| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 12/25 |
| 2003/9/23-24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:10304 Activity:high |
9/23 Bush and Annan's speeches to the UN:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/09/23/sprj.irq.bush.transcript
http://www.un.org/webcast/ga/58/statements/sg2eng030923.htm
\_ I can't believe he said that! What a POS!
\_ Yep, the era of the UN is past.
\_ "History is a harsh judge: it will not forgive us if
we let this moment pass."
\_ How far up is that stick up your fat ass? |
| 12/25 |
|
| www.cnn.com/2003/US/09/23/sprj.irq.bush.transcript -> www.cnn.com/2003/US/09/23/sprj.irq.bush.transcript/ All governments that support terror are complicit in a war against civilization. No government should ignore the threat of terror because to look the other way gives terrorists the chance to regroup and recruit and prepare. And all nations that fight terror, as if the lives of their own people depend on it, will earn the favorable judgment of history. The former regimes of Afghanistan and Iraq knew these alternatives and made their choices. When confronted, that regime chose defiance and that regime is no more. Afghanistans president, who is here today, now represents a free people who are building a decent and just society, a nation fully joined in the war against terror. The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror while it built weapons of mass destruction. It used those weapons in acts of mass murder and refused to account for them when confronted by the world. The Security Council was right to demand that Iraq destroy its illegal weapons and prove that it had done so. The Security Council was right to vow serious consequences if Iraq refused to comply. And because there were consequences, because a coalition of nations acted to defend the peace and the credibility of the United Nations, Iraq is free, and today we are joined by representatives of a liberated country. Saddam Husseins monuments have been removed and not only his statues. The true monuments of his rule and his character, the torture chambers and the rape rooms and the prison cells for innocent children, are closed. And as we discover the killing fields and mass graves of Iraq, the true scale of Saddams cruelty is being revealed. The Iraqi people are meeting hardships and challenges, like every nation that has set out on the path of democracy. Yet their future promises lives of dignity and freedom and that is a world away from the squalid, vicious tyranny they have known. Across the Middle East, people are safer because an unstable aggressor has been removed from power. Across the world, nations are more secure because an ally of terror has fallen. Our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq were supported by many governments, and America is grateful to each one. I also recognize that some of the sovereign nations of this assembly disagreed with our actions. Yet there was, and there remains, unity among us on the fundamental principles and objectives of the United Nations. We are dedicated to the defense of our collective security, and to the advance of human rights. These permanent commitments call us to great work in the world, work we must do together. First, we must stand with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq as they build free and stable countries. The terrorists and their allies fear and fight this progress above all, because free people embrace hope over resentment, and choose peace over violence. The United Nations has been a friend of the Afghan people, distributing food and medicine, helping refugees return home, advising on a new constitution, and helping to prepare the way for nationwide elections. American and coalition forces continue to track and defeat al Qaeda terrorists and remnants of the Taliban. I have recently proposed to spend an additional $12 billion for the Afghan reconstruction effort and I urge other nations to continue contributing to this important cause. In the nation of Iraq, the United Nations is carrying out vital and effective work every day. By the end of 2004, more than 90 percent of Iraqi children under age five will have been immunized against preventable diseases such as polio, tuberculosis, and measles thanks to the hard work and high ideals of UNICEF. Iraqs food distribution system is operational, delivering nearly a half-million tons of food per month, thanks to the skill and expertise of the World Food Program. Our international coalition in Iraq is meeting its responsibilities. We are conducting precision raids against terrorists and holdouts of the former regime. They have made Iraq the central front in the war on terror and they will be defeated. Our coalition has made sure that Iraqs former dictator will never again use weapons of mass destruction. We are now interviewing Iraqi citizens and analyzing records of the old regime, to reveal the full extent of its weapons programs and long campaign of deception. We are training Iraqi police, border guards, and a new army, so that the Iraqi people can assume full responsibility for their own security. At the same time, our coalition is helping to improve the daily lives of the Iraqi people. The old regime built palaces while letting schools decay, so we are rebuilding more than a thousand schools. The old regime starved hospitals of resources, so we have helped to supply and reopen hospitals across Iraq. The old regime built up armies and weapons, while allowing the nations infrastructure to crumble. So we are rehabilitating power plants, water and sanitation facilities, bridges, and airports. I have proposed to Congress that the United States provide additional funding for our work in Iraq, the greatest financial commitment of its kind since the Marshall Plan. Having helped to liberate Iraq, we will honor our pledges to Iraq. And by helping the Iraqi people build a stable and peaceful country, we will make our own countries more secure. The primary goal of our coalition in Iraq is self-government for the people of Iraq, reached by orderly and democratic means. This process must unfold according to the needs of Iraqis neither hurried nor delayed by the wishes of other parties. And the United Nations can contribute greatly to the cause of Iraqi self-government. America is working with friends and allies on a new Security Council resolution, which will expand the United Statess role in Iraq. As in the aftermath of other conflicts, the United Nations should assist in developing a constitution, training civil servants, and conducting free and fair elections. Iraq now has a Governing Council, the first truly representative institution in that country. Iraqs new leaders are showing the openness and tolerance that democracy requires, and also showing courage. Now the nation of Iraq needs and deserves our aid, and all nations of good will should step forward and provide that support. The success of a free Iraq will be watched and noted throughout the region. Millions will see that freedom, equality, and material progress are possible at the heart of the Middle East. Leaders in the region will face the clearest evidence that free institutions and open societies are the only path to long-term national success and dignity. And a transformed Middle East would benefit the entire world, by undermining the ideologies that export violence to other lands. Iraq as a dictatorship had great power to destabilize the Middle East. Iraq as a democracy will have great power to inspire the Middle East. The advance of democratic institutions in Iraq is setting an example that others, including the Palestinian people, would be wise to follow. The Palestinian cause is betrayed by leaders who cling to power by feeding old hatreds, and destroying the good work of others. The Palestinian people deserve their own state, committed to reform, to fighting terror, and to building peace. All parties in the Middle East must meet their responsibilities, and carry out the commitments they made at Aqaba. Israel must work to create the conditions that will allow a peaceful Palestinian state to emerge. Arab nations must cut off funding and other support for terrorist organizations. America will work with every nation in the region that acts boldly for the sake of peace. A second challenge we must confront together is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Outlaw regimes that possess nuclear, chemical and biological weapons - and the means to deliver them - would be able to use blackmail and create chaos in entire regions. These weapons could be used by terrorists to bring sudden disaster and suffering on a scale we can scarcely imagine. The deadly combination of outlaw regimes, terror networks and weapons of mass murder is a peril that cannot be ignored or wished away. If such a danger is allowed to full... |
| www.un.org/webcast/ga/58/statements/sg2eng030923.htm Secretary-Generals Statement THE SECRETARY-GENERAL ADDRESS TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY New York, 23 September 2003 AS DELIVERED Thank you Mr. President, Your Majesty, Distinguished Heads of State and Government. Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen: The last twelve months have been very painful for those of us who believe in collective answers to our common problems and challenges. In many countries, terrorism has once again brought death and suffering to innocent people. In the Middle East, and in certain parts of Africa, violence has continued to escalate. In the Korean peninsula, and elsewhere, the threat of nuclear proliferation casts an ominous shadow across the landscape. And barely one month ago, in Baghdad, the United Nations itself suffered a brutal and deliberate assault, in which the international community lost some of its most talented servants. Another major disaster was averted only by the prompt action of the Iraqi police, one of whom paid with his life. I extend my most sincere condolences to the family of that brave policeman. And my thoughts go also to the nineteen injured, including two Iraqi UN staff members. Indeed, we should pray for all those who have lost their lives or been injured in this war innocent civilians and soldiers alike. In that context I deplore as I am sure you all do the brutal attempt on the life of Dr. Akila al-Hashemi, a member of the Governing Council, and I pray for her full recovery, too. The staff who were killed and injured in the attack on our Baghdad headquarters were your staff. You had given them a mandate to assist the suffering Iraqi people, and to help Iraq recover their sovereignty. In future, not only in Iraq but wherever the United Nations is engaged, we must take more effective measures to protect the security of our staff. Meanwhile, let me reaffirm the great importance I attach to a successful outcome in Iraq. Whatever view each of us may take of the events of recent months, it is vital to all of us that the outcome is a stable and democratic Iraq at peace with itself and with its neighbours, and contributing to stability in the region. Subject to security considerations, the United Nations system is prepared to play its full role in working for a satisfactory outcome in Iraq, and to do so as part of an international effort, an effort by the whole international community, pulling together on the basis of a sound and viable policy. If it takes extra time and patience to forge that policy, a policy that is collective, coherent and workable, then I for one would regard that time as well spent. Indeed, this is how we must approach all the many pressing crises that confront us today. Excellencies, Three years ago, when you came here for the Millennium Summit, we shared a vision, a vision of global solidarity and collective security, expressed in the Millennium Declaration. All of us know there are new threats that must be faced or, perhaps, old threats in new and dangerous combinations: new forms of terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The United Nations must confront all these threats and challenges new and old, hard and soft. It must be fully engaged in the struggle for development and poverty eradication, starting with the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals; We now see, with chilling clarity, that a world where many millions of people endure brutal oppression and extreme misery will never be fully secure, even for its most privileged inhabitants. Yet the hard threats, such as terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, are real, and cannot be ignored. Weapons of mass destruction do not threaten only the western or northern world. Where we disagree, it seems, is on how to respond to these threats. Since this Organisation was founded, States have generally sought to deal with threats to the peace through containment and deterrence, by a system based on collective security and the United Nations Charter. Article 51 of the Charter prescribes that all States, if attacked, retain the inherent right of self-defence. But until now it has been understood that when States go beyond that, and decide to use force to deal with broader threats to international peace and security, they need the unique legitimacy provided by the United Nations. Now, some say this understanding is no longer tenable, since an armed attack with weapons of mass destruction could be launched at any time, without warning, or by a clandestine group. Rather than wait for that to happen, they argue, States have the right and obligation to use force pre-emptively, even on the territory of other States, and even while weapons systems that might be used to attack them are still being developed. According to this argument, States are not obliged to wait until there is agreement in the Security Council. Instead, they reserve the right to act unilaterally, or in ad hoc coalitions. This logic represents a fundamental challenge to the principles on which, however imperfectly, world peace and stability have rested for the last fifty-eight years. My concern is that, if it were to be adopted, it could set precedents that resulted in a proliferation of the unilateral and lawless use of force, with or without justification. But it is not enough to denounce unilateralism, unless we also face up squarely to the concerns that make some States feel uniquely vulnerable, since it is those concerns that drive them to take unilateral action. We must show that those concerns can, and will, be addressed effectively through collective action. This may be a moment no less decisive than 1945 itself, when the United Nations was founded. At that time, a group of far-sighted leaders, led and inspired by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, were determined to make the second half of the twentieth century different from the first half. They saw that the human race had only one world to live in, and that unless it managed its affairs prudently, all human beings may perish. So they drew up rules to govern international behaviour, and founded a network of institutions, with the United Nations at its centre, in which the peoples of the world could work together for the common good. Now we must decide whether it is possible to continue on the basis agreed then, or whether radical changes are needed. And we must not shy away from questions about the adequacy, and effectiveness, of the rules and instruments at our disposal. Among those instruments, none is more important than the Security Council itself. The Council needs to consider how it will deal with the possibility that individual States may use force pre-emptively against perceived threats. Its members may need to begin a discussion on the criteria for an early authorisation of coercive measures to address certain types of threats for instance, terrorist groups armed with weapons of mass destruction. And they still need to engage in serious discussions of the best way to respond to threats of genocide or other comparable massive violations of human rights an issue which I raised myself from this podium in 1999. Once again this year, our collective response to events of this type in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and in Liberia has been hesitant and tardy. As for the composition of the Council, that has been on the agenda of this Assembly for over a decade. Virtually all Member States agree that the Council should be enlarged, but there is no agreement on the details. I respectfully suggest to you, Excellencies, that in the eyes of your peoples the difficulty of reaching agreement does not excuse your failure to do so. If you want the Councils decisions to command greater respect, particularly in the developing world, you need to address the issue of its composition with greater urgency. But the Security Council is not the only institution that needs strengthening. As you know, I am doing my best to make the Secretariat more effective and I look to this Assembly to support my efforts. I even suggested that the role of the Trusteeship Council could be reviewed, in light of new kinds of responsibility that you have given to the United Nations in recent years. In s... |