Address by the President of the Slovak Republic at the United Nations Summit 2005, New York, 14. 9. 2005

Sixty years is an important birthday for a person or an organization. It is usually a time for celebration. For the UN, it is more a time for contemplation and introspection. A look at today’s world often shows us a very contradictory picture:

• On the one hand, we are flying into outer space, and on the other hand whole peoples are dying of hunger.
• We have mapped the human genome, while there are places on earth where people are dying because of shortages of basic medicines and healthcare.
• Human rights have been a universally declared focus for sixty years, declared in a document ratified on UN territory. Despite this, there are still states that violate their citizens’ most basic rights while claiming that human rights standards vary from country to country.
• We have copious knowledge, which enables us to split the atom, but we do not have enough rationality to prevent the misuse of this atom splitting for the manufacture of nuclear weapons.
• We are capable of building skyscrapers hundreds of meters high, while in other places we are tearing down the poorest people’s tin huts.
• As if we did not have enough problems, there are people who are willing to sacrifice not only their own lives, but also the lives of others – usually innocent civilians – in pursuit of their goals. But terrorist attacks have not changed one essential thing – they have not changed our values. There has been one change, however. We have changed our perception of international security.

It is evident that the satisfaction of the most elementary human needs is not a given for a large part of the planet. On the contrary, even at the beginning of the 21st century it is necessary to fight for them. Millions of people are living in hardship. Additional millions do not have guarantees of basic human rights and essentially all live in fear as a result of global terrorism. In a sentence – the right to a dignified life is still only a right and not an everyday reality.

The world is at a crossroads and at that crossroads also stands the most important global organization. Much hangs in the balance, and maintaining the status quo will solve nothing. To say it more openly, maintaining the status quo could lead to the UN losing its relevance completely. In all probability, if the UN cannot be reformed, its member states will look for other ways to promote their interests.

For this reason, we have welcomed the Millennium Declaration, the report of the high-level panel, the conclusions of the Millennium Project and the report of the General Secretary “In Larger Freedom“. All of these documents contain inspirational ideas for UN reform, which would enable it to function effectively in the 21st century. Finally, I would like to applaud the enormous efforts by the President of the 59th General Assembly and its member states that developed the document we have before us today.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The international community’s lack of preparedness in recent times has resulted in our being forced into action and engagement by “wake-up calls” in the form of terrorist attacks, genocide, famine and natural catastrophes. How many of these wake-up calls does humanity need?

The list of terrorist attacks grows from one day to the next. I will not mention any of them here because if I had to mention all of them, a five-minute presentation would not suffice. Given this situation, why has the global strategy on the fight against terrorism, which the General Secretary proposed in Madrid in March, been sitting on our desks for six months? If the list of terrorist attacks is to stop growing, instead of further evaluating the strategy, we need to take measures to implement it as soon as possible.

This also goes for a complex agreement on terrorism. Further hesitation and endless discussion on this question only enables terrorists to pretend that their inhuman fight is legitimate. Moreover, the international community’s hesitation and inaction only further undermines the authority of the UN, as well as that of our governments, in the eyes of our citizens.

I will not be saying anything new if I assert that a coordinated approach by the international community in this situation is necessary and the UN’s central role in it is irreplaceable. The international community needs, however, not only a revitalization of the General Assembly and other UN organs, but also the revitalization of multilateralism. We need not only institutional regeneration, but a regeneration of our mindset as well. To this effect, one basic thing must be affirmed. We cannot exchange multilateralism for naiveté, but the problems of multilateralism cannot be solved by its rejection. The current situation requires careful deliberation as well as responsibility. Criticizing the UN for its missteps is as easy as it is alibistic. We, the member states, are the UN. If the UN is ineffective, it is because we, the member states, are unable to come to agreement. The UN is our instrument. The UN has been, is and will be what we make of it.

It is not enough to have multilateralism or revitalization of the UN only on paper. It must be put into practice. Even the best-laid plans for UN General Assembly (UN GA) revitalization will not return its credibility if it is not linked to the ability and courage to take decisive steps. The UN GA cannot remain a kind of discussion club that errs in its search for functional solutions. The UN GA will regain its prestige only when it can take operational decisions to resolve acute problems.

The same applies to multilateralism. We watched with concern the discussion on UN reform, which for a moment threatened to grow into a deep crisis. We also watched with concern the problems with development of the draft outcome document. If multilateralism is to be truly effective, it cannot be based on a search for the least common denominator. On the contrary, it must be driven by the world’s actual needs. We must avoid one long-standing myth and stop equating multilateralism with absolute consensus. Narrow, individual interests cannot hinder the efforts of the large majority of countries. Processes that move the organization forward cannot be slowed by the pretext of consensus. If the opposite were true, there would not be a search for consensus, but adjustment to the particular interests of a small minority of countries. Slovakia does not consider inaction to be an answer. For this reason, together with the EU we firmly support efforts for reform that would adapt the UN to new conditions. For Slovakia, the idea of effective multilateralism is not just a trendy expression in international relations, but also a true guarantee of security, equality and justice.

Regional groupings of states play an irreplaceable role in the world’s multilateral configurations. The actions of the EU and the African Union are proof of the added value that regional groupings are capable of bringing to efforts at building peace and security. They have the advantage of greater flexibility in decision-making and better knowledge of the conditions in crisis regions. Moreover, regional integration is able to very effectively absorb the negative effects of conflicts. The UN was founded when Europe lay in ruins after World War II. In the interim, European integration has absorbed not only the trauma of the Second World War, but also the division of the continent caused by the Cold War. Today, the EU is one of the most stable and successful places on earth. For these reasons, support for regional integration should be an integral part of the effort to make multilateralism more effective in other parts of the world as well. The UN and regional groupings should coordinate their efforts with the goal of avoiding duplication, seeking ways to work together and better complement each other.

Finally, we cannot overlook the role played by international organizations. Once again, the time allotted does not allow me to count them and naming only a few would discount the efforts of the others. Allow me, then, to applaud in general the health, humanitarian and charitable organizations that have often contributed much more effectively and tangibly to the creation of conditions for a dignified life than politically blocked, international, intergovernmental organizations.

It is this triangular synergy of the UN-regional organizations-nongovernmental organizations that can provide for greater effectiveness of global efforts and the resolution of the urgent problems of humanity.

The draft outcome document is a good first step on the way to a more effective brand of multilateralism headed by the UN. Currently, we must be cautious about one thing. The draft outcome document is not a solution to today’s situation, but is only a guide to its resolution.

The draft outcome document is first and foremost just a framework for further steps. For the latter we will need much political will and many compromises. The 60th gathering of the UN General Assembly will be as important for the success of a reform package as today’s summit. If we want to maintain the idea of the international community not only in the abstract, we cannot allow ourselves the luxury of endless discussion about which answers are best. Today, we need strong and bold steps, of which many are proposed in the summit’s document.

Secondly, as I have already mentioned, the UN does not and cannot replace its member states and their own efforts to implement individual steps.

Thirdly, the measures proposed in the draft outcome document are far from exhaustive. We are all aware that the draft outcome document was born of a difficult compromise. Many ambitious proposals had to bow to compromise, but this does not mean that they should be stricken or forgotten. However, their further development requires enormous efforts.

Fourthly, UN reform is a complex process that includes many functional aspects of the entire UN system. Interaction amongst all parts of the UN and individual specialized international organizations with the goal of eliminating duplication and effectively linking the UN’s international organizational system to the implementation of the commitments adopted at today’s summit is extremely important.

In conclusion, allow me to mention at least two of Slovakia’s contributions to efforts at creating conditions for a dignified life in the world.

Slovakia is a small country with a population roughly equal to one-third of New York city. Despite this, we currently participate in four UN peacekeeping missions and contribute 374 soldiers. If every country contributed such a proportionally large number of soldiers, there would be an army of half a million peacekeepers at the UN’s disposal. The actual number of peacekeepers is not the deciding factor. On the contrary, the UN should not attempt to create its own army. In this sense, it’s more effective to use existing regional organizations and mechanisms for prevention of conflict. The UN should, instead, place greater emphasis on strengthening conditions for stable development, which is more important than stopping wars. It is this extraordinarily delicate post-conflict phase of development that is often neglected and can lead to renewed fighting. This is why Slovakia welcomes and fully supports efforts to create a Commission for Peace-Building. Its creation and function could and should create the institutional pre-requisites for smooth transitions in countries from the end of conflict to the creation of conditions for stabilization and development.

Slovakia is a post-transition country. In the recent past, it faced structural problems such as those faced by many developing countries. Although we still have much work ahead of us, in 15 years we have managed to transform from a communist totalitarian society to a country with a modern market economy. Slovakia is today, despite its own problems, even able to provide annual development assistance to other countries. The story of Slovakia’s transformation from an aid recipient to a donor is proof that it is possible to overcome serious economic problems. It takes, however, more than just international assistance or debt forgiveness. The creation of a secure and stable legal, political and economic environment must be an absolute priority. We are pleased that the draft outcome document emphasizes what Slovakia has learned in its own experience – that development is not possible without a guarantee of security, without respect for human rights and the rule of law, without good governance and the effective handling of one’s own affairs.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is difficult today to guess the fate of the draft outcome document. Slovakia strongly expresses its hope that it will not become another in a series of unfulfilled UN declarations. It’s likely that it will not be read by many. Even fewer will understand its complexities. It is, however, positive that the international community has agreed on a document that stands for the right to life without hardship, the right to life without fear and the right to life in dignity. These are, after all, values that do not require explanation. We should all return home from here with the message that humanity in September 2005 declared its right to a dignified and secure life. Everyone will understand that.

Thank you for your attention.