 |
|
|
UN United Nations |
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a great honour for me to join you on this historic occasion.
The enlargement of the European Union will have far-reaching
consequences. We all hope that the larger Union will also 
be
a stronger Union, able to make an even more decisive contribution to global
progress and stability.
And at the global level, it is of course to the United Nations that people look to provide a stable security framework. For the good of the world, our two institutions must work together.
Today is not the end of your enlargement process. There are more States waiting to be admitted in the future. Enlargement also brings you new neighbours – and that is the topic of this conference. I am glad that you have resolved to "avoid new dividing lines". Europe’s destiny, I am sure, is not to be a fortress, but to serve as a model of strength through diversity, and of generosity as well as prosperity.
Needless to say, you want to live in a peaceful and stable neighbourhood. The bitter conflict on your doorstep between Arabs and Israelis is of great concern to you – as it is to your Russian neighbours, your transatlantic partners, and indeed the whole world.
That is why the United Nations is working so hard together with you, in the Quartet, to realise the vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security – a solution which must be the keystone of a comprehensive settlement, based on United Nations resolutions.
I am convinced, as you are, that we now have a Road Map that can take us to that destination. We must urgently persuade both parties to summon the political will to follow it – not setting pre-conditions for each other, but marching forward together towards peace.
Our success in that enterprise, as in many others, will be affected by the way the international community handles the daunting new challenge that now faces it in Iraq.
No issue has so divided the world since the end of the cold war. It is vital that we heal that division now. The world cannot afford a long period of recrimination.
No one needs to abandon positions of principle. What we can, and must, do is to define a set of principles and objectives around which all of us can rally, and then move forward.
Surely our first concern, in all our dealings with Iraq, must be the well-being of the Iraqi people.
They have suffered terribly, and they deserve a better future. Their most immediate needs now are for public order and safety, and for humanitarian relief. It is therefore imperative that the Coalition, as the occupying power, now give top priority to fulfilling its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Hague Regulations.
For our part, we at the UN have already begun to assume our essential humanitarian role. We will do whatever we can to assist the Iraqi people, in an independent and impartial manner.
Other, more fundamental measures will have much greater legitimacy if they are carried out by the Iraqi people themselves – which means they can only be undertaken when the time is ripe.
The international community, for its part, must be guided in its future policy and actions towards Iraq by a set of basic principles, which I believe all of us share:
– the sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of Iraq;
– the right of the Iraqi people to freely determine their own system of government and political leadership, as well as to control their own natural resources;
– the need to help the Iraqi people, as quickly as possible, to establish conditions for a normal life, and to put an end to Iraq’s isolation;
– the need for any role entrusted to the United Nations, beyond the purely humanitarian, to be mandated by the Security Council, consistent with the Charter, and matched by the necessary resources; (This means that the UN should be asked neither to play a subordinate role under an occupying power, nor – on the other hand – to take on responsibilities which in the circumstances it cannot fulfil.)
– and finally, above all, the need to give pride of place, in all our thinking, to the rights and interests of the Iraqi people. Only so can we hope to ensure a viable future for Iraq.
If we base ourselves firmly on those principles, I believe we can reunite, around a project to give the Iraqi people the chance of a brighter future. And that could be a big step towards a more stable and peaceful world.
Thank you very much.
|
 |
United Nations Development Programme |
A Public Hearing on the draft of the annual National Human Development Report (NHDR) for the Russian Federation was organized by UNDP on 31 March 2003 in the Higher School of Economics. The central theme of this year’s report is "The Role of the State in Economic Growth and Socio-economic Reform".
Produced by a team of leading Russian experts and academics, the report features a detailed analysis of the linkages between the state reform process and human development, a critical issue in contemporary Russia. In addition, the report includes a comparative analysis of the socio-economic situation in the Russian regions and Human Development Indices (HDI) for 79 regions of the Russian Federation.
The
public hearing was opened by Mr Victor Zagrekov, of the Russian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and Mr Eric Brunat, UNDP Deputy Resident Representative, who
outlined the importance of the State in creating enabling environment for human
development and sustainable economic growth.
With over 70 reviewers in attendance, the Public Hearing provided an opportunity for the broad expert community to assess the draft report and discuss human development trends and challenges facing Russia today. While full drafts had been submitted to participants ahead of time, select chapter presentations were made by NHDR authors, including:
– Mr Alexander Sourinov, First Deputy Chairman of the State Statistical Committee;
– Mr Lev Jakobson, Vice-Rector, Higher School of Economics;
– Mr Leonid Grigoriev, Deputy Director, Expert Institute under the Russian Union of Entrepreneurs and Industrialists;
– Mr Alexander Auzan, President, National Project Institute "Social Contract";
– Ms Lilia Ovcharova, Research Director of the Independent Institute for Social Policy;
– Mr Vladimir Zakharov, Director, Centre for Russian Environmental Policy and Head of the Department, Institute of Developmental Biology, Russian Academy of Sciences.
The half-day event was filled with stimulating discussion and debate. Authors were able to interact in person with their ‘peers’ in a process that confirmed the high quality and relevance of the report while identifying some areas in need of further development.
During the Public Hearing Mr. Lev Yakobson, Vice-Rector of the Higher School of Economics, agreed to answer some questions from our UN in Russia correspondent.
– In your view, how closely is the general topic of the report "The Role of the State in Economic Growth and Socio-economic Reform" connected with that of the chapter you wrote, "The Modernization of the Government Machinery"?
– Quite closely. According to the Russian Constitution, our government is much like those in the developed nations. In fact, however, it is an apparat government. Until the end of the twentieth century, there was no real separation of powers in Russia. The head of state was the head of a hierarchically structured state apparatus. The most important decisions were made with the defining participation of the Leader himself and his inner circle. Although a genuine separation of powers started to take shape only in the last decade, one can already speak of some impressive positive shifts. Who cares if a party or parliament isn’t quite as influential as the government; what’s important is that their influence is already comparable.
Up to now, however, these shifts have taken place under the conditions of a general weakening of power. Now, the Russian public is almost unanimously in favor of strengthening the State. But you can only strengthen that which actually exists; therefore, the next few steps will largely be connected with consolidating the apparatus, and with more effective administration. It is important that this be effective administration within the framework of a law-based State, including the separation of powers, and not the rebirth of an uncontrolled bureaucracy.
– Can we go back to what we were hoping to free ourselves from in the process of democratization?
– Our cultural and historical legacy will for a long time yet
undoubtedly continue to carry with it the threat of reversing
our democratic reforms. However, I believe that, given three conditions, Russia
has a chance of forming relatively quickly a mature, efficient, and stable democratic
State. The first of these is that the government apparatus is subjected to decisive
modernization. The second is that the pace of modernization will, at a minimum,
correspond to the tempo of the consolidation of power. The third is that the
modernization strategy will sufficiently meet the needs that dominate in the
apparatus.
– How do you rate the work being done on the Report, and the organization of the joint hearings of the Higher School of Economics and the UN Development Programme?
It’s a great honor for me to take part in this work. In my opinion, the Report is very good in its selection of topics, and in its analysis of social policy. The draft of the report gives an unbiased picture of what is happening in Russia, from the point of view of human development. I feel great satisfaction that the hearings on the draft of National Report are taking place within the walls of our institution. The Higher School of Economics is working together very closely with colleagues from many international organizations. We would like for these relationships, particularly the one with the UN Development Programme, to continue developing forwards.
