Security Council 3977

United Nations S/PV.3977

99-85106 (E) This record contains the original text of speeches delivered in English and interpretations of speechesdelivered in the other languages. The final text will be printed in theOfficial Records of the SecurityCouncil. Corrections should be submitted to original speeches only. They should be incorporatedin a copy of the record and be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned,within one week of the date of publication, to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Service,room C-178.

Security Council ProvisionalFifty-fourth Year

3977th MeetingFriday, 12 February 1999, 10 a.m.New York

President: Mr. Axworthy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Canada)

Members: Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.PetrellaBahrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.BuallayBrazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.ValleChina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr. QinHuasunFrance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.DejammetGabon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.Dangue RéwakaGambia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.JagneMalaysia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.HasmyNamibia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.AndjabaNetherlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr. vanWalsumRussian Federation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.LavrovSlovenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.TürkUnited Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. . . . . . . Mr. EldonUnited States of America. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.Burleigh

Agenda

Protection of civilians in armed conflict

Security Council 3977th meetingFifty-fourth year 12 February 1999

The meeting was called to order at 10.30 a.m.

Adoption of the agenda

The agenda was adopted.

Protection of civilians in armed conflict

The President: In accordance with the understandingreached in the Council’s prior consultations, and in theabsence of objection, I shall take it that the SecurityCouncil agrees to extend an invitation under rule 39 of itsprovisional rules of procedure to Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga,President of the International Committee of the Red Cross.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

I welcome Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga and invite him totake a seat at the Council table.

In accordance with the understanding reached in theCouncil’s prior consultations, and in the absence of anyobjection, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees toextend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules ofprocedure to Ms. Carol Bellamy, Executive Director of theUnited Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF).


I welcome Ms. Carol Bellamy and invite her to takea seat at the Council table.

In accordance with the understanding reached in theCouncil’s prior consultations and in the absence ofobjection, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees toextend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules ofprocedure to Mr. Olara Otunnu, Special Representative ofthe Secretary-General for children and armed conflict.


I welcome Mr. Otunnu and invite him to take a seatat the Council table.

The Security Council will now begin its considerationof the item on its agenda.

The Security Council is meeting in accordance withthe understanding reached in its prior consultations.

At this meeting, the Security Council will hearbriefings by Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga, President of the

International Committee of the Red Cross; Ms. CarolBellamy, Executive Director of UNICEF; and Mr. OlaraOtunnu, Special Representative of the Secretary-Generalfor children and armed conflict, regarding the protectionof civilians in armed conflict.

I give the floor to the President of the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross, Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga.

Mr. Sommaruga (International Committee of theRed Cross) (interpretation from French): I wish to thankyou, Mr. President, for inviting me to address you today.This is undoubtedly clear evidence of thecomplementarity that exists between the SecurityCouncil’s political action and the humanitarian,independent, impartial and neutral work of theInternational Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

I am delighted to be able to say this, just as I amdelighted at the convergence of views expressed at theCouncil’s meeting on 21 January, when the Council heardthe Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs,Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello. We should be encouraged bythe reaffirmation that political and humanitarian actionneed to follow clearly distinct paths. As we seek to fulfilour respective goals, we must all renew our efforts toprotect and assist all those who, in every part of theworld, are not or are no longer participants in theconflicts that are devastating our planet yet who are thevictims of these conflicts.

Nonetheless, I feel obliged to echo certain concernswhich were expressed here on 21 January. Does thisinterest in humanitarian affairs not mask a certain feelingof impotence at the magnitude of the task that confrontsus? We all know that those organizations which arestriving to deliver protection and assistance to victims ofarmed conflicts are unable to cope on their own withsituations whose very size and extreme complexity arebeyond them.

The topic which I should like to address today, asyou indicated, Mr. President — protection of civilians inarmed conflicts — is at the heart of my organization’sconcerns. This year, which marks the fiftieth anniversaryof the Geneva Conventions, it is more necessary andimportant than ever that we reflect on this theme.

The ICRC is faced today with 20 open conflicts theworld over, in many of which civilians are the first andprincipal target. Women, children, the elderly, the sick,refugees and internally displaced persons have been

2


attacked in large numbers and methodically driven fromtheir homes. They have suffered from conflicts in whichevery conceivable means, even the most reprehensible, hasbeen and is still being used against them.

Genocide, “ethnic cleansing”, attacks on humanitarianpersonnel and the repudiation of the principles of humanity,impartiality, independence and neutrality have becomeincreasingly prevalent. At the same time, the politicization,“instrumentalization” and devaluation of humanitarianaction are making it more difficult than ever for us to assistall victims. This insidious trend has been observable in theGreat Lakes region, in West Africa, in the Balkans, in theCaucasus and in certain Asian countries. The full horror ofthe consequences is familiar to us all. The unimaginablepain borne by the populations in these areas can leave noneof us indifferent. Not only that, it compels us to take actionon their behalf.

And then, as in the Caucasus, there are situationswhere neither war nor peace prevails and millions of peopleare unable to return to normal life. Driven from theirhomes, they have been waiting for years for a negotiatedsolution to put an end to their misery. The basicinfrastructures required for daily living no longer exist. Theland cannot be cultivated because it is mined or too closeto the front lines. The political, economic and psychologicalconsequences of these stalled conflicts must not beunderestimated. They will ultimately lead to new cycles ofviolence whose principal victims will once again becivilians. If there is no sustained effort to achieve peace,the slide back into war seems inevitable. We need onlythink of the recent return to hostilities in Angola or betweenEthiopia and Eritrea.

When negotiations are getting nowhere it takes a lotto convert a ceasefire into lasting peace. The same tragicsituation could easily be repeated tomorrow in other partsof the world.

Furthermore, there are conflicts where humanitarianaction has always been or has recently become impossiblebecause Governments or other parties to the fighting seehumanitarian action as interference in their internal affairsor as dictated by political concerns. Worse still, thepresence of humanitarian organizations is sometimesrefused so that there will be no witnesses to mass slaughter.In such cases, humanitarian workers are no longer seen asthe bringers of help but rather as unwelcome observers.

Sadly, the same workers are more and more frequentlyprevented from doing their job when they themselves come

under serious assault. There is no question of ourbecoming resigned to such incidents, in which so manypeople engaged in humanitarian endeavour have beeninjured or even killed, because these incidents, too, areserious violations of international humanitarian law. Ihave said this many times before, and I wish to reiterateit here and now: such conduct is unacceptable. This pointcannot be made often enough to all those concerned, justas they need to be reminded that the protective emblemsof the Red Cross and Red Crescent must be respected atall costs.

On 21 January, in this Council, the importance ofbasing humanitarian work on the principle of impartialitywas rightly underlined. Humanitarian assistance cannot beused as an instrument for bringing political pressure tobear on any party to a conflict. It is indeed mywholehearted conviction that any humanitarian work ismost effective when free of all political bias. The ICRCtook this stance in Somalia. It is taking the same stancenow in Afghanistan, where my organization, with thesupport of numerous national Red Cross and RedCrescent societies, is the only international agencyreaching out to all victims, in every part of the country,even those of the recent earthquake. This was also true inSri Lanka and Congo-Brazzaville, to cite just a few otherexamples.

Finally, it is also important to consider thephenomena of economic globalization and theprivatization of tasks that were previously theresponsibility of States. These phenomena have alsocreated new situations and raised some burning issues:What are the duties of economic groups that raise theirown security forces to protect their interests? Whatpolitical responsibilities do States have when sucheconomic groups encroach on their areas of jurisdiction?There is no easy answer to these questions, but it must berecognized that the authority of the State and the notionof collective security, which is a cornerstone of theCharter of the United Nations, are dangerously weakened.In this connection, I welcome the fact that Secretary-General Kofi Annan, present today, has called oneconomic players not to remain indifferent to theproblems caused by this new state of affairs, a call Imyself have made on several occasions.

(spoke in English)

These rather pessimistic observations must not be acause for gloom. On the contrary, they are a reminder thatat least the ICRC, notwithstanding the difficulties, is able

3


each day to offer protection and assistance to hundreds ofthousands of people. They should also give us pause forthought on what can and must be done if the plight ofcivilians caught up in armed conflicts is to be alleviated.Allow me to look briefly at a few of these issues.

The States parties to the Geneva Conventionsundertake in common article I to respect the Conventionsand to ensure their respect. This article is in every way theprimary expression of the respect due to those who are not,or who are no longer, taking an active part in hostilities.While it is addressed to the individual States parties to theConventions, it also concerns, I believe, their collectiveaction under the auspices of the Security Council.

The early 1990s saw more and more instances ofpeacekeeping forces being deployed by the United Nationsor regional organizations. Despite the many intrinsicadvantages of such interventions, it is my view that theyhave sometimes led, as a political, military andhumanitarian amalgam, to a certain amount of confusion.They have also demonstrated how crucial it is to makepeacekeepers familiar with the relevant principles of humanrights and international humanitarian law. A Secretary-General’s bulletin on the observance of internationalhumanitarian law by members of United Nations forces hasbeen prepared by the Office of Legal Affairs jointly withthe ICRC. I hope very much that this can be promulgatedbefore the fiftieth anniversary of the Geneva Conventions.

Members will agree that this is just as much a legal asan ethical issue: legal because of the undertakings of theStates parties to the Geneva Conventions; ethical becausetroops deployed by the United Nations are required to setan example by scrupulously complying with internationallaw. In order to respect and ensure respect for the law, onemust first understand it. Through its programme ofdissemination to the armed forces, the ICRC has for manyyears been raising awareness among those who bear armsall over the world. It has been doing the same for civilianpopulations, with a particular emphasis on targeting youngpeople.

What is needed, then, is to remind all States and allparties to conflicts of their duty to protect civilians from theeffects of war. And we must not overlook the majorresponsibility of the Security Council in this domain.

If the principles of humanitarian action are to be fullyrespected, aid workers must have access to people affectedby conflicts. Where these people are also suffering fromeconomic sanctions imposed on their country, caution must

be exercised. Nothing can justify punishing an entirepopulation for its Government’s misdeeds. It is not theICRC’s place to comment on the use of economicsanctions per se; however, it is duty-bound — a dutywhich it has frequently carried out — to requestexemptions to sanctions so that needy populations canreceive humanitarian assistance. I am again in fullagreement with the Secretary-General, who has said thatsanctions are known on occasion to have tragicconsequences for civilian populations. The ICRCtherefore welcomes the fact that the Security Council hasinstructed the sanctions committees to examine thehumanitarian impact of sanctions on the most vulnerablegroups.

The ICRC operational budget for the year 1999 ismarginally lower than that for 1998. This decrease is nocause for celebration, since it does not indicate that theneeds of populations in conflict zones have declined. Onthe contrary, it is caused by the fact that in a number ofconflicts where our work and our principles are rejectedout of hand, as is the case in Sierra Leone, the ICRC isfinding it increasingly difficult to gain access to thevictims whom it seeks to protect and assist. What is more,far too little political attention is being given to conflictsin certain parts of Africa and Asia.

We must take care to avoid classifying victims asgood or bad. We must constantly bear in mind one basicfact: irrespective of where a given conflict is taking place,there will always be human beings who are suffering andwho require protection and assistance.

The bottom line for any action by humanitarianorganizations is that it must have received the consent ofeach and every party concerned. This is why the ICRCseeks to establish, maintain and consolidate close contactswith all belligerents, both Government forces and others.The purpose is to engage them in constructive dialogue asto their duty to respect the rights of protected persons. Itis therefore very disturbing to note that there is an evergreater tendency to demonize the enemy. This is, Ibelieve, dangerous and makes the work of humanitarianorganizations even more hazardous and problematic. Onceagain, our activity must not be influenced by partisaninterests; we must aim to serve only those people towhom we have an obligation, and those are the victims.

There is a need to examine potential sources ofconflict and take whatever measures are necessary beforeit is too late. I am convinced that conflicts can beprevented if full compliance with human rights

4


instruments can be guaranteed. The ICRC has neither amandate nor the resources to devote itself to this task, butit is doing its humble best to promote the elementary rulesof international humanitarian law and their core underlyingprinciples, which are ethical principles, among those whohold the key to the world’s future: our children. TheExecutive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund(UNICEF) and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflicts will certainlyaddress this topic later on.

I cannot close without recalling again that 1999 marksthe fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the modern GenevaConventions, now ratified by 188 States. To mark theoccasion, the ICRC has opted for a project involvingconsultation among a large number of people caught up inconflicts. By speaking out, they should emphasize the factthat there are rules and that even wars have limits. I haveno doubt that they will remind politicians and humanitarianplayers alike of their responsibilities. The twelfth of Augustof this year, which is the anniversary date, will be the idealtime to launch a call for humanitarian law to bestrengthened. Though it may not be perfect, this law doesexist and remains entirely valid.

Finally, this autumn in Geneva, the 27th InternationalConference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent will givethe whole Red Cross movement and all the States party tothe Geneva Conventions an opportunity to recommitthemselves wholeheartedly to rules which are universallyrecognized.

What suffering civilians are expecting from us all isthat we provide incontrovertible proof that all ourdeclarations on the importance of, and compliance with,existing law are being translated into fact. “Res non verba”must be our motto. Let us leave to our children and ourchildren’s children the prospect of life in a world wheregreater justice prevails.

The President: I now call on the Executive Directorof the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF),Ms. Carol Bellamy.

Ms. Bellamy: The actions pursued by the SecurityCouncil on the related themes of conflicts in Africa,promoting peace and humanitarian action have set the stagefor today’s discussion on protecting civilians. The UnitedNations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) appreciates very muchthe significance of the Council’s attention to this issue, andwe are grateful for the opportunity to speak to it as itrelates to children and women.

In the space of about four years, the scope ofUNICEF’s humanitarian activities has almostquadrupled — from 15 countries convulsed by conflict toover 50. Our work in these places is closely coordinatedwith allied agencies, including the Office of the UnitedNations High Commissioner for Refugees, the WorldFood Programme, the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Human Rights, the Office forCoordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the SpecialRepresentative of the Secretary-General for Children andArmed Conflict, as well as the International Committee ofthe Red Cross and numerous other non-governmentalorganizations.

UNICEF is operational before, during and afterarmed conflicts, and so we have seen how the samechildren that we have helped nurture, immunize andeducate are now being systematically targeted andbrutalized — many of them recruited as killers or pressedinto service as porters and sexual slaves. Others end upmaimed or psychologically traumatized.

This horrific abrogation of child rights is simplyintolerable. Yet simply saying so is not enough. That iswhy the Security Council’s recent Presidential Statementon children and armed conflict is so very important, forit has helped greatly elevate the relevance of theseconcerns to international peace and security, and it hasopened new opportunities for improving standards forchild protection while strengthening humanitarianassistance.

In this connection then I would like to propose aseries of elements that would make up a peace andsecurity agenda for children.

First, we must end the use of children as soldiers.

Over 300,000 children, girls as well as boys, haveparticipated as combatants in the 30 most recent conflicts.Many are recruited; others are abducted. Some joinsimply to survive. Many of these children, some less than10 years old, have witnessed or taken part in acts ofunspeakable violence, often against their own families ortheir own communities.

In establishing 18 as a minimum age forparticipation in its peacekeeping operations, the UnitedNations has set an important precedent — one aimed atensuring the highest standards for the Organization. TheUnited Nations has further recommended that this policy

5


serve as an example for police and military forcesworldwide.

UNICEF wholeheartedly supports this position. We aremindful of the sensitivities within the Security Councilconcerning the recruitment issue. But we would be derelictif we did not reiterate, in the strongest possible terms, thatuntil the minimum age of recruitment is universally set at18, the ruthless exploitation of children as soldiers willcontinue.

At the same time it must be acknowledged that thereasons that give rise to children’s participation in armedconflict are often the very causes of the conflictsthemselves: poverty, discrimination, displacement andmarginalization. Yet these reasons do not justify inaction.

Preventing the recruitment of children is as importantas demobilization. Both objectives require a long-termcommitment to education and vocational training andattention to psycho-social needs, as well as to reunitingchildren with their families. Without these elements,children are easily remobilized.

At the same time, peace agreements and peacekeepingoperations must include full-fledged demobilizationprogrammes specifically designed for child soldiers. Thesemust be aimed not only at reclaiming and destroyingweaponry, but also at providing former child soldiers withmaterial benefits and vocational alternatives.

We have already made a start. Through programmessuch as birth registration campaigns, family reunification,dialogue with non-State parties and psycho-social support,UNICEF programmes in a number of countries are helpingto heal children who have participated in conflicts.

Education — I wish to emphasize this — is anextremely important tool in these efforts. In Tanzania’srefugee camps, for example, where children from Rwanda,Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congoattended schools under trees, we have found reaffirmationthat education helps to re-establish stability even in themidst of chaos, not only for children but for families. Imight point out, though, that in many cases donors classifyeducation as development and not as activity that wouldtake place in the course of the humanitarian emergency,very often denying the funds for the kind of work thatcould help so much to prevent some of these problems.

Secondly, we must protect humanitarian assistance andwe much protect humanitarian personnel.

UNICEF and its partners on the ground struggledaily with the task of gaining humanitarian access toendangered civilian populations — a struggle made all themore difficult as the issue of access, as the Council hasheard, becomes politicized. This is why we need tovigorously promote political solutions while findinginnovative ways to reach civilians at risk, of whomchildren and women continue to make up the vastmajority. Of the nearly 25 million refugees and internallydisplaced people, 80 per cent are women and children.Many of them are trapped in the highly militarizedenvironments found in camps for refugees and thedisplaced, where children and women are especiallyvulnerable to violence and sexual assault, and boys toforced recruitment.

We have already reached tens of thousands ofchildren and women using such programmes as “corridorsof peace” and “days of tranquillity” in regions likeCentral America, South Asia and the Middle East, as wellas through the principle of Operation Lifeline Sudan andthrough agreements like the recent United Nations accordto supply humanitarian relief to people in previouslyunreached parts of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Our work is informed by the internationallyrecognized principles of humanity, impartiality andneutrality. To ensure that these principles always guideour actions, we have just launched training programmesin humanitarian principles for staff, agency and non-governmental organization partners who provide directsupport to children in conflict situations. We must alsotake steps to improve the safety and security ofhumanitarian workers.

In their efforts to protect civilians, our courageousUnited Nations staff members — indeed, aid workersgenerally — have been increasingly targeted for violentattack, murder and rape. Their right to usecommunications systems for their own operations hasbeen denied in some instances. United Nations propertyhas been looted with impunity, with losses exceedingmany tens of millions of dollars. If a peace and securityagenda for children is to be effectively implemented, thismust stop.

At the same time, all United Nations staff membersmust be given proper training in how to cope with thelawlessness and violence that awaits them. UNICEF,together with the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees, has invested quite heavily inthis area. We are pioneering the development of an

6


incident-tracking system and we have distributed security-awareness training programmes to over 200 duty stations.But these measures are, I might say, only a beginning and,by themselves, they cannot begin to meet the security needsof the 30,000 United Nations staff members in the field.

Third, we must support humanitarian mine action.Repatriation, which is fundamental to any peace process,cannot be conceived of, let alone undertaken, without therequisite resources and commitment to clearing mine fieldsalong repatriation routes and in destination areas. Yet, inplaces like Cambodia, there are twice as many anti-personnel mines as children.

UNICEF welcomes the coordinating role played by theUnited Nations Mine Action Service and we are workingclosely with a group of United Nations partners to ensuremine-awareness education, victim assistance andrehabilitation for children and communities. We currentlysupport such programmes in every region of the world.

Moreover, the Ottawa Convention has immensepotential to bring about dramatic improvements in affectedcommunities. That is why we are so fiercely committed topromoting its widest implementation. We are concerned,however, that many affected countries will require UnitedNations assistance to meet their Convention obligations.Political will and donor support in these areas will becritical for a coordinated response.

Fourth, we must protect children from the effects ofsanctions. In the interests of children, sanctions should notbe imposed without obligatory, immediate and enforceablehumanitarian exemptions, along with mechanisms formonitoring their impact on children and other vulnerablegroups. In all countries under comprehensive economicsanctions, the inadequacy of current provisions has resultedin alarming rates of child malnutrition and in child andmaternal mortality. These inadequacies must be addressed.

We welcome the Security Council’s recent call tomonitor the humanitarian impact of sanctions on childrenand to create more efficient exemption mechanisms. Webelieve that child-impact assessments are central to this andshould be carried out before, during and after sanctions areimposed.

Humanitarian assistance represents just less than 5 percent of all of the goods presented for Sanctions Committeeexemption. I would therefore underscore the need todevelop a list of essential humanitarian goods for

exemption, and I would urge that those items includeeducational supplies.

Fifth, we must ensure that peace-building specificallyincludes children. In concluding peace agreements, wehave an opportunity to ensure that peace-buildingactivities are developed in conformity with human rightsand humanitarian norms, while promoting respect forthese standards by non-State entities. While respect forchild rights is rarely mentioned in peace agreements, it isnoteworthy that the peace processes in El Salvador and inGuatemala reached agreement on human rights and on theneed for national and international verificationmechanisms.

It is true that much more could have been done toaddress children’s special needs. But at the same time,important precedents were set that we very stronglysupport. The United Nations Verification Mission inGuatemala (MINUGUA), for example, pursued projectsto strengthen child-rights institutions that ultimately led tothe creation of a special Government office to promoteawareness of child rights, to investigate violations, tomonitor public institutions providing services for childrenand to influence legislation to ensure conformity withGuatemala’s obligations under the Convention on theRights of the Child. We believe that support for suchactivities should be extended further to other nationalinstitutions, which would include police and judicialsystems.

Sixth, we must challenge the impunity of warcrimes, especially against children. Children’s recruitmentas members of armed forces, their rape and slaughter andthe targeting of their schools and hospitals are recognizedby the International Criminal Court Statute (ICC) for whatthey are: heinous atrocities. Ratification of the ICCStatute is a major priority for us and we will work toensure the Statute’s effective implementation at thenational level through training and support for legislativereform. The ICC Statute’s entry into force this year wouldbe, we believe, the most significant commemoration ofthe fiftieth anniversary of the Geneva Conventions as wellas of the tenth anniversary of the Convention on theRights of the Child, and would indeed be a fitting way tomark the arrival of the next millennium.

Seventh, we must promote early warning andpreventive action for children. Early warning andpreventive action can help deter human rights violationsas well as defuse situations that might lead to armedconflict. International field personnel, including military,

7


civilian and humanitarian, are often the first to witnessegregious violations against children and women. Yet theprocedures and mechanisms to assess, report, monitor,prosecute and remedy them are woefully inadequate.Deploying human rights field monitors and observers inpreparatory missions and with field operations should beconsidered a fundamental aspect of all Security Councilefforts to promote peace and to resolve conflicts. To beeffective, these components should be adequately resourcedand staffed to handle child rights and gender-basedviolations.

To this end, we have developed a training package ongender and child rights protection in complex emergencies.These are presently being used by the Department ofPeacekeeping Operations and several national peacekeepingtraining institutes. We have made similar material availableto the Kosovo Verification Mission of the Organization forSecurity and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and, at acountry level, for example in Mozambique, we are workingwith the United Nations Development Programme on childrights, gender and juvenile justice training for the police.Most important, we must support the establishment ofpermanent independent national institutions that will protecthuman rights and reinstitute the rule of law in the transitionto democratic governance.

The protection of children in armed conflict must beframed by the standards and norms embodied ininternational human rights instruments and humanitarianlaw. We have that framework in the Convention on theRights of the Child. It is not only history’s most universallyembraced human rights treaty, but the only one thatexplicitly incorporates humanitarian law. In this connection,therefore, let me conclude with these urgentrecommendations:

We must ensure that children are always identified asan explicit priority in all efforts to build peace and resolveconflicts, whether as part of demobilization mandates orobserver missions or in concluding peace agreements. Incurrent practice, I would point out, children are officiallyoverlooked. For example, the United Nations ObserverMission in Sierra Leone (UNOMSIL)’s latest human rightsassessment of the shocking situation in Freetown, which Iread last night, focuses almost exclusively on violationsagainst children and women. Yet the Mission’s mandatefails to address their desperate need for special protection.Likewise, the United Nations Operation in Mozambiquemade no mention of children in either the demobilization orhumanitarian aspects of its mandate. And by the sametoken, the United Nations Mission in Angola did not

include children in the demobilization, disarmament ordemining aspects of its mandate.

We must move towards ending the use of childsoldiers by continuing to press strongly for aninternational requirement that raises the age of recruitmentto 18.

We must protect children from the effects ofsanctions.

We must secure full implementation of the globalban on anti-personnel landmines.

We must achieve a dramatic reduction in theavailability of small arms and light weapons, which onlyserve to sustain war and conflict and whose portability isa major factor in the ease with which children aretransformed into combatants.

We must ensure that there be specialized child-rightstraining and codes of conduct for all — all — military,civilian and peacekeeping personnel, so that they willunderstand their legal responsibilities to all children,including the need to shield them from egregiousviolations of their rights.

We must make adequate resources available toensure the safety and security of humanitarian personnel.

And we must ensure that those who commit warcrimes against children are brought to account before afully empowered International Criminal Court.

UNICEF stands ready to support the work of theSecurity Council in any way possible and, as well, tokeep it fully informed.

Let me say in closing how much we appreciate theCouncil’s concern with the issues of civilians in armedconflict, especially the plight of children and women. Weare confident that this discussion will enhance mutualunderstanding of the issue and will lead to greater andmore active cooperation.

The President: I would now like to give the floorto the Special Representative of the Secretary-General forChildren and Armed Conflict, Mr. Olara Otunnu.

Mr. Otunnu: I thank the Security Council verymuch for asking me to join in this briefing.

8


All civilians deserve and need the protection of theinternational community, but children deserve particularattention because they are the most innocent and powerlesssector of vulnerable populations and because destroyingchildren in this context is destroying the future of oursociety; but also simply because children sufferdisproportionately in these situations.

Just witness these figures. In the course of the lastdecade, as the Council knows, more than 2 million childrenhave been killed in situations of conflict, more than 1million have been orphaned, more than 6 million have beenpermanently or seriously injured, 12 million have beenmade homeless and more than 10 million are estimated tobe suffering from grave psychological and emotionaltrauma. But even as we speak now, more than 300,000children in over 30 conflict situations in the world areserving as child soldiers. More than half the totalpopulation of displaced persons — both those displacedwithin their national borders and those who have crossedtheir national borders — are children. More than 800children are estimated to be killed or maimed every monthby landmines; and, indeed, the worst forms of trauma andviolation — rape and other forms of sexual violence — areroutinely committed against women, especially youngwomen, in situations of conflict. These are the reasons whywe must especially focus on the particularly vulnerablesituations of children.

I wish to devote the rest of my remarks to what canbe done, what measures the international community mightexplore to reverse this trend of abomination.

The first measure, on which my colleague SergioVieira de Mello briefed the Council only a few weeks ago,is the absolute imperative of having access to populationsin distress. When communities are cut off from the outsideworld and are isolated, that is when they are mostvulnerable and when abuses take place and multiply. So theinternational community must insist on access byhumanitarian agencies to bear witness, quite simply, toprovide succour to those who are in need and to monitorthe real application of both the international and localstandards that apply to the conduct of war.

Second, we have to promote the concept of childrenas a zone of peace. In practical terms this implies two kindsof measures. The first is that the locales where childrenpredominate, such as schools, hospitals and playgrounds,should be regarded as battle-free zones. In this context, Iam very pleased that the Statute of the InternationalCriminal Court now makes it a war crime to target or

violate those locales. But, secondly, it also means thateven if we may not in particular situations be able tobring war to an end, we should at least promote the ideaof humanitarian ceasefires and of a break in hostilities toallow for inoculations and evacuations and to allow forchildren to be given special protection. The ideas that arenow being explored in this context with colleagues in theUnited Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the WorldHealth Organization in the context of the Congo aresomething that I hope the Council will strongly support.

Third, there are situations where — in the midst ofongoing conflict — parties in conflict, including non-Stateactors, have made commitments to take certain measuresthat can increase the space of protection for children.They have made commitments not to recruit and usechildren, not to interfere with access to relief supplies bypopulations within their zones of control and not to targetcivilian populations. The challenge now is how to ensurethat these parties in conflict are encouraged and givenincentives to honour these commitments. There is acollective role for the Security Council in that context,and there are individual roles for Governmentsrepresented within the Security Council and within theUnited Nations in this regard.

What can Governments do? Governments have veryimportant lines of communication to parties in conflict,including non-State actors. Governments have influencethat really matters on the ground. In an interdependentworld, I believe that no party in conflict can remainindifferent if concerned Governments and the SecurityCouncil make a concerted effort for them to know that itmatters whether or not they honour the commitments thatthey have made.

Fourth, we must explore how the initiatives that arenow taken within countries can be translated intoneighbourhood initiatives. What do I mean by this? I havebeen to a number of countries in the course of the pastyear and I have tried to undertake some commitments andinitiatives on the ground. But I have also beenincreasingly struck by certain cross-border activities: therecruitment, abduction and transfer of children acrossborders; the illegal flow of arms, especially lightweapons; the flow of landmines; and also the flow ofdisplaced persons to and fro. It is impossible to protectcivilian populations, especially children, exclusivelywithin national boundaries. We must therefore identifycertain neighbourhoods — neighbouring countries — andtake initiatives that will bring about commitments on thepart of neighbouring countries, as well as insurgency

9


groups active within those zones, to forgo some of theiractivities and to take certain measures that provide for theprotection of children.

With my colleagues within the United Nations,including UNICEF, we are already exploring how we mightinitiate such initiatives in the neighbourhood of theIntergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) ineastern Africa, Sierra Leone, Liberia and, certainly, in theneighbourhood of the war theatre in Kosovo.

Fifth, I could not agree more with the observation thathas been made by my colleagues that one of the strikingfeatures of peace agreements up to now is the conspicuousabsence of any mention of the needs and protection ofchildren. And yet we know, as I have indicated, thatchildren suffer disproportionately in the midst of conflict.In the aftermath of conflict it is they who are the mostdominant presence within a society, children who need tobe taken care of. I therefore hope that every effort will bemade, in a more systematic way, to encourage parties inconflict and to promote the incorporation of the issue of theprotection and the needs of children in peace agendas,meaning, at the stage when negotiations are taking place.

My office has begun some preliminary discussions inthe context of both Burundi and Colombia, and we hopethat with the Council’s support and the support of otherfriends of Burundi and Colombia it might be possible toincorporate the issue of the protection and the needs ofchildren in these two situations where children havesuffered especially badly.

Sixth, we have the recruitment and use of children,and there are three elements involved in this. The overallstrategy must be to eradicate the use of children in conflictsituations. But there are three elements that are importantin achieving that strategy. One is obviously the raising ofthe age limit for recruitment and participation from 15 to18, and I remain most active in promoting a consensus onthis issue. But that is not sufficient. Secondly, it isimportant for the international community to mobilize amovement, a movement of pressure, that can lean on partiesin conflict and that can help protect children in presenttheatres of conflict where children are being abused. Thatis essentially a political project, as distinct from thejuridical project of raising the age limit. Thirdly, and this isequally important, we know that there are social, economicand political factors that create the conditions that facilitatethe exploitation of children in this fashion. We mustaddress those economic and social factors as well. These

three elements together will help us in moving toeradicate the use and abuse of children in this way.

Seventh, I have been quite struck in my visits tomany countries by the fact that the single most vulnerablegroup consists of those who are displaced within theborders of their country, and by the fact that there is, asof now, no agreed framework for providing protection forthese people. Yes, there are arrangements for providingrelief, and that is most welcome, but there is noframework for providing protection to these populations.I have been discussing this with both the Office of theUnited Nations High Commissioner for Refugees andwith my very good friend Mr. Francis Deng, theSecretary-General’s Special Representative for InternallyDisplaced Persons. The international community has achallenge, an urgent challenge: as we speak, there aremore people displaced internally, within their countries,than those who have crossed borders and have becomerefugees. A framework must emerge for the protection ofthis most vulnerable of groups.

Eighth, there is the issue of the importance of localvalue systems. There are two pillars on which we mustfasten our claim for the protection of civilian populations.One pillar has been referred to already by my colleagues:international humanitarian and human rights instruments,such as the Geneva Convention, the Convention on theRights of the Child, the recently adopted Statute of theInternational Criminal Court, and so on. That is animportant, probably the primary pillar. But there is asecond pillar, about which we hear less, though I hope wemight hear more. In many societies facing the challengewe are describing, there are values, there are norms thathave germinated in the local soil, that speak to theprotection of civilian populations, and especially ofwomen, children and the elderly. I am reminded of thewords of a Kenyan elder who, observing the atrocitiescommitted in situations such as those we are describing,said, “In our tradition, men fight men. But now they aretargeting women, children, and the elderly.” This was thelament of a Kenyan elder. So we must work to promotethis other pillar and, where that pillar has beenundermined, and in some cases collapsed, work to helplocal communities and elders resuscitate that pillar. Onthese two pillars we must build our claim for theprotection of women and children.

Ninth, it is very clear that the ground is oftenprepared for the massive violation of civilians through thedemonization of the other community, through hatecampaigns, political rallies and political tracts, on radio,

10


and on television. These signs are visible and audible. Theinternational community must make a more concerted,systematic effort to repudiate these signs when they beginto appear.

Finally, tenth, there is dialogue with the businesscommunity, because we have seen that in some of the worsttheatres of conflict where children and women are beingtargeted there are active business dealings going on, intimber, in gold, in diamonds, in the sale of light weapons.I am not talking of all theatres of conflict. I am talking ofSierra Leone, I am talking of Angola, I am talking of theDemocratic Republic of the Congo and of the Sudan —theatres where we especially see the worst manifestation ofvictimization of civilian populations. Is it possible toencourage the business community to have a seriousdialogue around this issue, to perhaps develop voluntarycodes of conduct within their own industry that can addresstheir contribution, however indirect, to fuelling the machinethat victimizes and violates women and children?

Let me say, in conclusion, that I believe two things arevery important for the Council as it looks at this issue. One,the era now ending has been an era of the elaboration ofinternational instruments. A very impressive body is inplace, and many of those instruments have been referred to.The era we are entering must be one of application. A childin Sierra Leone is not impressed by all the instruments wecite here, unless the application of those instruments andvalues makes a difference to his or her life on the ground.I hope the Security Council collectively and Membersrepresented within the United Nations will invest theirinfluence in that direction.

Finally, I very much hope that the Security Councilwill undertake to follow up systematically on thecommitments made in the discussion of a few weeks ago,the discussion today, and the most important initiative takenby the Council last June and the presidential statement onthe impact of war on children. I hope that the commitmentrepresented in those initiatives will inform the ongoingbusiness of the Council, and will especially inform thework of the Council when it decides on specific crisissituations and elaborates specific mandates.

I am at the Council’s disposal to help it move forwardwith this project.

Mr. Türk (Slovenia): Mr. President, I wish to beginby expressing our appreciation to you and to the delegationof Canada for the creativity and work which made thepresent briefing possible.

I also wish to express our gratitude to Mr. CornelioSommaruga, President of the International Committee ofthe Red Cross, to Ms. Carol Bellamy, Executive Directorof the United Nations Children’s Fund, and to Mr. OlaraOtunnu, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, for their introductory statements. Indeed, thequality of these statements is such that one would wishthem to initiate not only an open briefing of the SecurityCouncil, but a full-fledged open orientation debate, whichwould allow all interested Member States to participate.Active participation of all the interested United NationsMembers could help the Security Council in the effort todevelop appropriate policies for the future, and we hopethat that participation will be there when we move onwith our tasks.

The basic aim of United Nations humanitarian actionshould be human security, with the key to security beingphysical rather than only legal protection. The currentspirit of resolve in the Council to make progress in thatdirection should lead to real improvement. A variety ofnew efforts are needed, both within the United Nationsframework and in other settings. It is appropriate today,therefore, to mention the initiative of a group of like-minded States, under the leadership of Canada andNorway, which is determined to give full meaning andspecific practical expression to the concept of humansecurity. Slovenia will continue to participate in thatinitiative to the best of its ability. We hope that time willbring concrete results in addition to those alreadyachieved in such areas as international mine action andinternational criminal justice.

Today’s Security Council discussion is focused onthe question of protection of civilians in armed conflict.This, in my opinion, has at least two importantimplications.

First, it involves the responsibility of the SecurityCouncil, which, according to the United Nations Charter,has the primary responsibility for international peace andsecurity. In other words, the Council’s task is to preventmilitary conflicts and, if they occur, to make a meaningfulcontribution towards their resolution. Furthermore, theCouncil has a responsibility after military conflicts end,to enable the transition to post-conflict peace-building.

The primacy of these essentially political andmilitary tasks of the Security Council must always beborne in mind. When addressing humanitarian issues, theSecurity Council must avoid the trap of usinghumanitarian action, or humanitarian discussions, as a

11


substitute for the necessary political or military action.Above all, the Council must always be aware thatpreventive action is preferable to any kind of cure. I amreiterating these principles not only for conceptual claritybut also, and above all, because of their practical relevanceto the way the Council deals with various situations on itsagenda and to the topic being discussed today.

The second implication of today’s discussion is theneed for a full understanding of the importance ofprotection of civilians in contemporary armed conflicts. Theprotection of civilian populations requires action, and actionis very often a matter of necessity. For the SecurityCouncil, this means that its powers must be usedadequately. Furthermore, protection of civilians in armedconflict requires a variety of forms of cooperation amongStates and their cooperation with the Security Council andwith humanitarian organizations.

At the stage when conflict prevention is still possible,cooperation among States requires the ability to develop aunified approach and bring the necessary pressure to bearwith the aim of making peaceful solutions more realisticand military options less likely.

In situations characterized by humanitarian problemsresulting from existing military conflicts, a variety ofactions that are sometimes termed “medium alternatives”may be necessary, such as providing police and otherpersonnel to guarantee security in refugee camps anddeveloping appropriate peacekeeping mandates, to mentionjust two of the possible options.

In some military conflicts it is necessary for theSecurity Council to be able to build the resolve of theinternational community to use Chapter VII measures inorder to protect civilians, including those measures thatrequire the use of force. On the other hand, when decidingon comprehensive economic sanctions, the Security Councilmust provide for the necessary humanitarian exemptions.

Careful and timely use of the instruments and powerswhich the United Nations Charter has made available to theSecurity Council is the most effective contribution theCouncil can make to conflict prevention and limitation andconsequently to protecting civilians. The Security Councilis a unique body with unique powers which have to be usedwisely and effectively.

The preceding remarks were made in an effort tomaintain the focus on the role of the Security Council whileaddressing a variety of issues relating to the protection of

civilians in armed conflict, including those pertaining tothe implementation of international humanitarian law.Respect for humanitarian law is essential and anobligation of all States. The President of the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross reminded us of article 1 ofthe Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protectionof Civilian Persons in Time of War, which reads:

“The [188] High Contracting Parties undertaketo respect and to ensure respect for the presentConvention in all circumstances.”

Article 13 of Protocol II Additional to the GenevaConvention, which relates to the protection of victims innon-international armed conflicts, expressly prohibits allattacks against civilians. These are important and basicobligations that have to be given specific meaning.

I do not wish to attempt a systematic legal analysisof the current problems in international humanitarian law.The Security Council is certainly not the most appropriateforum for such an analysis. On the other hand, there is aneed for the Security Council to address a basic, and Ishould say existential problem of internationalhumanitarian law today.

The Security Council has been reminded many timesthat the gap between the rules of humanitarian law and itsapplication has never been wider. Deliberate attacksagainst civilians have become a basic feature of manycontemporary armed conflicts. The fate of children asvictims of war is particularly appalling. The basic rules ofhumanitarian law are being deliberately violated. In somesituations described by the Special Representative of theSecretary-General on children and armed conflict, eventhe most basic ethical norms and value systemstraditionally respected in all societies are disregarded.This situation of what the Special Representative hascalled “ethical vacuum” has the potential of underminingthe entire edifice of international humanitarian law.

This problem must be of the utmost concern to theSecurity Council. What can we do? At present, I believethat we need to understand the problem more fully.Therefore we support the proposal for a report by theSecretary-General, containing specific suggestions andproposals, to the Security Council, acting in its sphere ofresponsibility, with the aim of improving the physical andlegal protection of civilians in armed conflict. We believethat such a study need not repeat the analysis of alreadywell-researched questions relating to the legal structure ofinternational humanitarian law, but it should focus on the

12


basic existential problems of international humanitarian lawtoday and should help the Security Council in devisingpolicies for the future.

The basic premise here should be that currenthumanitarian law already comprises all the necessaryprinciples and basic rules. Additional norm creation neednot be a priority. It is necessary to avoid the temptation toredefine already defined war crimes and crimes againsthumanity. However, some norms need to be strengthened,such as, for example, the prohibition of recruitment intoarmed forces of children below the legal minimum age forrecruitment, or the norms related to the prohibition ofmilitary action against areas declared safe havens for thecivilian population. Norms which require strengthening arenot too numerous but they are essential, and efforts in thatregard are necessary.

On the other hand, measures intended to give effect tosubstantive norms of humanitarian law require furtherelaboration and practical implementation. These include thetasks which will make the future International CriminalCourt an effective institution, and the development ofmechanisms of cooperation among States which will enablethe realization of the idea advocated by, among others, theSecretary-General of the United Nations of holdingcombatants financially liable to their victims. Such practicalideas, which may require new, ambitiously conceived formsof international cooperation, should be among the prioritiesof a possible study by the Secretary-General.

Such mechanisms will inevitably require long-term andsustained action and will to a large extent involve theSecurity Council in the future. At the same time, theCouncil will have to ensure better implementation of itsown basic functions in the maintenance of internationalpeace and security, such as those to which I referred in thefirst part of my statement. I hope that today’s discussionwill represent a real contribution in that regard.

Mr. Eldon (United Kingdom): First I should like towelcome you, Mr. President, most warmly to this Councilmeeting. The United Kingdom very much appreciates andsupports Canada’s initiative in arranging this briefing andthe commitment that you personally have given to it. 1999marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Geneva Conventionsand the centenary of the first Hague Peace Conference. Itis timely for the Council to consider what more can bedone to ensure that existing humanitarian law is fully andeffectively implemented. We also welcome the fact that thisbriefing is held at a meeting of the Council, in public andunder your chairmanship, which is another step forward

towards transparency in our procedures. I should like tothank Mr. Sommaruga, Ms. Bellamy and Mr. Otunnu fortheir most valuable and interesting contributions today.

Most of the conflicts which now come before theSecurity Council are internal armed conflicts.Increasingly, civilians bear the brunt of suffering or areeven deliberately targeted. The protection of civilians hasbecome more difficult because the dividing line betweencivilians and combatants and between peacekeepers andhumanitarian personnel is often blurred. Many of theperpetrators of the attacks on civilians are not under thecontrol of a State or part of a chain of command. Thefundamental and disturbing problem is the collapse of therule of law, both international and internal, in a numberof the conflicts with which the Council has to deal.

This collapse of law is compounded by the brutaland frankly anarchic nature of contemporary conflict, sographically described to the Council last month by theUnder-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs andhere again today. So what policy conclusions should wedraw?

The main conclusion we must draw is theimportance of conflict prevention, as Ambassador Türkhas just said. The best way to protect civilians is to try toprevent violent conflict in the first place by promotingeconomic and social development, as SpecialRepresentative Otunnu has advocated, good governanceand respect for human rights. We need to recognize thevital importance of conflict prevention and post-conflictpeace-building in breaking the cycle of violence whichleads to the disintegration of States. In this respect wevery much welcome the efforts of the Secretary-Generalto improve coordination between the key United Nationsactors involved.

We must also redouble our efforts to curb illicittrafficking in weapons and support universal participationin, and implementation of, the Ottawa Convention onanti-personnel landmines. We must help vulnerable Statesto develop responsible and well-trained military andpolice forces under civilian control. This meanscontinuing to build conflict prevention into our longer-term development programmes and paying increasedattention to the security sector.

But we must also work to mitigate the effect ofviolent conflict on civilians, so graphically described thismorning. There is already a large body of internationalhuman rights and humanitarian law. Our objective should

13


be to ensure that this is respected and implementedconscientiously.

We must also find practical ways of reducing the risksand confusion on the ground, ways which will survive thebreakdown of the rule of law. We hope that the Secretary-General’s forthcoming report will particularly focus on thisaspect of the problem. I would like to highlight six areas.

First, we need to put more effort into education andtraining. We should lay the foundations for the protectionof civilians in armed conflict by disseminating knowledgeof human rights obligations and international humanitarianlaw among security forces so that the individual soldierunderstands in clear and simple terms what hisresponsibilities are. This is an area where the ICRC isalready doing excellent work in many countries anddeserves our full support. It is obviously just as importantto ensure that United Nations peacekeepers themselves areproperly trained in human rights and humanitarian law.

Secondly, we need to tackle the question ofmonitoring and enforcement. Education is an important firststep. But what can we do if international humanitarian lawis still being flouted? The problem of internally displacedpersons is a case in point. Some excellent work has beendone in codifying the principles governing the handling ofinternally displaced persons. But there is no mechanism toensure that these principles are being observed. Thisproblem should be addressed.

Thirdly, as Ms. Bellamy and Special RepresentativeOtunnu have said, we should do more to tackle the rootcauses of the problem. One of these is the recruitment ofchild soldiers. It is pointless to expect a 12-year-old tounderstand, remember and observe detailed provisions ofinternational humanitarian law. The internationalcommunity must redouble its efforts to ensure that childrenare not used as soldiers in war. As Ms. Bellamy has said,once fighting has stopped, demobilized child soldiers —and for that matter, other former combatants — must begiven the assistance they need to play a positive role intheir communities.

Fourthly, we must tackle the problem of small arms,since if former combatants still have access to personalweapons once the fighting is over, they are at great risk ofbeing drawn back into violent ways of life.

Fifthly, the Council should consider whether it coulddo more to ensure that the needs of civilians aresystematically taken into account when designing new

peacekeeping mandates, particularly in areas such ashuman rights and humanitarian issues, includingdemining. We also need to give further thought toensuring a smooth transition from peacekeeping to peace-building and to the importance of rebuilding localcapacity and civil society.

Finally, as all of our briefers have said, we need toconsider what more can be done to enhance the safety ofhumanitarian personnel on the ground, particularly incases where there is limited consent from the warringparties and the security situation is volatile. We mustmake sure the United Nations security machinery has theresources it needs to do its job. We need to look atpractical measures, such as the regular sharing of vitalsecurity information among United Nations agencies andnon-governmental organizations.

Many of the issues we are discussing today gobeyond the immediate remit of the Security Council andare also under discussion in other forums. But that is noreason why the Council should not consider this importantmatter or have its discussions informed by the views ofother actors, and vice versa. We think the Council shouldoperate in coordination with, not in isolation from, therest of the United Nations system. It also needs to lookbeyond the symptoms to the causes of conflict.

Accordingly, we hope the Secretary-General’s reportwill take a broad view of this subject, based ondiscussions with a wide range of other actors both withinand outside the United Nations system. We hope it willcome up with concrete recommendations so that follow-up to this debate will make a real difference and sustaineddifference.

The President: I thank the representative of theUnited Kingdom for his kind words addressed to me.

Mr. Lavrov (Russian Federation) (interpretationfrom Russian): Like my colleagues, we are glad to seeyou, Mr. President, presiding at this meeting and we aregrateful to the delegation of Canada for taking thisinitiative. I should also like to thank Mr. Sommaruga,Ms. Bellamy and Mr. Otunnu for their participation in ourmeeting and for their briefings.

From these briefings and from the statements of mycolleagues, it is clear that the task of providing for strictcompliance with international humanitarian law is one ofthe most important tasks today, primarily in connectionwith a great number of conflicts of very different natures.

14


I will not dwell in detail on those factors which alreadyhave been cited here.

Today’s briefing, which is being held here at an openmeeting, reaffirms that members of the Security Council areconvinced of the need to strengthen internationalhumanitarian law, to ensure its application and to make useof the potential of the Security Council for those purposes.

It is clear that the Security Council is obliged to takemeasures to support the activities of internationalhumanitarian organizations,inter alia, in questions ofensuring the protection of the civilian population during thecourse of armed conflicts, and also for the purpose ofprotecting the personnel of those humanitarian organizationswho are more and more themselves becoming the objectsof aggressive actions.

At the same time we are convinced that such supportfrom the Security Council must be implemented in strictcompliance with the United Nations Charter and must, firstand foremost, take the form of political support. Only whenall political and diplomatic methods have been exhaustedcan consideration be given to the question of using force toprotect the civilian population and the personnel of thehumanitarian organizations, and then only on the soundbasis of the Charter.

Incidentally, when the Security Council takes decisionsto use force for the protection of the civilian population,there is a need to give careful thought to how effective itwill be and whether it may not have negative consequences.Experience, in particular the experience of Somalia, hasdemonstrated that sometimes the decision to use force, ifnot fully thought through and calculated in terms of itsconsequences, may lead to a situation in which suchunsuccessful humanitarian interference only exacerbates theconflict and, inter alia, aggravates the situation for thecivilian population — the very population which we wantedto protect. This concerns the use of force on the basis ofdecisions of the Security Council itself, as provided for bythe Charter.

It is no secret that recently attempts have been madeto use humanitarian concerns to justify unilateral use offorce — that is, by bypassing the Security Council andwithout obtaining its authorization. It is clear that this runscounter to the Charter and that such an approach isunacceptable and can only destroy the present system ofinternational relations, which is based on the principles ofthe Charter. The destruction of that international system isthus is too high a price to pay to resolve humanitarian

problems, regardless of how important those problemsmay be, because the consequences will be devastating andglobal.

International humanitarian law must be compliedwith. It is my feeling that no one will contest the need tocomply with the Charter, and we cannot allow opposingthe need to implement international humanitarian law withthe need to implement the Charter.

It has already been stated by previous speakers thatthe problem of the protection of the civilian population inarmed conflicts is complex and far-ranging in nature andtherefore requires a complex approach on the part of theinternational community. Many examples which havebeen cited today, for example by Ms. Bellamy, whospoke of the need to protect the rights of children inarmed conflicts, including the minimum age forinvolvement in armed forces. These and other questionsare also considered by the Security Council, as are thoseaddressed by Mr. Olara Otunnu, namely the need, forexample, to draw up a code for conducting business.Without question, that too is extremely important, but itfalls outside the competence of the Security Council.

I would therefore like to support the statement madeby Mr. Eldon regarding the need for the report of theSecretary-General to be as broad as possible in nature,drawing from a wealth of sources and containingrecommendations which would be addressed not only tothe Security Council but also to all the other participantsin efforts to ensure compliance with internationalhumanitarian law. And perhaps this report should becomea catalyst for that comprehensive approach of which weare speaking and assist in moving this thesis into thelanguage of practical activity.

Naturally, we cannot forget either the GeneralAssembly or the Economic and Social Council, becausethey too have a mandate in the area of humanitarianquestions. Nor can we forget the regional organizationswhich in one way or another also deal with humanitarianquestions, nor the non-governmental organizations. I wantto mention separately the International Committee of theRed Cross, a universally respected organization whosework we actively support.

Mr. Valle (Brazil): I am honoured to convey to you,Sir, the Brazilian delegation’s sincere appreciation foryour presence among us today. As you are well aware,my authorities hold you in the highest esteem and areparticularly pleased to be able to coordinate closely with

15


Canada during this year of 1999, in which we coincide inthe Security Council. Your commitment to multilateralismand your personal role in promoting respect for, and thedevelopment of, international humanitarian law areespecially worthy of recognition in the context of today’sexchange of ideas. The leadership displayed by Canada, andby you personally, in developing a strategy to move theinternational community towards a global ban on anti-personnel landmines deserves to be highlighted and shouldserve as an inspiration for our continuing endeavours in theSecurity Council and other appropriate forums to deal withthe exceedingly high levels of civilian death and injury inmany contemporary conflicts.

Let me proceed by expressing our gratitude to thePresident of the International Committee of the Red Cross,Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga, the Executive Director of theUnited Nations Children’s Fund, Ms. Carol Bellamy, andthe Special Representative of the Secretary-General forChildren and Armed Conflict, Mr. Olara Otunnu, for theimportant contribution they have made to our debate.

Our discussion today can be seen as part of anongoing exercise in the Security Council aimed atarticulating a coherent agenda for dealing with conflictsituations that will not only help stem violence andminimize the suffering of civilians but also promote durableand sustainable solutions to the conflicts themselves.

We consider these discussions useful and necessary.But as we heighten our awareness of the scope of theviolations of humanitarian law that occur even as we meettoday, we believe that we must be careful to maintain abalanced perspective, both as regards the analysis of thechallenges we face and as relates to the options for dealingwith such challenges. An increasing amount of publishedmaterial, from a variety of sources, dealing with theinterlinkages between humanitarian and security issues canhelp us to keep such a balanced perspective.

According to a recently published article by ProfessorJarat Chopra, of Brown University, while at the beginningof the twentieth century 85 to 90 per cent of war deathswere soldiers, as the century comes to a close 75 per cent,on average, are civilians. These alarming figures indicatethat we are indeed facing a serious phenomenon on a widescale. The same article points out that of the 22 millionpeople who have perished in armed conflicts since 1945,about one quarter died in the nineties. While this is anunquestionably high proportion, it would be improper togloss over the fact that in absolute terms more civiliansperished during previous and deadlier decades, or to forget

that the targeting of civilians for extermination on anethnic, religious or political basis is not an invention ofthe nineties. Unfortunately, serious humanitarian abuseshave taken place throughout the century, and we shouldbe wary of hasty judgements that might entail historicaldistortions.

It has frequently been said in recent years that ethnicor internal conflicts are likely to be more savage becausethey are often fought by irregular armies. My delegationhas previously commentedon the fact that internalconflicts are not necessarily more frequent today than inthe past, and some of the most serious threats to peace wecurrently face are clearly of an inter-State character.

A different but related point is made in a recentstudy entitledThe Myth of Global Chaos, where we arereminded, on the one hand, that ethnic wars are oftenfought by regular armies and, on the other, that regulararmies are quite capable of vicious massacres.

Today, numerous conflicts are referred to as“humanitarian disasters” or “catastrophes”. But, as waspointed out by the head of the ICRC’s media services ina conference published by the Red CrossReview, inreality this kind of labelling runs the risk of steering theinternational response towards purely humanitarian actionin cases where what is required is political initiative.According to the same source, far too many disasters withpolitical causes, and for which there can be only politicalsolutions, are labelled today “humanitarian crises”.

The impact of humanitarianism on North-Southrelations is also of relevance in our attempts to keep abalanced perspective on the issues before us. It isincreasingly felt that a strategic vision for integratinghumanitarian relief, politics and economic and socialdevelopment is essential if we are to promote trulydurable solutions to many of today’s crises. As theNorwegian Minister for Development Cooperation andHuman Rights, Hilde Johnson, has asserted,

“spending a few dollars on development today maysave us millions in humanitarian assistance in thefuture”.

In addition, my delegation has often made the pointthat we should differentiate between collectiveresponsibility and collective security in the humanitarianfield. Concerns with ensuring that humanitarian relief besafely provided should not automatically imply resort tomilitary options or Security Council involvement. All

16


peaceful and diplomatic efforts should be exhausted beforethe military option is contemplated and, when it is, consentand cooperation at the receiving end should be sought, apoint that Mr. Sommaruga emphasized earlier.

There are those who argue — like Antonio Donini, inan article entitled “Asserting Humanitarianism in PeaceMaintenance” — that, from a humanitarian point of view,the pertinence of military intervention is at best doubtfuland that the alibi of humanitarian action through militaryintervention can lead to a militarization of North-Southrelations which runs the risk of being interpreted asdisguisedrealpolitik.

On another level, let us not lose sight of the fact thatthe use of indiscriminate weapons, such as landmines, isone of the biggest causes of civilian suffering in conflictsituations. The banning of such weapons, and indeed of allweapons of mass destruction, deserves the utmost priorityof the international community because of their impact oncivilians, among other reasons. In this context, it might beappropriate to recall that the contrast between the inordinateamount of resources invested in the production of suchweapons in the face of dwindling resources for economicdevelopment is a source of perplexity.

At the same time, it is worth recalling — as stressedby the Secretary-General in his report on Africa — thatstopping the flow of arms to areas of chronic instability isan essential ingredient of any strategy for lowering thelevels of brutality against civilians and humanitarianworkers.

There are several points that can be made in thisconnection. On the one hand, the Security Council shouldnot hesitate to impose arms embargoes against States orparties whose actions threaten regional or internationalpeace. Arms embargoes, as opposed to more comprehensivesanctions, cannot be said to provoke any legitimatehumanitarian or third party side-effects. Such measures canonly attain their objectives, however, if effectivelymonitored. Unfortunately, we must recognize that, moreoften than not, the flow of arms and ammunition tosanctioned States or parties is continuing in defiance ofSecurity Council resolutions.

It is possible to contend that the high levels of civiliandeath, from Bosnia to Liberia, need not be seen asinevitable by-products of so-called internal conflicts of themodern age. Rather, these can be viewed as resulting fromthe inadequate or non-existent control of the flow ofweapons, both internationally and domestically. An article

published in the latest issue of the Red CrossReviewargues in favour of establishing the principle that thosewho supply arms in situations where rampant violationsof international humanitarian law can be expected sharethe responsibility for the use of such weapons and,ultimately, for those violations. The same argument canbe made even more forcefully with respect to those whoviolate multilaterally negotiated and Security Council-mandated arms embargoes. At the very least, we shouldconcur with the Secretary-General when he states in hisreport on Africa that arms exporting countries have aresponsibility to exercise restraint, especially with respectto the export of weapons into zones of conflict or tension.

Before I conclude, let me stress the importance ofworking towards a consensus in the United Nations thatwill integrate, in a balanced way, the endeavours of theSecurity Council, the Economic and Social Council andthe General Assembly, as well as those of the specializedagencies and other international actors in an effort to fine-tune a doctrinal framework capable of ensuring greaterrespect for humanitarian law, on the one hand, but also oflooking beyond humanitarian relief into the spheres ofinstitutional, economic and social development. We fearthat, unless we keep in mind the need to take into accountthe spheres that lie beyond humanitarian relief, and unlesswe do this with political and even cultural sensitivity, theaim of reducing the levels of violence against civiliansand humanitarian workers will remain elusive.

I would like to end by recalling that a focused reportby the Secretary-General on protection for humanitarianassistance to refugees and others in conflict situations, indocument S/1998/883 of 22 September 1998, addressedseveral of the issues that we continue to grapple with ina clear and straightforward manner. As we are about torequest an additional report, we would like to suggest thatthe framework provided in the 22 September report beborne in mind and that the new report concentrate onareas not covered therein.

The President: I thank the representative of Brazilfor his kinds words addressed to me.

Mr. Dejammet (France) (interpretation fromFrench): I wish to thank Canada and especially you, Sir,and the Permanent Representative of Canada for yourvery welcome initiative of convening the Security Counciland inviting the President of the International Committeeof the Red Cross (ICRC), the Director General of theUnited Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and theSpecial Representative of the Secretary-General for

17


Children and Armed Conflict to express their views on theprotection of civilians in armed conflict.

At the outset, I wish to pay a very special tribute tothe work of the International Committee of the Red Cross,which it carries out with the greatest discretion. In an erawhen every gesture is broadcast by the media, I think weneed to be aware of and grateful to the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross for the way it works in silenceand with such effectiveness. It performs this work with thegreatest sense of human respect and dignity and strivesdaily and tirelessly to alleviate the sufferings of peoples,regardless of their origin, race, religion, gender or status.

In this fiftieth anniversary of the Geneva Conventions,I therefore believe that it is time to pay tribute to PresidentSommaruga and the unflagging work of the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross under his leadership to ensurerespect for the human condition. Tribute also must be paidto the thousands of volunteers who often work at risk oftheir lives and who reflect honour on the founder of theInternational Committee of the Red Cross, Henri Dunant,the first recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

This struggle is more necessary today than ever beforein order to ensure respect for the fundamental and verysimply rules of international humanitarian law, according towhich defenceless persons must not be attacked. In the lightof the debate we held last month, however, and particularlyin the light of the statement made by the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Mr. Sergio Vieira deMello, we must focus today on the means of actionavailable to us. Everyone has mentioned here that conflictsare in fact no longer confined to struggles between clearlyidentified national interests or to clashes between Statesthat, for the most part, are adherents to treaties andconventions. That ensures a certain reciprocity andoccasionally allows those international instruments to beobserved.

We are today witnessing a proliferation of parties toconflicts, many of which are not State actors. This leads toa situation that is much more complex and gives us causeto think about what instruments can be implemented inorder to deal with this new state of war and to ensurerespect for humanitarian law in accordance with commonarticle 1 of the Geneva Conventions.

Many of the preceding speakers have already indicatedquite concretely and precisely what the priorities are. Forour part, we would emphasize five elements. The first ispreventive in nature and involves the dissemination of the

fundamental norms of humanitarian law, which is one ofthe obligations contained in the Geneva Conventions. Aswe know, the International Committee of the Red Crossis involved in this work, but we must actively support thework of disseminating and making common knowledge ofthe norms of humanitarian law. This entails educationabout human rights and respect, in both wartime andpeacetime, for the fundamental principles relative to thehuman person, such as the right to life and theprohibitions against torture, the deportation ofpopulations, disappearances and illegal detentions. Theseare inalienable principles that, in accordance with humanrights conventions, cannot be suspended for reasons ofsecurity or law enforcement and whose violationconstitutes a war crime. Missions of the United NationsHigh Commissioner for Human Rights can contribute tostrengthening this prevention on the ground and tosupporting the establishment of national judicial systemsand legislation that will make it possible to deal withviolations of humanitarian law.

At a time when almost everyone has access to themost sophisticated means of information andcommunication, it is important to make good use of thosemeans. This goes along with the comments made byMr. Sergio Vieira de Mello, who the other day denouncedthe use of the media as a tool of mass conflict. In thisconnection, I also support Mr. Otunnu’s project with theUnited Nations Children’s Fund to prepare radioprogrammes to make it possible to sensitize children, andof course adults as well, regarding respect for the rightsof children.

Finally, just a word to say how very rightMr. Sommaruga and Mr. Otunnu are in warning againstattempts to demonize. Some might be tempted todemonize a given leader, but we sometimes see,subsequent to such attempts, that the country of thatleader is also demonized. That can lead to a spiral ofthreats and sometimes even violence.

The second obligation that concerns us has to dowith weapons, in particular with small-calibre arms andlight weapons. While a number of conventions have beendrawn up in the course of the last century to ban certaincategories of weapons — especially weapons of massdestruction and anti-personnel mines — light weaponsand small-calibre arms continue to cause more and moreharm by virtue of their accessibility, even to children. TheSecurity Council must therefore see to it that armsembargoes are implemented. In this respect, we shouldrecall resolution 1209 (1998), which was adopted by the

18


Security Council last November, on illicit arms movementsto Africa and within Africa.

The European Union adopted a joint action last monthin order to combat the accumulation and the destabilizingspread of small-calibre weapons and to help reduce existingstockpiles. We consider it necessary to strengtheninternational cooperation in this respect, in accordance withthe provisions of the Charter. Our objective in this fieldshould be to achieve the same success as that which wasachieved in the extremely rapid adoption of the OttawaConvention. We cannot fail to thank Canada and theInternational Committee of the Red Cross once again forthe tireless energy they applied to that work, which resultedin success, and to congratulate them. The report that is tobe published by the International Committee of the RedCross next month on the problem of the spread of small-calibre arms and light weapons should be an opportunity forfurther consideration of this fundamental problem.

The third instrument is that of sanctions. Thisinstrument is available to the Security Council, and itshould be used. But it must be used appropriately to targetthose responsible and not to increase the suffering ofpopulations, especially those who are most vulnerable. Inthis respect, we endorse the conclusions of the Councilregarding the recommendations of the various chairmen ofthe sanctions committees. This reflection must be continuedwhile bearing in mind the contributions made by the Officefor the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in order tolimit collateral damage to the civilian population as muchas possible and to take its needs into account.

The fourth direction in which we must work is thefight against impunity. Wherever necessary we mustconduct investigations and see to it that they are given thenecessary follow-up. Major progress has recently beenmade. This can be seen,inter alia, in the establishment ofinternational tribunals. Let us simply recall that the Councilwill have an important role to play with regard to theInternational Criminal Court once it is in operation.

The last element concerns the authorization by theCouncil of resort to armed force. This may be indispensableto ensure the security of populations and humanitarianaction. In some cases it is armed force alone that can makeit possible to create a humanitarian space, corridors ofaccess and protection for the delivery of aid. That objectivemust be borne in mind, even though relatively recentexamples in history have unfortunately shown that theefforts of certain countries — including Canada — have notbeen successful and have had very regrettable

consequences. Of course, with regard to this question ofresort to armed force, it will be necessary for us toestablish very clear mandates so that tasks will not beconfused and the neutral and impartial nature ofhumanitarian aid will not be undermined. TheInternational Committee of the Red Cross is quite rightlydevoted to that principle, but we should perhaps moreoften envisage the cooperation that can be provided bypeacekeeping forces to alleviate the needs of populations— for example, by introducing a demining ordisarmament component in the mandate of these forces orby adding some specifications and provisions for thedemobilization of children.

I will dedicate my final words to the issue ofchildren and to pay tribute both to the comments made byMs. Bellamy in her very strong statement and to the workof UNICEF, as well as to the forceful, very efficient,rapid and precise work accomplished by Mr. Otunnu.

The enlistment of children in a war dooms acountry’s future for generations. It means there will be nomore education, and only learning how to kill one’sneighbour and engender a cycle of violence. The GenevaConventions and the Convention on the Rights of theChild guarantee the protection due children under the ageof 15. It is without doubt imperative for that age to beraised to 18. We support the efforts made by Ms. Bellamyand Mr. Otunnu in this direction.

But the primary responsibility in this field resides, inthe last analysis, with States. Thus, my country has begunthe necessary internal procedures for ratification ofProtocol I to the Geneva Conventions, and France hopesto be able to adhere to it this year.

The important thing, in conclusion, is that we alwaysact pragmatically. In each and every one of the situationsbefore the Council, we must hear the views of thehumanitarian agencies on the consequences for civilianpopulations. These elements must also be taken intoconsideration in the peace processes, as can currently beseen in the contribution made by International Committeeof the Red Cross to the negotiations in Rambouillet thisvery day.

Mr. Otunnu’s initiative aimed at including thedemobilization and reintegration of children within theArusha peace process is an excellent, concrete examplethat we should bear in mind in the action we take underyour leadership, Mr. President.

19


The President (interpretation from French): I thankthe representative of France for the kind words headdressed to my country.

Mr. van Walsum (Netherlands): Like speakers beforeme, I would like to commend you, Mr. President, and yourdelegation for organizing this briefing on a very important,specific aspect of the concept of human security, to whichyou are so personally committed. We would also like tothank the three briefers, who have provided us with a largenumber of new ideas.

Just over 100 years ago, on 11 January 1899, theRussian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Count MikhailNikolayevich Muravyov, dispatched a circular to allindependent States, convening what was to become knownas the first Hague Peace Conference. Although theConference, which was attended by 26 States, failed toachieve its primary objective — the limitation ofarmaments — it did adopt a number of conventions relatingto war on land and sea. It also accepted three declarations:one prohibiting the use of asphyxiating gases, anotherprohibiting the use of dumdum bullets and a third oneprohibiting the discharge of projectiles or explosives fromballoons. Its most important achievement, however, wasthat it was generally seen as the first in a series of peaceconferences which would gradually eliminate the scourge ofwar.

The second Hague Peace Conference was held in1907, and the third was planned for 1915. The latter failedto meet, due to the outbreak of the First World War, butthe rhythm of the Hague Peace Conferences provided theimpulse for the subsequent creation of the League ofNations, the forerunner of our present United Nations.

The modern concept of the law of war — the notionthat war is not a total surrender to barbarity, but that certainnorms of behaviour continue to apply even after theoutbreak of hostilities — is also closely linked with theNetherlands, thanks to the epochal work of Hugo Grotius,De Jure Belli’ac Pacis(On the Law of War and Peace),published in 1625. These norms of behaviour underconditions of armed conflict are the subject of our openbriefing today.

As we approach the end of the twentieth century, weare disturbed to find that there is little left of the relativeoptimism which prevailed at the Hague Peace Conferencea century ago. What makes it difficult to continue tobelieve that we are in the process of gradually alleviatingand restraining the horrors of war is the fact that two

important distinctions seem to be simultaneouslyvanishing: that between international wars and civil wars,and that between combatants and non-combatants. Of allthe armed conflicts currently being discussed in theSecurity Council, only one is a war between two States,and it is generally estimated that more than 75 per cent ofthe casualties produced by a modern armed conflict arecivilians. If this trend continues, the law of war willslowly cease to play its regulatory role, and we willwitness a return to the days when war was a phenomenonof unmitigated barbarity.

This is not due to a lack of legal instruments. Lawof war, like international law in general, is, of course,never complete, and many studies and seminars aredevoted to its further development. The Security Council,however, should not try to add more documents to thealready impressive list of available texts. It should be ouraim to obtain a wider acceptance of existing legalinstruments, to promote a strict application of theirprovisions, to bring about an early entry into force of theInternational Criminal Court, and most of all to identifyfeasible, practical steps that by their nature lendthemselves to being taken by this Council rather than byother organs, bodies or agencies.

One thing the Security Council can and should do isto keep drawing special attention to the problem ofsecurity for humanitarian workers, not becausehumanitarian workers deserve more protection than thepeople they are supposed to protect, but because attackson them put the whole concept of humanitarian assistancein jeopardy. We have seen in Angola how two attacks onaircraft carrying humanitarian workers have almostsucceeded in bringing the United Nations presence in thatcountry to a halt.

In addition, the Security Council could see to it thatfor every United Nations-led intervention a clear mandateis drawn up. Whenever Chapter VI or Chapter VIIoperations are planned, the need for civilian protectionshould be given a prominent place in a specific mandate.

The Security Council certainly would not wish tointerfere with the work of other members of the UnitedNations family, but it could take the initiative inrequesting the establishment of a strategic framework toguide the work of the various United Nations organs incomplex emergencies. Although the peaceful resolution ofany conflict will always be the ultimate goal, protectionof civilians should be one of the pre-eminent short-termaims of such a strategic framework. Although one might

20


argue that this approaches the limit of the SecurityCouncil’s competence, we could urge the humanitarianrelief agencies to apply principled programming so as topreserve the credibility of their humanitarian activities. It isclear that relief agencies depend on the parties in theconflict to reach the victims they want to help. At times awarring party may be tempted to obstruct a relief operationif it considers it predominantly beneficial to the other party.Relief agencies will be able to deal with such situationsonly if their operational decisions are based on a sound andtransparent set of humanitarian principles. This is what ismeant by principled programming, and it is our view thatin the context of a strategic framework the Security Councilmay legitimately ask for it to be applied by all humanitarianactors.

If we want to salvage anything of the concept of thelaw of war in this modern age, when most wars are internalconflicts, we must finally find a solution to the problem ofmaintaining contact with both warring parties. In all internalconflicts — leaving aside the extreme contingency that aState has ceased to exist — we are faced with a recognized,sovereign State on the one hand and a rebel movement orinsurgency on the other. We cannot hope to promoterespect for humanitarian law in what common article 3 ofthe Geneva Conventions calls “armed conflict not of aninternational character” if we do not allow ourselves toestablish contact with the non-State party.

The problem becomes even more intractable when therecognized, sovereign State is itself the terrorizing party.The Netherlands disagrees with those who believe that eventhen Article 2, paragraph 7, of the United Nations Charterprovides us with the ultimate answer. That article shouldnever be read in isolation. After all, the opening words ofthe Charter do not refer to sovereign States but to thepeoples of the United Nations. It must be the peoples whoare entitled to the protection we are discussing today.Nothing contained in the United Nations Charter authorizesa State to terrorize its own citizens.

Mr. Petrella (Argentina) (interpretation fromSpanish): First of all, Mr. President, we wish to expressappreciation for your initiative to hold a debate on theprotection of civilians in situations of conflict. This topicundoubtedly represents the fundamental challenge facing theinternational community and in particular the SecurityCouncil.

May I also express our gratitude to the previousPresident of the Council, Ambassador Celso Amorim of

Brazil, whose skills and talents contributed to resolvingthe problems before the Council during the month of January.

We also express our appreciation to the ExecutiveDirector of the United Nations Children’s Fund,Ms. Carol Bellamy, and to the President of theInternational Committee of the Red Cross, Mr. CornelioSommaruga, for their thorough briefings, and toAmbassador Olara Otunnu for his contribution to thismeeting. All of these statements will undoubtedly have animpact on and be followed up by the Council.

The presence here of the Minister for ForeignAffairs of Canada is yet another example of his country’ssteadfast and selfless contribution to the United Nations,above all in the area of international peace and security.

Unfortunately, it is clear that in present conflicts,civilian populations are being deliberately andindiscriminately targeted. With growing frequency, theenemy is identified with a different ethnic or religiousminority or simply with the members of a different group.There has been an increase in conflicts betweenautonomous armed elements that neither answer to aunified command or respect international humanitarianlaw or human rights.

We have been given today alarming statisticsshowing that a high percentage of current victims arecivilians. The situation of children is particularlysensitive, not only because they are particularly vulnerableduring conflicts but because their post-conflictrehabilitation is complex, difficult and extensive.

The demobilization and social rehabilitation of childsoldiers is the most difficult of processes. The magnitudeand complexity of the problem make clear once again thatthe concept of international peace and security as seen in1945 has evolved considerably. It now encompassesbroader qualitative aspects that involve not only factorsrelated to military activity but also to governability,democracy, development and justice.

This does not mean that the Security Council shoulddeal with all of these problems, but it does imply that theCouncil can act, in certain circumstances, within theframework of this broader concept. That is the sense ofthe debate that we are holding today.

The protection of the civilian population in conflicts,particularly in internal conflicts, is a relatively recentconcern of the Security Council. That concern has

21


evolved, though slowly, along with the changes that haveoccurred in the law governing customs and practices duringarmed conflicts.

International humanitarian law has also increasinglytaken into account the need to emphasize the protection ofcivilians and has recently stressed the protection of thosewho by definition have never been combatants — thecivilian population. This development has provided us witha whole range of standards to set limits on the conduct ofhostilities and to protect innocent persons. Many of thesehave already been enshrined in universally recognizedprinciples and norms. We must not underestimate theirimportance, although we should recognize a basic structuralflaw: the great majority of these norms apply only toconventional international armed conflicts — in otherwords, to a tiny percentage of current conflicts.

This situation does not appear easy to resolve in theshort term. Nonetheless, the growing acceptance of the factthat the protection of individuals transcends the domesticsphere of States gives rise to hope that gradually thedifferences in the way the two categories of conflict arehandled will be reduced.

In this respect, special mention should be made of theStatute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda,which for the first time criminalized violations ofinternational humanitarian law committed in an internalconflict, and, more recently, the Rome Statute for theestablishment of the International Criminal Court, whichmade headway in the application of norms to this type ofconflict. In addition, both instruments should be a valuabledeterrent force.

In spite of the limitations, we have at our disposal anadequate body of norms. For this reason, it is a priorityissue to focus our efforts on the implementation of thesenorms to make them better known and more practical interms of their application. The punishment of the guilty isnot only essential to combat impunity; it is alsoindispensable in order to build a stable peace following theend of a conflict. In this context, the creation of theTribunals and the Statute of the International CriminalCourt are of historic relevance.

But the importance of emphasizing individualresponsibility should not make us forget the responsibilityof States themselves. Article 1 of the Geneva Conventionsclearly establishes that it is the States that are responsiblefor respecting and ensuring respect for internationalhumanitarian law in all circumstances.

We appreciate the tireless efforts of the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross for the dissemination andteaching of humanitarian law and to help meet thedemand for protection generated by present conflicts.States must also make every effort to promote anunderstanding of the norms that are applicable tosituations of conflict, not only on the part of our soldiersbut also on the part of the population at large.

One way of protecting civilians is through vigorousaction to prevent conflict. That requires the adoption ofurgent and decisive measures in the early stages. Many ofthose measures form part of the exclusive competence ofthis Council. Others require joint action of the Counciland other organs within and outside of the system, suchas those that involve aid for development andhumanitarian assistance. But for all those measures thevisible and dynamic action of the Council is necessary.Otherwise it will be extremely difficult to adequatelyprevent and punish those who violate humanitarian law.In the preventive stage we must focus efforts on thecreation of adequate mechanisms or on strengtheningexisting mechanisms, first to stop the flow of arms toconflict zones and secondly to actively destroy arsenals,particularly of small arms and conventional weapons, asthey are the most widely used.

Adequate measures must also be assured to considerthe security of humanitarian field workers. The recentattacks on United Nations or associated personnel violatethe conscience of this Council and should be investigateddynamically in order to allow for the severe punishmentof those responsible.

Those attacks renew the concern which only a fewyears ago led us, under the presidency of Canada, to thenegotiation and speedy adoption of the Convention on theSafety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. Wemust urgently promote the signing and ratification of thisConvention.

However, it should be emphasized that thatConvention, while very important, is not applicable to allpersons and organizations in conflict zones. For thatreason Argentina is studying the possibility of presentingan initiative that will broaden, perhaps through a protocol,the scope of personal application of that instrument.

Mr. Andjaba (Namibia): Protection of civilians inarmed conflict is topical and thus my delegation expressesits gratitude to you, Mr. President, for having arrangedthis briefing in this format. The introductory remarks by

22


Mr. Sommaruga, Ms. Bellamy and Mr. Otunnu have indeedenriched our deliberations, and we are most grateful.

Today civilians, especially women, children and theelderly, are deliberately targeted by combatants and areperpetual victims of indiscriminate shootings and anti-personnel landmines. The cruel and degrading treatment,physical and psychological torture, killing and mutilation ofcivilians are well-known characteristics of armed conflict.Inciting of ethnic animosity by hostile media has alsobecome a common phenomenon. Human suffering as aresult of displacement is on the increase. On the other hand,displaced persons fleeing into neighbouring countriescontinue to place a huge social and economic burden on thehost countries, especially in Africa.

It is obvious from the briefing we received a whileago that the situation of children is even more perilous. Thestatistics of displaced children cited here are truly alarming.Over 13 million children are internally displaced. Thosewho manage to escape the bullets of belligerents often haveno place to hide. They are pursued by the scourge oflandmines and are either killed or scarred for life. Not onlyare children easy targets; they are increasingly being usedto kill other children. Girls are traumatized through rape.They become instant mothers by being forced to bearchildren or having to assume the role of parenthoodbecause their parents have been murdered.

Recruitment and deployment of child soldiers who areoften orphans of the same conflict is preposterous, for theybecome ruthless and as such wreak vengeance on theiradversaries. Enmities and hatred are inculcated in them, andunless measures are taken to curb this practice, societieswith this breed of soldiers are heading for disaster.

In a word, what we have heard today is that there areno children in war and thus there is no childhood in armedconflict. Therefore banning the recruitment or the use ofchildren in hostilities must be made an internationalcommitment.

In the past, civilians in armed conflict regarded UnitedNations premises as safe havens, and those fleeing hostilityknew they could be safe under the blue and white flag.Today all that has changed. Shootings at United Nationspremises and other properties, as well as at United Nationspersonnel, will become fair play unless we act decisively.

Motivated by human considerations to protect thevictims of armed conflict, humanitarian agencies arethemselves victimized or face accusations of giving aid to

rebels, and their neutrality and impartiality becomecontentious. In a worst-case scenario, they are refusedaccess to the victims of the conflict, expelled or theirproperties are confiscated. Thus, all efforts should bemade to encourage parties to a conflict to allow safeaccess by humanitarian agencies to the victims of conflict.

My delegation wishes to call on all parties toconflicts to observe the provisions of the pertinent GenevaConventions and the additional protocols and to respectthe neutrality of the civilian populations. Implementationof the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use,Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-personnelMines and on Their Destruction is imperative. There arenumerous instruments to address this problem. What isneeded, therefore, is a collective political will to enforcethem.

The Platform for Action adopted at the Fourth WorldConference on Women, which took place in Beijing in1995, among others, addressed women and armedconflict. Not only does the Platform for Action depict thehorror women and girls go through in armed conflict, butit gives concrete actions to be taken by Governments inorder to reduce excessive military expenditures andcontrol the availability of armaments. Let me reiterate thatthis is one of the commitments we all made at thatConference.

In fact in this regard the Conference on Womenaddressed the heart of the problem — proliferation ofarms and their impact on armed conflict. The uncontrolledinflow not only of small arms but of all types ofsophisticated arms into areas of conflict needs to beaddressed. Is it not ironic, for example, that in Africathere is a shortage of food but an abundance ofsophisticated arms? Therefore, just as we call uponbelligerents to stop the fighting, so too must we undertakemeasures for all weapons-producing countries not totransfer anti-personnel landmines and arms, whether bysale or grant, to regions where armed conflict isimminent.

Furthermore, and equally important in our view, it isthe responsibility of all Member States to ensure that theircitizens are not used as mercenaries. Indeed, protection ofcivilians in armed conflict is pertinent, but what is evenmore crucial is for the world to come to sanity and stoparmed conflict.

Mr. Agam (Malaysia): I should like to congratulateyou, Sir, and extend my delegation’s most sincere

23


appreciation to you for this timely and important initiative.The question of the protection of civilians in armed conflictis indeed one of which the Council should be seized on acontinuing basis. Today’s open briefing provides theopportunity for not only members of the Council but alsothe general membership of the United Nations to get furtherinsights into this question. I thank Mr. Sommaruga, Ms.Bellamy and Mr. Otunnu for their comprehensive, indeedpassionate, and most enlightening presentations.

The current situation is indeed alarming, as confirmedby the three speakers. Their statements speak volumes onthe condemnable acts and practices carried out by parties inarmed conflicts who make civilians the victims andcasualties. Wherever there is an armed conflict civilians arebeing increasingly affected, suffering casualties directly orindirectly. Even the use of highly sophisticated and super-accurate weapons in some conflict situations has caused theloss of innocent civilian lives and damage to civilianproperty. Even when civilians are not the intended targetsthey very often become part of the so-called “collateraldamage”.

The major question then is how do we afford adequateprotection for civilians in armed conflict? What can theCouncil, other organs of the United Nations, Governmentsand others do to ameliorate the situation? We will not getall the answers today. But this briefing should provide thebasis for a more serious and comprehensive considerationof this important question.

Modern armed conflicts have obviously changed incharacter. Increasingly, more sophisticated weapons arebeing used with devastating effects on the civilianpopulation. In the First World War civilians accounted foronly 5 per cent of casualties. In the Second World Warcivilian casualties rose to 48 per cent. Today, up to 90 percent of conflict casualties around the world are civilians. Alarge and increasing number of these are vulnerable groupssuch as women, children and the elderly.

They have increasingly become direct targets throughdeliberate and indiscriminate actions by armed combatants.The millions of refugees and internally displaced personsthe world over speak for themselves. Every day, thousandsof civilians are being raped, physically and psychologicallytortured, maimed and incarcerated. We see the mostheinous and barbaric acts being committed, includingoutright genocide and massacres of unarmed civilians. Thisis indeed a sad commentary on the state of humancivilization on the eve of the new millennium.

My delegation condemns in the strongest terms theseacts of violence against civilians. The deliberate attacksand acts of violence perpetrated by combatants againstinnocent civilian populations deserve not onlycondemnation but also a strong and resolute response bythe international community. These heinous acts clearlyand blatantly violate the principles of international law,including international humanitarian and human rightslaws. Indeed, they are also in direct violation of the 1949Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of CivilianPersons in Time of War, and other international legalinstruments. The perpetrators must account for theircrimes, with the appropriate punishments being meted outagainst them. This is the only effective way to stop theculture of impunity that has increasingly prevailed in mostconflict situations around the world.

It is obvious that states have the primaryresponsibility in prosecuting the perpetrators through thenational justice system, or whenever and whereverappropriate, the relevant international criminal tribunals.My delegation reiterates its strong support for the idea ofholding combating parties and their leaders financiallyliable to their victims under international law in caseswhere civilians are made deliberate targets of armedaggression. An appropriate legal machinery will, ofcourse, have to be established for this purpose.

It is imperative that United Nations Member Statesand all parties concerned comply strictly with theirobligations under international law to assist and protectcivilians affected by armed conflict. There is an urgentneed for the international community to take collectiveaction in this regard. The approach should cover thepolitical, security, economic, social, legal andhumanitarian dimensions. In supporting a comprehensiveapproach to address this problem we look forward to theSecretary-General’s report, as requested for in the draftPresidential Statement which we will shortly adopt,containing concrete recommendations to the Council. Thereport would be useful not only to the Council but also tothe other relevant organs of the United Nations inaddressing the same question acting within their areas ofcompetence and responsibility.

Another important issue of concern to my delegationhas been emphasized by virtually all speakers at thismeeting, and that is access by civilian populations tointernational protection and humanitarian assistance. Wefully recognize that humanitarian assistance should beundertaken with the consent and cooperation of the partiesconcerned. However, there is a clear obligation under

24


international law that those in need should receiveprotection and assistance.

While humanitarian assistance is vital in alleviating thehardship of civilians caught in armed conflicts, its use as atool to prolong conflicts by the warring parties should beprevented. The argument has been made that relief aideither directly or indirectly subsidizes the cost of fightingwars and that it could offer some sort of reward for thebelligerents. Clearly there is a need to ensure thathumanitarian aid will not be used to enhance the motivationor capability of belligerents to commit further violence,especially against civilians.

The security and safety of the humanitarian missionitself is of paramount importance, especially in highlyvolatile and extremely dangerous areas. The disturbingincrease in the number and scale of direct and calculatedattacks against humanitarian and United Nations personnelin the field should be strongly condemned. Those concernedmust ensure the security and safety of these selfless andcommitted workers who carry out their noble missions inhighly dangerous situations, risking their own lives. Propertraining about the real situation on the ground could, ofcourse, better equip humanitarian personnel in handlingrisky situations in their mission areas, but this should notabsolve the combatants of their own obligations and responsibilities.

Landmines pose as serious a threat to the safety ofcivilian populations as they do to the combatantsthemselves. Every year, large numbers of civilians, many ofthem hapless women and children, are killed or maimed forlife by landmines. What is most distressing is thatlandmines can still kill and maim innocent civilians yearsafter the combatants have left the scene of conflict. Wetherefore welcome the global efforts to ban landmines andcommend Canada and other countries for their activitiesand leadership role in this regard.

In discussing the issue of civilians in armed conflict,we cannot ignore the issue of children who become victimsof these conflicts, either as instruments of war or when theyare caught up in the traumas and upheavals of the conflict.The issue of children in armed conflict — which has beeneloquently highlighted by our speakers, in particular by Mr.Otunnu — deserves the serious attention of the internationalcommunity in its own right, as was reflected by theCouncil’s consideration of it in June last year. Theappointment of a Special Representative of the Secretary-General to deal with this issue was indeed a laudable moveto give greater focus and urgency in addressing theproblem. In highlighting the problem, selected measures

have already been identified by Mr. Otunnu to alleviatethe suffering of children caught in armed conflict. Thesemeasures deserve the strong support of the internationalcommunity. Clearly, those who are guilty of acts ofviolence against children during armed conflict should bepunished accordingly. My delegation is particularly gladthat, among such punitive measures, the targeting ofschools and hospitals has now been made a war crimeunder the new Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The pernicious impact of the proliferation of arms,in particular small arms, on the security and safety ofcivilian populations is amply illustrated by the numerousarmed conflicts that are still raging around the world. Mr.Olara Otunnu has noted,inter alia, that the developmentand proliferation of lightweight automatic weapons hasmade it possible for very young children to use arms. Theconsequences of this proliferation are indeed devastating.It means more combatants, more intensified conflicts,more victims and casualties, more refugees and displacedpersons. In the name of humanity, my delegation appealsto all States and non-State actors involved in themanufacturing and marketing of such weapons to restrictarms transfers which could provoke or prolong armedconflicts. We also believe that there has to be a moreconcerted international effort and collaboration to combatillegal arms flows. This is imperative if we are to stopfuelling further armed conflict in our contemporary world.

My delegation fully associates itself with theremarks made by Mr. Sommaruga and Ms. Bellamy onthe impact of sanctions on the civil population,particularly children. We ourselves had made that verysame point during the Council’s consideration of thehumanitarian aspects of the promotion of peace andsecurity last month. We are gratified that our speakersdeemed it pertinent to draw the attention of the Councilto this issue. I believe that it was only for the sake ofbrevity and the fact that he spoke extemporaneously thatMr. Otunnu himself did not refer to this issue. I know fora fact that the matter is also of concern to him as hecarries out his mandate.

This very difficult question before us cannot beeffectively addressed without the requisite political will ofall concerned. The Council can only act in accordancewith its appropriate responsibilities under the Charter.Other organs and organizations and other relevant actorsmust play their parts. At the same time, those directlyinvolved in the various armed conflicts must be made tounderstand the full consequences of their actions aimedagainst civilians. Ultimately, they will have to account for

25


their actions and understand that they cannot get away withimpunity. That message, and the will of the internationalcommunity to back it up, should ring out loud and clearfrom this forum. Beyond that, there should be serious andconcrete follow-up actions by all concerned, including thisCouncil, to give substance to the many creative andcommendable ideas that have been presented to us.

Mr. Buallay (Bahrain) (interpretation from Arabic):My delegation is gratified at seeing you, Sir, preside overthe Council in the presence of the Secretary-General. Wealso wish to thank you for having convened this meetingand chosen this very important subject to be discussedopenly; this reinforces the principle of transparency toUnited Nations Members.

Recent decades have seen an unacceptabledeterioration in respect for humanitarian norms in armedconflicts and we note with great regret that civilians areincreasingly being directly targeted in the midst of armedconflict. Civilian populations today are the source of thelargest number of victims; this reflects a violation of theprinciples of international law, including internationalhumanitarian law.

Armed conflicts have grown ever more cruel andbarbaric. The warring parties tend to use means that servetheir interests and thus defy international security andpeace. Thus, a large number of civilian victims are womenand children who are frequently subjected to rape orsystematic sexual exploitation. Children are recruited orkidnapped by armed forces to be turned into soldiers. Thisproblem must therefore be addressed very precisely throughthe drafting of international legislation and treatiesprohibiting the use or recruitment of children in armedconflict. Moreover, my delegation supports the idea, putforward by the Secretary-General in his report on thecauses of conflict in Africa, to turn children themselves intozones of peace. We hope that this idea will be widelydiscussed. We should also like to see the recruitment ageraised to 18 years, as mentioned by the Director General ofthe United Nations Children’s Fund and the SpecialRepresentative of the Secretary-General for Children andArmed Conflict.

I also wish to emphasize the problem of refugees,whose numbers have grown considerably in recent yearsbecause of armed conflict. Today, the security of refugeesis a matter of concern to us and to the States receivingthose refugees from neighbouring countries. Theproliferation of weapons, notably small arms and lightweapons, has had a serious impact on civilians. My

delegation believes that it is very important for allMember States to control and limit the transfer ofweapons that incite and prolong these armed conflicts.Cooperation in the campaign against the transfer and flowof illicit arms into conflict zones must be stepped up.Every effort must therefore be made to give refugees anddisplaced persons the necessary protection and to meettheir needs, in accordance with agreed international rulesand norms.

My delegation wonders at the extent to which theFourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection ofCivilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, isbeing implemented. It has been nearly 50 years since thatConvention was signed. How is it being trulyimplemented in the field? We ask this question becauseof the growing number of civilians running every sort ofrisk and danger, not to mention, of course, being killedand displaced. It is therefore necessary to establishmachinery to ensure the implementation of theseconventions, whose essential and basic aim is to protectcivilians.

Furthermore, whatever might be done or said, onecan never insist enough on the importance of the securityof humanitarian personnel working for the various UnitedNations agencies. My delegation does not hesitate torepeat here that these humanitarian workers run the samerisks and encounter the same fates as do civilians in zonesof armed conflict. They are subjected to the same difficultcircumstances, and some have recently been killed orassassinated. It is very hard to ask for the protection ofcivilians in zones of conflict without giving the samedegree of protection to those who are providing assistanceto mitigate the suffering of those same civilians.

To conclude, I should like to emphasize that it isnecessary for there to be a degree of coordinationbetween the Security Council, on the one hand, and, onthe other, all of the agencies working in the humanitarianfield, including the Economic and Social Council. Theremust be cooperation, among these humanitarianorganizations; otherwise each one will act unilaterally andperform actions that run counter to those taken by theothers. This will have a negative impact on the assistancethat is to be given to civilians in zones of conflict. We donot want those civilians to become the victims of conflictsor victims of a lack of coordination among the variousUnited Nations agencies.

Finally, in the same vein, the Security Council musttake practical steps that will change the tragic situation

26


that exists today. As far as civilians in zones of conflict areconcerned, experience has shown us that resolutions andconventions do not suffice to meet their needs. Legislationmust be followed up by practical steps that provide thenecessary assistance.

The President: I thank the representative of Bahrainfor his kind words addressed to me.

If I might just comment on the clock, which is nowgoing past the witching hour, we still have five speakersleft plus the responses of the briefers. Because of theimportance of the topic, I would hope that the members ofthe Council would indulge us in allowing us to continueright through without a break. I know that this may dosome damage to members’ physical nourishment, but thenourishment of a higher order that is being supplied so ablyby the speakers thus far, I think, will suffice to keep ussustained during that period of time. So that will be theintention of the President, if members are all in agreement.

Mr. Dangue Réwaka (Gabon) (interpretation fromFrench): Your presence, Mr. President, which we warmlywelcome, attests to the importance that your country,Canada, attaches to the protection and promotion of humanrights, particularly the protection of civilians in armedconflict — the issue being addressed at our meeting today.In this connection, we would like to express our gratitudeto you and to your delegation for having organized thisdebate.

I am certain that the very good statements justdelivered by Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga, President of theInternational Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), by Ms.Carol Bellamy, the Executive Director of the UnitedNations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and by Mr. OlaraOtunnu, the Special Representative of the Secretary-Generalfor Children and Armed Conflict, will add a great deal tothe deliberations of the Council on the issue of theprotection of civilians in armed conflict.

It is intolerable that civilians — especially women,children, the elderly and the personnel of humanitarianagencies — are being targeted wherever armed conflictserupt, in disregard of international rules that prohibit suchpractices. In this context, the Security Council must ensurethat the rules relative to the protection of civilians in timesof war are scrupulously respected. The Council can alsorequest United Nations agencies dealing with humanitarianassistance to develop programmes to promote awareness ofinternational humanitarian law. In this regard, we would

like to thank the International Committee of the RedCross for its efforts.

For our part, the Security Council should first andforemost work to prevent conflicts, for an ounce ofprevention is worth a pound of cure. On 13 April 1998,the Secretary-General presented a report to the SecurityCouncil on the causes of conflict and the promotion ofpeace and sustainable development in Africa(S/1998/318). The Council considered therecommendations outlined in that report for themaintenance of peace and the protection of civilians. It isnow up to the Council to translate those provisions intoconcrete actions that can contribute to a restoration ofpeace and security wherever they are being seriouslythreatened.

To that end, the weight of the internationalcommunity should be brought to bear upon the parties toconflicts in order to lead them to resolve their disputes bypeaceful means. Emphasis should therefore be placed onactions to combat illicit arms flows, especially of small-calibre arms, and on the observance of arms embargoes,as called for in Africa by Security Council resolution1196 (1998).

It is often not ideas that are lacking in findingsolutions to conflicts. What is most lacking is politicalwill.

The President(interpretation from French): I thankthe representative of Gabon for his kind words addressedto me.

Mr. Burleigh (United States of America): I wouldlike to thank Canada for its initiative to focus theattention of the Council on the protection of civilians inarmed conflict. The United States shares Canada’s desireto bring to international attention the new character ofarmed conflict, in which civilians, including humanitarianworkers, are often not simply random, incidental victimsof conflict, but its very targets. We must work together tofind ways to halt this trend, and we must strive tostrengthen international protection of civilians,recognizing that the Council’s task of maintaining peaceand security can extend to the protection of individuals aswell.

Over the past several months, the Security Councilhas wrestled with the issue of protecting civilians inarmed conflict, including refugees, children andhumanitarian workers. As one example, the United States

27


chaired the Council’s thematic group that drafted resolution1208 (1998), which identified the maintenance of thesecurity and the civilian and humanitarian character ofrefugee camps as an urgent and important issue. In itsresolutions and presidential statements, the Council has alsoaddressed the challenges of illicit arms flows, childrenaffected by armed conflict and protection of humanitarianworkers.

We welcome the discussion of these matters in otherforums, particularly in this year which marks the fiftiethanniversary of the four Geneva Conventions and the onehundredth anniversary of the Hague Convention. We salutethe Red Cross Movement and look forward to the results ofthe upcoming International Committee of the Red Cross(ICRC) humanitarian forum in Wolfsberg, which will focuson “protecting people affected by armed conflict”. Theseefforts in other forums are vital and complement the actionthe Council takes today in the exercise of its primaryresponsibility for the maintenance of international peace andsecurity.

We particularly welcome the Council’s reaffirmationtoday of the need for the international community to assistand protect civilian populations affected by armed conflict;of the need for all parties concerned to ensure the safety ofcivilians and to guarantee the unimpeded and safe access ofUnited Nations and other humanitarian personnel to thosein need; of the obligation of all States to comply strictlywith their obligations under international law; and of theneed to bring to justice individuals who target civilians, assuch, in armed conflict, or who otherwise commit offencesunder international humanitarian and human rights law.

We also support the Council’s willingness to respond,in accordance with the United Nations Charter, to situationsin which civilians have been targeted or humanitarianassistance to civilians has been deliberately obstructed.

In summary, the Government of the United Stateswelcomes the Council’s efforts to address these criticalissues. The many constructive suggestions we have heardtoday from the ICRC, the United Nations Children’s Fundand the Special Representative deserve careful and urgentconsideration by the Council. We pledge ourselves to thepursuit of practical applications of these suggestions.Finally, we look forward to the Secretary-General’srecommendations, both on ways the Council can improvethe physical and legal protection of civilians in all situationsof armed conflict and on contributions the Council canmake towards more effective implementation of existinghumanitarian law.

The President: I thank the representative of theUnited States for his kind words addressed to my country.

I give the floor to the representative of the Gambia.

Mr. Jagne (Gambia): Mr. President, let me begin bycommending you for your foresight, which led you toinclude this important issue in our programme of work forthe month. Our meeting today takes on particularimportance for a number of reasons. First and foremost,the presence among us of The Honourable LloydAxworthy is a clear demonstration of the significance thatCanada attaches to humanitarian issues generally. At atime when there are so many theatres of conflict inAfrica, and worse still, when such conflicts targetcivilians more than combatants, there could not have beena better time to discuss the protection of civilians inarmed conflict. We are also honoured to have theSecretary-General with us today. In the same vein, wewould like to salute the presence of the representatives ofthe International Committee of the Red Cross, and theUnited Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and theSpecial Representative of the Secretary-General forChildren and Armed Conflict in the persons ofMr. Sommaruga, Ms. Carol Bellamy and AmbassadorOlara Otunnu. This is indeed a unique experience.

These three briefings, we hope, will complement theones that were held before on related issues. We nowhave a global picture of the magnitude of the problem.While admitting that there are no easy solutions, weshould begin by attacking the evil at its roots. I amreferring to the causes of conflict, the main culprit beingpoverty. In fact, all three briefings we have heardunderscore the need to look into the causes of conflict. Itis becoming increasingly clear that poverty has thepotential to constitute the single most important threat tointernational peace and security. It is not a merecoincidence that all three speakers drew attention to thisfact. The writing is on the wall. Let us therefore actbefore it is too late.

The urgent need to act now is made most acute bythe fact that children, who are the future of any society,are the most affected. This is why we are not surprisedwhen, again, all three briefings clearly laid emphasis onthe plight of children. My delegation would thereforeinvite the Council to consider seriously the peace andsecurity agenda for children being advocated by UNICEF.Ambassador Olara Otunnu started by saying that childrendeserve particular attention, and he went on to develop

28


similar aspects of the problem raised by both Ms. Bellamyand Mr. Sommaruga.

These eloquent speakers not only posed the problem,they also offered practical proposals for possible solutions.We are convinced that through concerted internationaleffort, coupled with the necessary political will, we cansurmount these difficulties. The problem of access byhumanitarian actors to those in need is at the top of the list,and we cannot agree more that we have to insist on havingaccess to the needy for the effective and efficient deliveryof humanitarian assistance. Most atrocities against civiliansin armed conflict are committed in places outside the reachof the international community, and the mere presence inthe field of humanitarian workers, we have been told, justto witness events, is a major deterrent and could contributegreatly to the protection of civilians. This is why access tothose in need is crucial in every humanitarian endeavour.

Considering that the needy are often trapped in hostileconditions, exposed to all sorts of dangers and difficulties,it goes without saying that those who risk their lives in totalself-abnegation to reach out to others must be protected andminimal guarantees established to create on enablingenvironment for them to carry out their humanitarian operations.

The effects of sanctions on children is a cause ofgrave concern. When designing sanctions, it is important tocontemplate the effects those sanctions might have onchildren and on other vulnerable groups of society. It isunacceptable that as a result of poorly targeted sanctions,infant mortality rates in some countries have increaseddramatically.

One important feature in contemporary armed conflictsis the indiscriminate use of anti-personnel landmines.These, as we have learned, have accounted for an untoldamount of death and destruction among civilianpopulations. For this reason, we welcome the coming intoforce of the Ottawa Convention on anti-personnellandmines. We hope that this Convention will yield thedesired effects.

As we think about protecting civilians in armedconflict, the most effective protection that comes to mindis the prevention of conflict itself. The internationalcommunity as a whole has an important responsibility inthis regard. As we have earlier pointed out, povertycontributes immensely to the causes of conflict. The needto eradicate poverty and establish early warning systems toprevent conflict therefore needs no further emphasis.

As we are all aware, the Geneva Conventions andtheir Additional Protocols are applicable only to Statesparties. The problem we face in warfare today is thatmost conflicts involve groups that are not parties to theGeneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. Howdo we deal with the situation? The establishment ofinternational norms to ensure individual responsibility foratrocities committed in times of war and to ensure respectfor fundamental human rights is therefore crucial.

The international community has done a lot in recenttimes to bring to an end the related problem of impunity.The establishment by the Security Council of theInternational Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and theformer Yugoslavia and the recent adoption of the Statuteof the International Criminal Court (ICC) are classicexamples. The coming into force of the Statute of theICC would indeed be a fitting tribute on the fiftiethanniversary of the Geneva Conventions.

Finally, what can the Security Council do to ensureprotection of civilians in armed conflict? Chapter 7 of theCharter of the United Nations provides the SecurityCouncil with the unique power to deal with conflictsituations. Effective use of its provisions, including, ifpossible, the use of enforcement actions, can be of greathelp. We hope that the Security Council in dealing withconflict situations in the future will bear in mind theproblems of lack of respect for international humanitarianlaw and human rights law in making its decisions. Wetherefore agree with Mr. Sommaruga’s idea of launchingan appeal for the strengthening of internationalhumanitarian law on 12 August this year. We hope thaton that auspicious occasion, the international communitywill also do something for internally displaced persons byadopting an appropriate framework.

The President: I thank the representative of theGambia for his kind words addressed to me.

Mr. Qin Huasun (China) (interpretation fromChinese): The Chinese delegation is very pleased to seeMr. Lloyd Axworthy, the Minister of Foreign Affairs ofCanada, preside over today’s formal meeting of theSecurity Council. We thank Mr. Cornelio Sommaruga,President of the International Committee of the Red Cross(ICRC); Ms. Carol Bellamy, Executive Director of theUnited Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); and Mr.Olara Otunnu, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for children and armed conflict, for the briefingsthey just gave us. We appreciate the active efforts madeby the ICRC, UNICEF and the Special Representative of

29


the Secretary-General in protecting civilians in armedconflict around the world.

The protection of civilians in armed conflict hasalways been the concern of Governments and of bodiessuch as the General Assembly. Today many regions of theworld are still plagued by armed conflict, which not onlythreatens peace and security in those regions and in theworld at large but also brings untold suffering to the peopleof the countries and regions involved. Civilians aresubjected to forcible displacement and violent assault.Women and children in particular, as one of the mostvulnerable social groups, are most gravely affected inconflict situations. This calls for the full attention of theinternational community.

We believe that the ultimate way to protect civiliansin armed conflict is effectively to prevent and eliminate allarmed conflicts. The root cause of humanitarian crises mustbe addressed through ethnic reconciliation, confidence-building measures, economic development and themaintenance of national stability.

We also believe that regardless of when and whereconflicts break out, the parties involved should be urged toend them as soon as possible through peaceful means; toabide strictly by the relevant international laws, includinginternational humanitarian law; to provide, as best they can,protection and assistance to civilians; and to prevent andprohibit all forms of violent assault against civilians orattempts to impede the provision of humanitarian assistanceto civilians.

The Chinese delegation maintains that the internationalcommunity cannot afford to turn away from humanitariancrises. However, the current tendency in internationalrelations to politicize humanitarian issues and interfere in acountry’s internal affairs under the guise ofhumanitarianism cannot but cause us concern. In ahumanitarian crisis, the wilful invocation of Chapter VII ofthe Charter of the United Nations to use force, or even theunilateral use or threat of use of force, against a sovereignState without the authorization of the Security Council, withno consideration given to the specific causes of the crisis,will only complicate matters and further intensify theconflict. In this connection, we hope that the countries andorganizations concerned will abide strictly by the principlesof international law and the Charter of the United Nationsand respect, in real earnest, the sovereignty, territorialintegrity and political independence of all countries.

We call for the elimination of double standards inthe humanitarian field. The international communityshould give equal attention to all incidents involvingcivilian losses in armed conflict, regardless of where theyoccur. In this respect, the situation in Africa has beenvery troubling in recent years. In some areas of theregion, crises are escalating, while in others old conflictsare being rekindled. Civilians, especially women andchildren, are undergoing agonizing pain and sufferings.The international community should take the necessarysteps to support the efforts of African countries andorganizations to resolve their “hot-spot” issues and toprovide meaningful and effective assistance to help keepcivilians out of harm’s way.

We are of the view that in the light of the nature andscope of the matter, it is appropriate that the question ofthe protection of civilians in armed conflict be placed onthe agenda of the General Assembly and the Economicand Social Council for more thorough and comprehensivediscussions. We are in favour of strengthening theSecurity Council’s cooperation and coordination with theGeneral Assembly and other United Nations organs. Wesupport greater information exchange between theSecurity Council on the one hand and the ICRC,UNICEF, the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees and other organizations onthe other. Once the so-called division of labour is clear,each and every organ and institutions will be able toconcentrate on its own sphere of responsibility.

The Chinese Government has always attached greatimportance to the protection of civilians in armed conflictand participated actively in deliberations on this matter inthe General Assembly and other related organs. We are infavour of the President of the Council’s issuing astatement to demonstrate the attention the Council devotesto this matter.

The President: I shall now make a statement in mycapacity as the representative of Canada.

(spoke in French)

I too should like first of all to thank Mr.Sommaruga, Ms. Bellamy and Mr. Otunnu for theirpresentations to the Council. Their presence here is animportant milestone in the Council’s deliberations. Theyhave conveyed with honesty and clarity the precariousplight and the enormity of the problems faced by ordinarycivilians caught in the grip of armed conflict.

30


(spoke in English)

I think it is true to say that the victimization ofcivilians in war is as old as time, but never more so than atthe end of this century. As so many here have commented,what is most disturbing today and provides the globalcommunity with a compelling reason for engagement is theincreasing “civilianization” of conflict itself. More thanever, non-combatants — especially, as our briefers havepointed out, the most vulnerable — are the principaltargets, the instruments and, overwhelmingly, the victims ofmodern armed conflict. The number of casualties fromarmed conflict has almost doubled since the 1980s to about1 million a year; of those, 80 per cent are civilians.

(spoke in French)

Our discussion leaves no doubt about the considerablethreats faced by civilians or about their global dimension.Consider the brutality in Sierra Leone; “ethnic cleansing”and the slaughter of non-combatants in the Balkans;genocide and the mass movements of refugees anddisplaced persons in the Great Lakes region of Africa; andthe emergence of modern-day warlords in failed States whotake advantage of, brutalize and terrorize local residents —aided and abetted by outside arms dealers and privategroups who benefit from the marketplace of conflict.Indeed, there is today a marketplace of conflict.

(spoke in English)

It is a fact of our time that the threats to humansecurity — the risks that individuals, communities andpeople face in their daily lives — outweigh the risks tosecurity occasioned by conflicts across borders, the moretraditional concern of the Council. The promotion of humansecurity is the bedrock upon which all other objectives ofthe United Nations Charter must rest — from economic andsocial development, to human rights and freedom, to thefree flow of commerce. The dark side of globalization isthe attack upon the basic integrity of people. No one canprosper or progress if they fear becoming victims ofmarauding child soldiers set loose by political leaders, ofthe drug warlords who exploit human misery, or ofcombatants who sow landmines without discrimination.

The point of this meeting is that the Security Councilhas a vital role to play in confronting these threats. Thereshould be no mistake. Promoting the protection of civiliansin armed conflict is no sideshow to the Council’s mandatefor ensuring international peace and security; it is central toit. The ultimate aim of the Council’s work is to safeguard

the security of the world’s people, not just the States inwhich they live. Clearly, faced with the disproportionatetoll that modern conflict takes on civilians, the protectionof individuals should be a primary consideration in theCouncil’s activities.

As many here have pointed out, the Council does nothave to do it all; other parts of the United Nations and thewider international community have their responsibilities.However, in the absence of resolute and effective Councilleadership, civilians in situations of armed conflict are leftin a security void. This vacuum will be, and in somecases already is, filled by others combatants, includingmercenaries, who act with little restraint and scant regardfor even the most basic humanitarian standards.

Active Council engagement would reverse thissituation. It would also reinforce the legitimacy of theStates. It is the prerogative and the obligation of States toensure the protection of all citizens, especially in times ofarmed conflict. This is the fundamental public good thatthe State provides. But oftentimes Governments do not orcannot provide it. Sometimes this is a consequence ofweakened State structures or failed States. In these cases,Council action to defend civilians in armed conflict willalso diminish the threat to the States themselves. Thereluctance to involve the Council, justified by some bythe need to uphold State sovereignty, only serves,ironically, to undermine this very principle itself. Theresponsibility of the Council to protect civilians istherefore compelling from a human security perspective,in terms of fulfilling the Council’s own mandate and inthe interest of enhancing State sovereignty.

Our discussion today is a welcome acknowledgementof the Council’s role. Indeed, this meeting builds uponrecent initiatives by current and previous Councilmembers, as well as the existing Council declarations andactions. In its deliberations, the Council has condemnedthe targeting of children in armed conflict. It hasindicated a willingness to consider how to assist with theprovision and protection of humanitarian assistance. It hasrecognized a need for peacekeeping operations to takebetter account of the needs of civilians and it hasconsidered the devastating impact of arms transfers inareas of conflict. And last month, the Council consideredthe humanitarian impact of conflict. Awareness, assomeone has said, precedes action. The Councilundoubtedly is more sensitive than ever to the manydimensions of this contemporary problem.

31


In its practice, the Security Council decisions havebegun, and I use the word begun to reflect the reality. TheCouncil exhorts both State and non-State actors involved inconflict to comply with relevant provisions of internationalrights and humanitarian law that relate to protection ofcivilians. Peace support operations, as appropriate, includeprovisions relating to the security of United Nationspersonnel, including human rights monitors, and takespecial consideration for the situation of civilians. TheCouncil’s establishment of ad hoc Tribunals for the formerYugoslavia and Rwanda were concrete measures againstthose who violate international humanitarian law.

The Council’s words and deeds to date are apromising start. However, the march of time is relentless.Civilians continue to be brutalized by the hundreds ofthousands. There are no signs that we, the internationalcommunity, can somehow wait this out. Our briefing todayhas made this urgently clear, and I thank the briefers for theeloquence and drama with which they have brought this toour attention. It makes the decline in the Council’s activepresence in the world’s conflict areas all the moredisturbing. More, not less vigorous, comprehensive andsustained action on the part of the Council is imperative.

In Canada’s view, the challenges of the Council arefourfold.

First, as many members have pointed out, is theprevention of conflict. Averting the outbreak of armedconflict is the optimal means to avoid needless destructionand suffering, in particular the victimization of civilians.There is nothing new in this observation. Yet the UnitedNations record is not all it might be either in taking pre-emptive steps, building strong human rights institutions,ensuring early warning of impending crises, offeringconcerted support for peace processes or having thecapacity to act quickly in the absence, for example, of therapidly deployable mission headquarters that we and othernations have espoused. Frankly, the Council needs toreassert its leadership in this area.

The second challenge is ensuring respect forinternational humanitarian and human rights law. We havedeveloped a considerable body of law and standardsregulating the conduct of belligerents and the protection ofcivilians, both local and international in scope. In thisregard, the situation of children and refugees merits ourspecial attention. It is also important to underline, asbriefers have indicated, that new standards are emerging toadapt to the changing nature of conflict, for example withregard to the treatment of internally displaced persons.

However, too frequently these standards are flagrantlyviolated or ignored or simply left unanswered.

Thirdly, supporting the pursuit of those who violatehumanitarian norms and standards is imperative. Theimpunity of individuals who commit gross violations ofhumanitarian law against others during armed conflict isa widely acknowledged problem. The Tribunalsestablished for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda werea step forward, but backing for a more systematicprosecution of alleged war criminals, for example throughsupport to the International Court, should happen soonerrather than later because it is needed. There is a simpledemand for it now.

Taking aim at the purveyors and instruments of waris a fourth major objective. Those who are accessories tothese crimes and violations — the merchants of conflictwho illicitly traffic in the means of war — can likewisenot be left unaccountable. Conflict areas are awash witharms, especially military small arms and light weapons.Their abuse compounds the misery of civilians, and theflow and abuse of weapons that terrorize, maim and killrequires urgent action.

These are complicated challenges. I recognize that.There are no easy solutions. Nonetheless, we believe thatthe Council has the capacity to respond, provided, as ourfriend from Gabon has said, that there is political will.

The Council should ensure that the Secretary-General highlights the situation of civilians, especiallychildren, in reporting to the Council. The when, why andhow of Council-mandated peace missions and goodoffices might be re-examined thoroughly to enable theCouncil to act rapidly when civilians are threatened andto propose ways to give peacekeepers the authority,guidance and resources they need to defend civilians.Other innovative practices, such as how Council missionscould assist in minimizing the abuse of mass media totarget civilians, as suggested by Under-Secretary-GeneralVieira de Mello last month, also merits furtherexploration. The Council might also consider how tobetter target, design and enforce sanctions regimes, as somany members have pointed out, to maximize theirimpact on belligerence, to dry up the resources to wagewar and to constrain those who profit from it whileminimizing their effect on non-combatants.

These are only a few suggestions, and if timepermitted, I would like to give a more exhaustive list. Butmembers have also presented many ideas and there has

32


been a good discussion today about how the Council canrespond. To help in moving forward, the Council needs acomprehensive assessment that brings together thenumerous challenges that we face with an inventory ofpossible responses. For this reason, Canada stronglywelcomes the statement the Council will adopt requestingthe Secretary-General to submit a report later this yearcontaining practical, concrete recommendations for furtheractions to protect civilians.

If I have heard one compelling message today fromvirtually everyone around this table, it is that the plight ofcivilians in armed conflict is an urgent matter, growing andglobal in the threat it poses to the fundamentals of humansecurity. It goes to the very core of the Council’s mandateand deserves continued attention. The Council has aresponsibility to act resolutely and vigorously. To dootherwise risks diminishing the Council’s standing andopens the way to a more disorderly and far less secureworld. We look forward to the Secretary-General’s reportand to working with other Council members to address thesituation, starting now.

I now call on Mr. Sommaruga to respond to anycomments or questions or thoughts that he has heard. Iwould just remind him that, as time goes on, economy isthe watchword for the next 10 minutes.

Mr. Sommaruga (interpretation from French): Firstof all I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for havingmade possible this substantive, high-level meeting, whichfor me is an affirmation of Canada’s leadership and ofyours personally in humanitarian action. I would also liketo express my appreciation to all members of the Councilwho have expressed gratitude to the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross, particularly to its personnelworking in the field in sensitive situations everyday in orderto protect and assist victims and to disseminate internationalhumanitarian law. I wish also to tell my friends Ms.Bellamy and Mr. Otunnu how very much I appreciated theirstatements. I learned a great deal from what they said, andI look forward to learning more from them.

The question that kept arising was that of what theCouncil can do. Not being a part of the United Nationssystem, and keen to maintain our mutual independence, Iwish to respond with several points on the responsibility ofStates that also touch, I believe, on the responsibilities ofthe United Nations and the Council. These are points thathave already been addressed to a certain extent, but I wishto emphasize them. They are points that might also beincluded in the Secretary-General’s report.

First, I believe I should stress that no effort must bespared to prevent human suffering. These efforts shouldinclude education on international humanitarian law andon human values throughout the population, especiallyamong young people.

Secondly, we must strive to gain universal adherenceto humanitarian law, especially the conventions — thereis one country today, for instance, that is involved in aninternational conflict but is not a party to the GenevaConventions — their Additional Protocols and the OttawaConvention, on which I had the pleasure of working withyou, Mr. President. That Convention must achieveuniversality, as must the existing weapons protocols, suchas that on blinding laser weapons.

One element has not been mentioned: the applicationof individual criminal jurisdiction, as laid down in theGeneva Conventions, which has no territorial or nationallimitations for war criminals. A fact-finding commission,as provided for in Protocol I, already exists. Thiscommission must enjoy the broadest participation and thisprovision must be invoked. In examining the GenevaConventions, we find provisions on the Protecting Powerin humanitarian law. States seem to have forgotten that,and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)constantly has to act as a substitute for the ProtectingPower. But I believe that States should give some thoughtto this subject. Moreover, when we consider the threatsthat loom over peace and security, any decision onappropriate operations to ensure respect for internationallaw must take into account a provision of humanitarianlaw that I would like very briefly to cite. Article 89 ofProtocol I to the Fourth Geneva Convention states that:

“In situations of serious violations of theConventions or of this Protocol, the HighContracting Parties undertake to act, jointly orindividually, in co-operation with the United Nationsand in conformity with the United Nations Charter.”

It is important for there to be no ambiguity on thissubject. While I am here today as an independent agent,I am also here because I believe that there is a bond thatallows us to say that we are not politicizing human rights.

Action must be taken with regard to arms. We havespoken of embargoes. I believe that the movement toachieve better control of the transfer of light weapons —to which we have already referred — is also veryimportant from the point of view of international humanrights law. This is the “ensure respect for” of common

33


article 1. The person who is responsible for a transfer ofarms must realize that he must ensure that humanitarian lawis respected. The study to be published shortly on theconsequences brought about by the availability of arms inconflicts, which was done by the International Committeeof the Red Cross and which was mentioned by theAmbassador of France, will emphasize this point.

I would also like to say that we ourselves need — andthis is something that I believe is a responsibility of theSecurity Council — is to create a humanitarian environmentthat provides the humanitarian space needed by institutionsto be able to assist all victims. I would also like to make anappeal that the term humanitarian not be misused. I believethat when we speak of humanitarian action we must alwaysbear in mind its independence, impartiality and neutralityand not allow the term to be employed in reference toactions that do not have a humanitarian character.

I would like to close by saying that we must neverforget the provisions of common article 3 of the fourGeneva Conventions, which I would like to consider amini-convention in and of itself. This has to do withconflicts that are not of an international nature and is aimedat ensuring that not only States but also the other actors innon-international armed conflicts abide by basichumanitarian rules.

You, Mr. President, and the members of the SecurityCouncil have demonstrated the political will to act. Ibelieve that you have shown your sense of responsibility.At a time when we speak so much about globalization —of communications, of economy, what we desire, and whatyou have contributed to today is the globalization ofresponsibility.

The President:I thank Mr. Sommaruga for taking thetime to be here today.

I now give the floor to Ms. Bellamy to respond tocomments.

Ms. Bellamy: Mr. President, I will be guided by yoursuggestion of economy and try to avoid any repetition. Letme just say that we are very appreciative and that we thankyou very much for your personal leadership and for that ofyour Government, as well as for the invitation by theCouncil to participate in this briefing today.

I very much appreciate the kind words of support andencouragement for the work of the United NationsChildren’s Fund (UNICEF). It is really the wonderful staff

of UNICEF; they are some of those civilians who are outthere, and I would like to express my appreciation ontheir behalf.

The clearly increasing recognition of the rapidlychanging nature of armed conflicts in the world is today’sreality. Factors to be considered are the parties — Stateor non-State; the role of the private sector, unfortunately,in some places; the victims and victimizers — sometimesthe same; the use of modern weaponry; and the impact oncivilians, particularly children and women. So it is, then,a challenge in which traditional responses need to bequestioned. Thus, the opportunity to appear today and tocomment, in the realization that it is part of an ongoingprocess involving my colleagues with whom we work inthe field — a few weeks ago Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mellowas here to comment — is all part, we hope, of a veryhopeful sign of the actions that might take place.

I think it is fair to say that today’s discussions andbriefings presented, I hope, some very concrete, practicalideas. We think that it is very important to do that,because sometimes it seems that the discussions in thisbuilding are quite far removed from what is actuallygoing on in the field. So it seems to me that it is ourcollective responsibility to the people to whom weattempt to respond to be as concrete, specific, real andpractical as we can.

We very much welcome the Council’s engagementand look forward to the next steps and to the report of theSecretary-General. Let me just assure the Council that westand ready, along with the other members of the UnitedNations family and our colleagues beyond the UnitedNations family, to try to assist in any way we can withinformation or with briefings. We are here for the Councilwhenever it wishes to avail itself of the information wehave. We are here to try to assist.

The President: I would like to thank Ms. Bellamyfor the good work of the United Nations Children’s Fundand for the indication of ongoing cooperation.

I now call on Mr. Otunnu.

Mr. Otunnu: First of all, the representative of theRussian Federation made the point that some of the ideasI put on the table go beyond the responsibility of theSecurity Council. He is entirely right. I presented a broadmenu of ideas and possible initiatives, hoping very muchthat the Council will provide the critical leadership, butacknowledging that there are other actors within and

34


outside the United Nations whose own responsibilities andmandates will necessarily be engaged.

Secondly, I very much agree with the observationmade that, in our advocacy work, in our undertaking ofinitiatives, humanitarian action should necessarily beconsistent with the principles and the provisions of theUnited Nations Charter. That is the spirit in which I amconducting my own work.

Thirdly, the point was made quite rightly when Icalled for engaging the business community andencouraging it to develop a voluntary code of conduct.First, it has to be voluntary. No suggestion is being madehere to impose or to regulate the activities of businessentities. Secondly, this is not entirely unprecedented; thereare other areas in which an industry has begun to self-regulate and to have some codes of conduct. My suggestionwould be to encourage this in the particular context ofparticularly unacceptable abuses in situations of conflict,where the activities of the business community provides acertain machinery and fuels the abuse against civilianpopulations. I also hope very much that this in fact mightconstitute one element that can help to concretize theSecretary-General’s very important appeal, made a fewdays, for a compact between the United Nations and thebusiness community.

Fourthly, the question was asked about my position onthe imposition of sanctions. Well, the impact of sanctionson children is very much an integral part of my mandateand, indeed, my views have been well expressed elsewhere.I did not want to repeat them here, but indeed I am verymuch concerned about the impact of sanctions on children.I have been deeply engaged with Mwalimu Nyerere in thecontext of Burundi. I am delighted the sanctions have beenlifted and have some ideas about other sanctions situations.

I also agree very much with the point that has beenmade that it is so important that humanitarian action not bepoliticized, in the sense of not being exploited for politicalpurposes independent of the protection of the civilianpopulation. This would give humanitarian action a very badname and in the long term would jeopardize the protectionprecisely of those around whom we seek to build a wall ofprotection.

Where do non-State actors come into the picture? Thequestion was asked by the representatives of theNetherlands and Gambia. In my own work, I have made itmy obligation to engage all entities in situations of conflictwhose actions have an impact on children, for better or for

worse, without prejudice to their political or juridicalstatus, but with a view to getting them to take measuresthat can provide the broadest possible protection tochildren. Thus, in Sri Lanka, I did make contact with theLiberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam; in Sudan, I madecontact with the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movementand will do so again in a few weeks; in Sierra Leone,with the Civil Defence Forces, a paramilitary group inthat country.

Finally, let me say again that the situation ofinternally displaced persons is grave. It is an importantchallenge to the international community. There is someurgency about developing an agreed framework moresystematically to provide protection to this especiallyaffected category of vulnerable persons.

In conclusion, let me just say how much I appreciatethis initiative, your personal presence here today, Sir, andthe very important commitment and leadership whichCanada, your country, and you personally have beenproviding in this area. I look forward to working veryclosely with you to try to translate some of these ideasinto concrete measures on the ground that might make asmall difference to the protection of civilians, especiallychildren and women.

35


The President: I thank Mr. Otunnu for his kindremarks and his own leadership in a very crucial area.

There are no further speakers on my list. The SecurityCouncil has thus concluded the present stage of itsconsideration of the item on the agenda.

The meeting rose at 2.05 p.m.

36

Documents

Security Council 3977