Security Council 396865BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C...Security Council 3968th meeting Fifty-fourth year 21 January 1999 than was ever before the case. This is a major achievement of humankind

United Nations S/PV.3968

99-85033 (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

3968th MeetingThursday, 21 January 1999, 10 a.m.New York

President: Mr. Amorim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Brazil)

Members: Argentina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.PetrellaBahrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.BuallayCanada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.FowlerChina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 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. . . . . . . . SirJeremy GreenstockUnited States of America. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mr.Burleigh

Agenda

Promoting peace and security: Humanitarian activities relevant to the Security Council

Security Council 3968th meetingFifty-fourth year 21 January 1999

The meeting was called to order at 10.10 a.m.

Adoption of the agenda

The agenda was adopted.

Promoting peace and security: Humanitarian activitiesrelevant to the Security Council

The President (interpretation from Spanish): Inaccordance with the understanding reached in the Council’sprior consultations, and in the absence of objection, I shalltake it that the Security Council agrees to extend aninvitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedureto Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello, Under-Secretary-General forHumanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The Security Council will now begin its considerationof the item on its agenda. The Council is meeting inaccordance with the understanding reached in its priorconsultations.

At this meeting, the Security Council will hear abriefing by Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency ReliefCoordinator, regarding humanitarian activities relevant tothe Security Council, in the context of promoting peace andsecurity.

I invite Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency ReliefCoordinator, to take a seat at the Council table and to makehis statement.

Mr. Vieira de Mello (Under-Secretary-General forHumanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator):On behalf of my colleagues in the humanitarian community,thank you, Mr. President, for giving me this opportunity toaddress the Council in an open meeting.

The aim of my remarks today is to put before theCouncil some of our concerns as they relate to the questionof peace and security, and to suggest a number of issuesthat the Council may wish to take up in 1999. Let me startby touching on two aspects of the environment in which wework: the nature of modern warfare and the legal contextthat guides our action.

Contemporary armed conflict is seldom conducted ona clearly defined battlefield by conventional armies

confronting each other. Today’s warfare often takes placein cities and villages, with civilians as the preferredtargets, the propagation of terror as the premeditatedtactic and the physical elimination or mass displacementof certain categories of populations as the overarchingstrategy. The acts of warring parties in recent conflicts inthe former Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone and Afghanistan beartestimony to this. Breaches of human rights andhumanitarian law, including mutilation, rape, forceddisplacement, denial of the right to food and medicines,diversion of aid and attacks on medical personnel andhospitals are no longer inevitable by-products or collateraldamages of war. They have become the means to achievea strategic goal. As a result, even low- intensity conflictsgenerate enormous human suffering. Humanitarian needsare disproportionate, in fact, to the scale of militaryconflict. Meeting these needs has become more difficultas the dividing line between combatants and civilians hasgrown blurred.

Too often, humanitarian agencies are left alone inthese desperate situations, and their efforts are taken forgranted. Humanitarian action on its own may alleviate andat times appease through non-political dialogue, but it cannever resolve conflicts that in essence have political orother origins. The willingness to commit resources — bethey political or military — to resolving internationalcrises has diminished since the early 1990s. As EdmundBurke said, the only requirement for evil to prevail is forgood individuals to do nothing.

The only effective way to deal with many of thesecrises is for the Security Council to exercise its centraland unique responsibility for the maintenance of peaceand security, as foreseen in the Charter.

The second aspect of the environment in which wework is the legal framework for our activities. This yearis the tenth anniversary of the Convention on the Rightsof the Child and the thirtieth anniversary of theOrganization of African Unity Convention governing theSpecific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa, a veryimportant regional instrument. It is also the fiftiethanniversary of the Geneva Conventions and the onehundredth anniversary of the Hague Convention. 1999 isalso a year of commemoration of the St. PetersburgDeclaration, one of the first instruments in terms ofinternational humanitarian law. Combined with otherinstruments, such as the Genocide Convention, today wehave a greater body of international law regulating thebehaviour of parties in conflict and aimed at protectingcivilian populations, before or after they become victims,

2


than was ever before the case. This is a major achievementof humankind.

However, in most contemporary conflicts, internationalhumanitarian law, human rights law and refugee law areunknown, ignored or wilfully disrespected. The gulfbetween existing international norms and respect for themon the ground has probably never been so wide. Ourgreatest challenge is to bridge this gap through therealization of international laws and fundamental principlesin practice. While the primary obligation to abide byinternational humanitarian law and human rights rests withMember States and parties to conflicts, which have oftencommitted themselves on paper, the Council is still chargedwith ensuring respect, as part of its internationalresponsibility to maintain peace and security.

Almost every abuse of a civilian population or attackon humanitarian personnel represents a breach ofinternational legislation and principles. The 1998 Statute ofthe International Criminal Court (ICC) elaborates further onprevious international instruments in defining the crimes ofgenocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes underthe jurisdiction of the Court. The elaboration of the Statuteof the International Criminal Court is a major developmentin this respect. The process of ratification of the ICCStatute and the setting up of the Court need to beaccelerated. The action of members of this Council will becrucial in setting an example to other Member States. Byestablishing the two ad hoc Tribunals, for the formerYugoslavia and Rwanda, the Council has in fact recognizedits responsibility for dealing with the question of impunityand its link to sustainable peace and security.

Most importantly, the Security Council has for sometime recognized that massive violations of humanitarian lawcan constitute a threat to peace and security. To cite onlya few, resolutions 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, establishingthe security zone in northern Iraq; resolution 941 (1994) of23 September 1994, on “ethnic cleansing” in Bosnia; andresolution 955 (1994) of 8 November 1994, calling uponStates to cooperate with the International Tribunal forRwanda, all are based on this understanding.

Alongside international humanitarian law, theimportance of respect for human rights is more and morefrequently recognized. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in his13 April 1998 report on Africa highlighted the all-importantlink between upholding human rights and preventinghumanitarian disasters. While international law defines themoral and legal imperatives for action, the law isineffective if it is not translated into pragmatic action. A

major accomplishment in recent years is the recognitionthat human, civil, political and social and economic rightsare not simply a matter of principle or politics, but froma strictly pragmatic point of view constitute an essentialbuilding block for peace and security of and amongnations. The Secretary-General, in his reform programmeof 1997, notes that

“Human rights are integral to the promotion of peaceand security”(A/51/950, para. 78).

The 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child isthe only Convention which incorporates articles of humanrights as well as international humanitarian and refugeelaw. Article 38 directly calls on States to respectinternational humanitarian law and also establishes theminimum age for conscription at 15, a provision which isbeing regularly flouted in today’s conflicts. I stronglysupport the move by the United Nations Children’s Fund(UNICEF) and others to increase the minimum age to 18and to introduce an age requirement for United Nationspeacekeepers and international civilian police as well. TheCouncil may wish to examine the fate of children caughtup in armed conflict, and effective ways of protectingthem, on a future occasion, as it did, I know, last year.

I have elaborated on the two main elements thatcharacterize the environment in which we currentlyoperate: the changed nature of conflict and the pervasivedisregard for international norms by parties to a conflict.I would now like to make some further specificsuggestions on ways in which the Council could considerassisting humanitarian agencies in these very difficultcircumstances.

Humanitarian action cannot succeed withoutunimpeded access to those in need. Government andopposition leaders in countries affected by conflict mustunderstand that they do not confer recognition on theiropponents simply by allowing civilians living in areaswhich they do not control to receive help. On thecontrary, it is an obligation under international law of alllegitimate authorities to ensure that all those in needreceive assistance. This is the fundamental principle ofthe responsibility of States towards their citizens. I waspleased that this was immediately recognized by bothsides to the conflict in Guinea-Bissau. We need theCouncil’s help to get the message across in Angola, as wediscussed yesterday, and Sierra Leone, where hundreds ofthousands are in immediate need.

3


General Assembly resolution 46/182 of 1991 — theresolution which also established my functions — spells outthat humanitarian aid should be undertaken with the consentof the sovereign State. The same resolution also reiteratesthe responsibility of States to take care of victims ofemergencies occurring within their territories. Internationallaw spells out the right of victims of armed conflict tohumanitarian assistance and protection. If States are for anyreason unable to fulfil this obligation, they have another,which is to facilitate the provision of internationalhumanitarian aid. In reaffirming the rights of victims,humanitarian organizations must also accept their obligationto uphold the non-political nature of humanitarian actionand the highest standards of impartiality.

We need the Council, as I have stated in the past, tostrongly reaffirm these principles, both in a generic andcountry-specific manner.

The caution regarding international engagementevident after the Somalia experience has led to morereluctance in the deployment of United Nationspeacekeeping operations. I do not wish here to get into thearguments for or against the deployment of individualpeacekeeping missions, which is clearly beyond mycompetence, but would like to highlight a number of pointswhich have a bearing on humanitarian action.

The contribution peacekeeping forces and internationalpolice can and do make to averting and containinghumanitarian crises is too often overlooked. There are manypositive examples of collaboration between peacekeepersand humanitarian agencies, which I know from experience,such as Cyprus, Lebanon, Cambodia, Mozambique, theformer Yugoslavia and Central America. Even wherehumanitarian objectives were not part of their primarymandates, peacekeeping operations have proved valuable,often vital, in supporting and protecting needy populations,humanitarian workers and supplies in environments wherethere was limited consent from the warring parties or whenthe security situation is simply beyond their control.

Peacekeepers can also play a valuable role in helpingto prevent the diversion or abuse of aid for political ormilitary purposes. The non-combat military resourcesavailable to peacekeepers have also proved crucial indealing with humanitarian emergencies, for instance in theGreat Lakes and in Bosnia. I am thinking in particular oftheir airlift, manpower and engineering capacities.

When mass murderers or other criminals hide inrefugee camps, as in Eastern Zaire in 1994, the primary

responsibility lies with the host Government and itssecurity forces. But peacekeepers can play a key role instrengthening national forces to allow for the separationof combatants from the victims. As members are aware,the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner forRefugees (UNHCR) is now actively working with theDepartment of Peacekeeping Operations to draw upoptions for an international mechanism to assistGovernments in maintaining security and a humanitarianenvironment in camps and settlements. The Council’scontinued support to this effort will be essential.

Another non-traditional area the Council may wishto look at relates to the use of the media to prepare andfoster conflict. The most powerful weapons in the handsof modern mass killers, orgénocidaires,are radio stationsand other mass media. The genocide in Rwanda and the“ethnic cleansing” in Bosnia were instigated by criminalpoliticians using lies and distortions to persuade ordinarypeople to murder their neighbours. In both casesnationalistic or ethnocentric hate campaigns propagatedthrough the mass media prepared the way for genocide.United Nations-supported radio stations can help tocounter such propaganda.

In the atmosphere created by such propaganda,peacekeepers and humanitarian workers face a virtuallyimpossible task. The Council could examine the feasibilityof replicating, in other places, the measures taken by theUnited Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) first andthen by the High Representative in Bosnia to curb theabuse of the media there. In a climate of ethnicintolerance and total disrespect for international law,UNPROFOR earlier and the High Representative laterensured that fair, objective, tolerant radio and televisionas well as newspapers received adequate internationalsupport, while broadcasting licences for other stationswere withdrawn, and the Stabilization Force (SFOR) tookcontrol of transmitters when necessary.

A further mechanism at the disposal of the Councilto encourage the upholding of international law, combatimpunity and help avert or reduce humanitarian crises isthe judicious use of sanctions. There is increasingrecognition that well-targeted or “smart” sanctions canhave a real impact without necessarily leading to the kindof humanitarian consequences which we have seen withsome recent sanctions regimes.

If sanctions can be used to prevent war criminalsfrom enjoying the fruits of their evil, without harminginnocent women and children, we have given ourselves a

4


potent new tool for good. The ideas contained in theSecretary-General’s report on Africa of using individualtargeted sanctions against the perpetrators of abuses ofhuman rights and humanitarian law, and holding themfinancially responsible to their victims, deserve to beimplemented with the broadest possible support.

I should like to make one final point before Iconclude. Given the environment I described in my initialremarks, assisting affected populations in war zones hasbecome more and more dangerous. In the past six years,153 United Nations personnel have lost their lives while onduty. The recent shooting down of two United Nationsaircraft in Angola has brought this issue home to us evenmore starkly. What can we do?

I welcome the fact that the Convention on the Safetyof United Nations and Associated Personnel of 1994 finallyentered into force last week, on 15 January. TheConvention relates to personnel serving in operationsspecifically authorized by the General Assembly or theSecurity Council and is therefore binding only on Statesparties. It thus does not apply to most of the situations inwhich humanitarian personnel work. Ways of extending theConvention to cover all situations in which United Nationsand associated personnel, including national staff, aredeployed, and of ensuring its implementation by non-Stateactors, need to be further explored. Humanitarian operationssee a high turnover of staff, and security training istherefore essential. A Trust Fund for Security has beenestablished; so far, only three States have contributed, whileone other has pledged. That is an extraordinarilydisappointing response. Conversely, the inclusion of attacksagainst humanitarian personnel as a crime falling within thejurisdiction of the ICC is a very positive development.

Humanitarian workers appear to be seen asexpendable. Many times they are deployed whereGovernments consider it too risky to deploy better-trained,better-equipped and better-protected peacekeepers. Thecasualty rates among humanitarian workers are simplyatrocious. Last year, the World Food Programme sufferedparticularly severe losses, but so did other United Nationsagencies, the Red Cross Movement as a whole and non-governmental organizations. Well over 90 per cent of thedeaths of humanitarian workers were not even adequatelyinvestigated by the authorities concerned. The killing willcontinue either until humanitarian agencies refuse to gowhere their security cannot be guaranteed or untilGovernments with influence give the security ofhumanitarian personnel the importance it merits. In thiscontext, I would like to reiterate our appreciation for the

action undertaken by the Government of the RussianFederation to ensure the liberation of Vincent Cochetel,a UNHCR colleague held hostage in the Caucasus forover six months.

In conclusion, the anniversaries beingcommemorated in 1999 are generating considerableinterest in international humanitarian law and in the waysin which the international community prevents orresponds to the outbreak of war — with humanitarian aid,by facilitating political negotiations, with militarydeployment or by promoting forms of governance anddevelopment as factors of stability and peace.

One theme which is uppermost in the public’s mindworldwide is at the core of all the issues I have brieflyraised with the Council today: the treatment of civiliansin armed conflicts. Humanitarian organizations wouldwelcome any move by the Council to examine practicalways in which we can ensure a greater level of protectionfor civilians in armed conflict, which we believe is ofdirect relevance to the Council’s core responsibilities.This is an urgent task. We can celebrate the last year ofthe millennium by helping translate international laws andprinciples into reality, and elementary moral standards, aswell as the universal concern for humanity, into action.

I should like to finish by paraphrasing Václav Haveland to say that we must not be afraid of dreaming theseemingly impossible if we want the impossible tobecome a reality.

The President (interpretation from Spanish): Ishould like to thank Mr. Vieira de Mello for his inspiringand detailed briefing. I am sure that his statementcontained many ideas that will be the subject of reflectionand comment. I believe it would also be useful for themembers of the Council to receive the notes that Mr.Vieira de Mello had prepared, because I believe that wemust think deeply about this matter, beyond what is saidtoday.

5


Mr. Burleigh (United States of America): I would liketo thank you, Mr. President, for organizing this openbriefing on this important subject, and I would like to beginby commending Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mellofor his comprehensive, informative and sober briefing onthe problems.

Most of the conflicts we are witnessing today invarious parts of the world involve internal struggles amongrival factions. Sadly, many of these conflicts involve grossviolations of human rights, resulting in complexhumanitarian emergencies. Many conflicts are exacerbatedby policies of ethnic expulsion, exclusion or annihilation.

Civilians, including women, children and the elderly,are increasingly becoming deliberate targets. Nine out of 10casualties in these conflicts are non-combatants.International humanitarian personnel sent to provideassistance are no longer simply caught in the cross-fire; alltoo often, they are targeted by participants in the fighting.

During the Security Council’s discussion ofpost-conflict peace-building on 29 December 1998, CouncilPresident Buallay affirmed the Security Council’s beliefthat the quest for peace in Africa required

“a comprehensive, concerted and determined approach,encompassing the eradication of poverty, thepromotion of democracy, sustainable development andrespect for human rights, as well as conflictprevention and resolution, including peacekeeping, andhumanitarian assistance.” (S/PV.3961, p. 2)

That comprehensive, coordinated approach should notbe limited to conflicts in Africa. The Council cannot ignorethe linkages inherent in today’s complex humanitarianemergencies. The Council should be kept regularlyinformed of the humanitarian aspects of potential or actualconflicts so that it has a comprehensive picture of theproblem and can determine the proper steps to take.

The Council should review ways to strengthen thelinkage between humanitarian action and the earlycommencement of post-conflict integration, rehabilitationand peace-building. In addition, the Council should lendsupport to initiatives aimed at strengthening local andnational capacities for confronting humanitarian and humanrights crises.

Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello spoke todayof the need to coordinate humanitarian action with peaceand security concerns. We agree that such coordination

efforts should be focused on ensuring humanitarian accessto populations in need, guaranteeing the safety andsecurity of international humanitarian personnel andimproving the transition from international peacekeepingto international peace-building.

In terms of ensuring humanitarian access topopulations suffering the impact of ongoing conflicts, itis our view that the Security Council may wish toconsider developing a range of options to maintain lawand order and to create a secure environment for civilians,including humanitarian workers, endangered by conflict.

With regard to the protection of international aidworkers, the United States welcomes the entry in effectlast week of the 1994 Convention on the Safety of UnitedNations and Associated Personnel. The United States ispursuing ratification of that Convention, and we remaininterested in exploring an optional protocol to theConvention to broaden its coverage to non-United Nationshumanitarian workers.

Where violations of international humanitarian lawand human rights pose a threat to international peace andsecurity, the Security Council should consider addressingthose situations with due regard to the roles andresponsibilities of other organizations of the UnitedNations system.

The United States believes the Security Councilshould review ways to ensure a smooth transition frominternational peacekeeping to post-conflict peace-building.We believe it would be desirable for the Secretary-General to make recommendations to appropriate UnitedNations agencies to assist in peace-building efforts aspeacekeeping operations are drawn down. We stress theimportance of a division of labour between peacekeepingactivities and longer-term peace-building programmes.There is a need for closer cooperation and dialoguebetween the Security Council and various bodies withinthe United Nations system responsible for thoseprogrammes.

It is critical that mechanisms exist on the ground toprovide for effective coordination between political andmilitary components of United Nations operations, as wellas with human rights and humanitarian components. TheUnited States welcomes the establishment by theSecretary-General of the Executive Committee on Peaceand Security and the Executive Committee onHumanitarian Affairs to better define the relationshipbetween the Special Representatives of the Secretary-

6


General, humanitarian coordinators and other componentsof United Nations missions. The United States also wouldlike to reiterate its support for the work of the EmergencyRelief Coordinator and the members of the United NationsInter-Agency Standing Committee.

We support more frequent Council briefings by Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello and other members ofthe United Nations Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs. The Council must considerhumanitarian and human rights needs as part of an overallstrategy to restore peace and security to an area in crisis.

Before concluding, I would like to thank Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello once again for hisbriefing and raise one specific issue which I hope he mightaddress prior to the conclusion of today’s meeting. Giventhe ongoing conflict in the Democratic Republic of theCongo, which has had such a widespread negative impactupon the civilian population in the country, we wouldwelcome Mr. Vieira de Mello’s comments and observationsconcerning the humanitarian situation in the DemocraticRepublic and the possible role which the Office for theCoordination of Humanitarian Affairs might play there.

Mr. Qin Huasun (China) (interpretation fromChinese): We would like to thank you, Sir, for conveningtoday’s meeting. We also wish to thank Mr. Vieira deMello, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs,for his briefing on humanitarian activities relevant to theSecurity Council. We appreciate the positive efforts of theOffice for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, underMr. Vieira de Mello’s leadership, to alleviate humanitariancrises throughout the world.

We note that, although there is no shortage ofinternational conventions on humanitarian questions andthat tremendous efforts have been made by all concerned,the humanitarian situation remains grim and problemsabound. We are deeply concerned by the frequent threats tothe safety of humanitarian workers and appeal to allconcerned effectively to guarantee their security andfreedom of movement so as to ensure the smooth conductof humanitarian activities.

At the same time, we have always held that thesolution of humanitarian problems must include palliativemeasures and the elimination of the root causes of theproblems. When the international community provideshumanitarian assistance to a region, it must delve deeperinto the situation, seeking the root causes of local conflictsand humanitarian crises. We must strive to eliminate these

causes by encouraging national reconciliation, enhancingmutual confidence, promoting economic development andmaintaining national stability.

Sanctions have a direct impact on the humanitariansituation in the countries concerned. The Security Councilhas imposed sanctions against Iraq for more than eightyears now, visiting great suffering on the Iraqi people anddeeply hurting the neighbouring countries. China isopposed in principle to the use of sanctions as a means ofsettling international disputes. When they do becomenecessary, we favour the setting of schedules and thelimitation of the sanctions’ scope so as to avoid thefurther deterioration of the humanitarian situation in thecountries concerned. We believe that the Security Councilshould seriously study the humanitarian impact ofsanctions, fully taking into account the potential seriousconsequences of any such actions in the future.

As a result of prolonged warfare and naturaldisasters, many African countries face a very grimhumanitarian situation, with large numbers of refugeesgoing without food and clothing, being displaced andlacking medical care. However, as a result of internal andexternal factors, their plight has not fundamentallyimproved. As the international community has paid greatattention to the humanitarian situation in the formerYugoslavia and has provided much assistance there, it isall the more unconscionable for us to forget the hundredsof thousands of our African brothers and sisters who alsorequire the international community’s special care. Wehope that no double standards will be applied in thehumanitarian sphere.

We believe that the international community shouldpay appropriate attention to humanitarian affairs.However, in international relations, there is a tendency topoliticize humanitarian questions and to use them as apretext to interfere in the internal affairs of sovereigncountries. This can only arouse great concern. Withoutregard to the specific causes of humanitarian crises,frequent recourse to the threat or use of force will nothelp to solve the problems, but will serve merely tofurther complicate efforts to solve them. We hope that thecountries and organizations concerned in this respect willstrictly adhere to the provisions of international law andthe United Nations Charter and scrupulously respect thesovereignty, territorial integrity and political independenceof all countries.

The Chinese Government has always attached greatimportance to the work being done in the humanitarian

7


field and has made its own positive efforts through bilateraland multilateral channels. We are ready, along with othermembers of the international community, to continue tomake our own efforts to alleviate the internationalhumanitarian situation. China supports the work of theOffice for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs andother United Nations bodies and will continue to play aleading role in this area.

Mr. Petrella (Argentina) (interpretation fromSpanish): Allow me to congratulate you wholeheartedly,Sir, on the very professional and effective manner in whichyou are presiding over the work of the Security Council inthis extremely busy month of January. I should also like toextend these sentiments to Ambassador Jassim Buallay ofBahrain on his brilliant work in December.

I also believe that it is only fair to highlight yourefforts, Sir, to convene this public meeting and to ensure athorough consideration of the importance of humanitarianactivities relevant to the Security Council. The dramaticcontribution just made by Under-Secretary-General Vieirade Mello is extremely important because it stresses theseserious problems precisely and forcefully. I also believe thatthe contributions made by China and the United States arevery useful and timely.

In our view, it is relevant for a number of reasons thatthis Council actively address these issues.

First, the concept of peace and security, as laid downin the Charter, is based today on broader and morequalitative issues than it was in 1945. Today, it isrecognized that, in order to prevent local conflicts fromspreading and acquiring international dimensions, it isnecessary to take effective measures, keeping in mind theclose interrelationship between justice, social well-beingand peace.

Secondly, a good number of the items on the agendaare related to intra-State conflicts, which on the one handunleash uncontrollable flows of refugees, and on the otherlead to gross violations of the laws governing armedconflicts, and all of this has a great impact on the civilianpopulation. Such crises develop quickly, when UnitedNations bodies with political responsibilities do not, orcannot, adopt the necessary measures to prevent them orcontrol them.

Thirdly, it is not possible seriously to negotiate apolitical architecture that will put an end to conflictswithout previously resolving or marshalling humanitarian

problems. Therefore, attention to the humanitarianproblem is essential, not just ancillary, in order to achievea solution. Hence, the idea of including humanitarianunits in peacekeeping operations is of great interest andmust have broad-based support.

Fourthly, the Secretary-General, in the report hesubmitted last year on the work of the Organization,pointed out that the Security Council should take up thoseeconomic and social factors that have an impact on peaceand security with the same energy and seriousness withwhich it deals with political issues, if it truly aspires toensure that prevention of conflicts is the rule rather thanthe exception.

In the last few days, the Council has consideredseveral items in its regular agenda where all theseelements appear quite clearly. Also, a few days ago, wesaw two aircraft chartered by the United Nations shotdown, with a most regrettable loss of the lives of staffserving the United Nations.

When tragedy of this kind strikes, the lack of anappropriate response, paralysis or powerlessness not onlymean a deplorable lack of consideration towards thevictims and their families but also encourage thecontinuation of such criminal acts under our very eyes.

The individuals who are trying to implement themandates of this Council in the most dangerous placesmust know that impunity will not be accepted, and thatthe required investigations and taking of responsibilitywill be encouraged with all necessary pressure, without,however, undermining the principle of non-intervention.

To think about strengthening the presence of UnitedNations personnel in places of conflict without at thesame time providing them the utmost guarantees ofsecurity and protection is simply inconceivable.

We welcome the fact that the Convention on theSafety of United Nations and Associated Personnel cameinto force two days ago. We congratulate New Zealandfor having made it possible for this most important eventto take place. But the entry into force of the Conventiondoes not relieve us of our responsibilities.

8


The trend to pursue policies of disengagement, to lookupon humanitarian tragedies that stem from armed conflictswithout trying to assume our responsibilities under theCharter in any visible way, adversely affects mainly thosecountries that are Members of the United Nations.

In such issues, we must practise a zero-tolerancepolicy. Hence, it is regrettable to note that in recent monthswe have seen renewed erosion of respect for humanitarianprinciples.

International humanitarian law enshrines the norm thatneedy civilians, and in particular women and children, havethe right to receive humanitarian assistance. Yethumanitarian organizations are denied the possibility todeliver assistance to those who need it, and, as Mr. Vieirade Mello stated, deliberate attacks are launched againstcivilian populations. Acts of violence have been committedagainst people working for humanitarian assistanceorganizations whenever armed groups wrongly believe thatsuch assistance is a threat to their political objectives. Asalso stressed by Mr. Vieira de Mello, statistics show thatmore civilian staff have lost their lives than United Nationsmilitary staff.

Let us also bear in mind that most of the conflictsconsidered by the Council occur in a context of poverty,backwardness and hopelessness. Therefore, it will be verydifficult to resolve them without a global approach andwithout the kind of resources that very few countries of theworld have available to them today. As stated by theSecretary-General, “a bridge must be constructed between,in effect, the Dow Jones index and the human developmentindex”. (A/53/1, para. 15)

Finally, nothing could be more relevant than the wordsof the Secretary-General contained in an article thatappeared on page A19 ofThe New York Timeson 19January 1999:

“the peace we seek ... is one that reflects the lessonsof our terrible century: that peace is not true or lastingif bought at any cost ... without democracy, toleranceand human rights for all, no peace is truly safe.”

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of Argentina for his kind wordsaddressed to me.

Mr. Buallay (Bahrain) (interpretation from Arabic):Allow me first to thank you sincerely, Mr. President, forconvening this open, formal meeting, which falls underthe heading of efforts to improve transparency in theSecurity Council. I truly appreciate your efforts in thisregard.

Promoting peace and security and their relationshipwith humanitarian affairs is of the greatest importance forboth the Security Council and the membership of theUnited Nations at large. Humanitarian assistance is anintegral part of activities organized during or afterconflicts and involves several tragic elements, to say theleast. These were pointed out very clearly by Mr. Vieirade Mello, and I would like to thank him for his briefing.

The Security Council convened a meeting lastNovember under the presidency of Ambassador Burleighto debate a similar subject. At that meeting, dealing withthe protection of humanitarian workers, we received abriefing by Mrs. Ogata. Mr. Vieira de Mello reiterated theimportance of that subject today.

Humanitarian assistance cannot reach those in needunless we ensure the safety of the workers who provideit. With the increasing complexity of conflicts, there is anincreasing need to protect humanitarian workers. We havevery disturbing statistics in this regard. Since 1992, 139United Nations civilian personnel have been killed andabout 143 taken hostage. The Red Cross alone lost 23staff members in the Great Lakes region in 1996 and1997. I am not even taking up today the aircraft downedin Angola. Many have lost their lives, and the numbersincrease with the passage of time. There is therefore aneed to think seriously about how to protect humanitarianworkers.

We have a contradiction: on the one hand, thenumbers of conflicts and victims are increasing; on theother hand, no steps are being taken to protecthumanitarian workers. Mr. Vieira de Mello spoke of thesigning of a convention in the middle of this month. Weshare his feelings of concern over the fact that only a fewStates have so far become signatories. However,intentions are one thing and facts another. Protection isrequired on the ground, where the conflict and fightingtake place and where bodies are being mutilated andwhere much assistance — whether medical or foodassistance — is required and being provided.

9


My question to Mr. Vieira de Mello is therefore this:what are the concrete steps being considered andimplemented by the Secretariat? We heard him say thatwhen security for humanitarian workers cannot be obtained,the option is simply to leave the area of conflict, and weagree with him. But if they leave, how can thehumanitarian assistance be provided? This is a veryimportant question. My delegation considers that ifhumanitarian workers left an area of conflict, we wouldsurely not blame them, because their safety was not beingensured. We can imagine such a case, but we truly hopethat this will not take place.

Perhaps a second question I could put to Mr. Vieira deMello is this: with the increasing number of conflicts, whatare the new obstacles now preventing the provision ofhumanitarian assistance to those in need? Naturally, wefully realize that the first obstacle may be financial. In thissame context, we would also ask what the current gap isbetween voluntary contributions, on the one hand, and thereal needs, on the other?

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

Mr. Lavrov (Russian Federation) (interpretation fromRussian): I am grateful to Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello forhis very comprehensive briefing to us.

We would like to confirm our support for thehumanitarian activities of the United Nations, including thework of the Office for the Coordination of HumanitarianAffairs. Russia provides political and practical support inthis sphere and participates in many humanitarianoperations coordinated by the United Nations in variouscountries.

We also believe that the Security Council is todaybeing increasingly asked for active political support for thework of humanitarian organizations and that humanitarianwork as a whole should not only be strengthened, butshould also be protected by the authority of the SecurityCouncil. At the same time, however, we are not equatingthe functions of the Security Council with those of ahumanitarian agency. Each of them has its ownresponsibilities. The Security Council is responsible for themaintenance of international peace and security, whilehumanitarian agencies have their own mandates and mustdeal with specific tasks that are different from the functionsof peacekeeping contingents — although, in fact, the tasksare very closely related in practice.

Coordinating the work of humanitarian agencies andpeacekeeping contingents is therefore essential. In doingso it is necessary to maintain functional separation. But,as I said, coordination is extremely important, primarilybetween the military/political components of peacekeepingoperations and humanitarian operations. One of themethods of establishing such cooperation is, in fact,applied in practice and has to do with ensuring the actualseparation of duties — distinguishing the duties of thespecial representatives of the Secretary-General fromthose of the humanitarian coordinators. When apeacekeeping operation has a humanitarian element —something that is happening with increasing frequency —the humanitarian tasks must be clearly defined in themandates. Those tasks must be feasible and supported bythe appropriate human and financial resources.

The broadening of consultations and cooperationbetween the Security Council and humanitarian agenciesand organizations is playing a useful role in efforts to findthe optimal means of coordination. Here I am thinking ofthe United Nations Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs, the Office of the United NationsHigh Commissioner for Refugees, the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross, the United NationsChildren’s Fund and other organizations. Moreover, wethink it is important to develop this cooperation even atthe stage of planning and preparing peacekeepingoperations that will involve humanitarian tasks.

I will not revisit all of the aspects of humanitarianactivities. Mr. Vieira de Mello and my colleagues whohave spoken before me have shed sufficient light on all ofthese matters. I would just like to comment on a fewadditional points.

I would like to highlight the task of curbing armsflows into conflict areas, because this relates directly tobetter enabling humanitarian agencies to do their work,inter alia, to help refugees. We should not take lightlyany violations of arms embargoes imposed by theSecurity Council, because if an arms embargo is declaredand then not respected, this simply exacerbates theconfrontation between the warring parties and makes itmore difficult to carry out humanitarian tasks — not tomention the fact that it also undermines the authority ofthe Security Council.

Much has been said here about the need to ensurethe safety and security of United Nations personnel,including humanitarian personnel. We agree that this isone of the most important tasks at this time. Of course,

10


one of the most important means of resolving the problemof security is the deployment of military contingents tosafeguard humanitarian deliveries. Nonetheless, as regardssuch provisions of assistance, the importance of basinghumanitarian work on the principle of impartiality shouldnot be forgotten. Humanitarian assistance cannot be used asan instrument for bringing political pressure to bear on anyparty to a conflict or for supporting just one side to thedetriment of the other. This principle fully applies both tothe activities of international humanitarian organizations andto the work of non-governmental organizations.

Perhaps I might give one example that illustratesclearly the situation. This is something the Security Councilhas already discussed during its consultations. It concernsthe work of two non-governmental organizations in northernIraq. They operate there not only without the consent of theGovernment of Iraq but also despite that Government’sprotests. These two non-governmental organizations innorthern Iraq have no visas whatsoever; for all intents andpurposes they have crossed the border illegally andestablished themselves in northern Iraq illegally. Thisdirectly undermines our efforts to uphold the sovereigntyand territorial integrity of Iraq, a goal that the SecurityCouncil has mentioned on several occasions.

Incidentally, this is all happening in northern Iraq,where a so-called no-flight zone was unilaterally declared.The Security Council has never in any of its resolutionstaken a decision regarding a no-flight zone, security zoneor anything similar to that in the northern or southern partof Iraq. The attempt by certain parties, who invokeresolution 688 (1991), to unilaterally declare or create a no-flight zone is illegal, as can be confirmed simply by readingthe resolution, which does not make the least mention ofno-flight zones and was not even adopted under ChapterVII of the Charter of the United Nations.

My last comment concerns how to take up questionsinvolving the use of force or coercion exclusively on thesolid foundation of the Charter of the United Nations. Wecannot fully exclude the possible effectiveness of coercionto ensure the security of humanitarian personnel and thedelivery of humanitarian assistance. However, variousconcepts currently under discussion, such as humanitarianintervention, raise a number of questions of principle anda number of quite practical questions. We believe that theCharter of the United Nations establishes the functions andprerogatives of the Security Council, and these functionsand prerogatives are sacrosanct, and any coercive operationsrequire the authorization of the Council. This includescoercive operations relating to humanitarian assistance.

We are very concerned about the attempts that someare making to promote an approach by which theexistence of a humanitarian crisis in any particularcountry would be in itself sufficient grounds for unilateralarmed intervention without any decision by the SecurityCouncil whatsoever. This approach is absolutelyunacceptable. It runs counter to all of the veryfoundations of the existing system of internationalrelations and the Charter of the United Nations. Only theSecurity Council can determine whether a given situation,including one involving a humanitarian crisis, is a threatto peace and security, and only the Security Council cantake a decision, if one is necessary, to authorize the useof force in accordance with the Charter of the UnitedNations.

Perhaps at some point international law will bedifferent from what it is now and will rely on unilateralregional positions, but for now international law isenshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, by whichall of us must be guided,inter alia, in making decisionsabout humanitarian-assistance questions. It is hardlypossible to provide humanitarian assistance whileviolating the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Statesor, for the sake of humanitarian work, to violate thefundamental principles of international law as enshrinedin the Charter of the United Nations.

In conclusion, I would like to ask Mr. Vieira deMello to convey to all of his colleagues our appreciationfor their efforts to carry out the humanitarian work of theOrganization. We stress our personal appreciation forUnder-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello’s efforts toimprove the coordination and effectiveness of the UnitedNations humanitarian programmes.

Mr. van Walsum (Netherlands): We, too, aregrateful to Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello forhis informative and stimulating briefing.

Having spent three weeks on the Security Councilthis time round, we are struck by the dominant role thathumanitarian issues play on the Council’s agenda. Almostevery subject discussed in the Security Council has aclear humanitarian side to it. It is difficult to imagine asecurity issue that does not entail human suffering, eitheras a direct result of armed conflict or indirectly, forinnocent civilians, refugees or displaced persons as aconsequence of the use of violence.

In this connection, the Netherlands is particularlyconcerned about the growing number of attacks on

11


humanitarian workers. This phenomenon is doublyunacceptable, because in addition to threatening the lives ofthe humanitarian workers concerned it also jeopardizes thewhole concept of humanitarian assistance.

At this time the Security Council is discussing asituation where this is precisely what is likely to happen.

The nature of armed conflict has not fundamentallychanged over the past decade. Indiscriminate use ofviolence, even the intentional targeting of innocent civilians,has characterized many conflicts since the end of theSecond World War. What has changed, however, is thequantity. The number of intra-State low- and medium-intensity conflicts has increased substantially over the past10 years. Another change concerns the impact on publicopinion abroad. Modern communications technologyfacilitates the dissemination of images of indiscriminateviolence to the public at large, which puts pressure onpolicy makers to do something.

What we have learned from the genocide in Rwandais that humanitarian action cannot serve as a substitute forpolitical action, but it is not easy to put this lesson intopractice. Unfortunately, most of our Governments are betterat providing humanitarian aid to victims of violence than attaking political action to prevent such violence frombreaking out.

There is a growing awareness of the need for a moreintegrated approach to crises. A coherent set of diplomatic,political and military measures has to be complementedwith measures related to economic, humanitarian anddevelopment aspects of conflict management. Someprogress has been made in this respect, for example theestablishment and mandate of the Office for theCoordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) as part ofthe United Nations reforms and the formulation of theOrganization for Economic Cooperation and Development/Development Assistance Committee (OECD/DAC)guidelines on conflict, peace and development cooperationof 1998.

But more needs to be done to bring about a trulyintegrated approach. Allow me to suggest six steps in thatdirection.

First, we should always aim for coherent and adequatedecision-making in the Council. The question of theprotection of humanitarian workers is a case in point. Wecannot expect humanitarian organizations to provide aidwithout adequate political or military backing.

Secondly, we should try to enhance the performanceof special representatives of the Secretary-General byfacilitating more interface and coordination with specialenvoys of, for example, the European Union or the UnitedStates.

Thirdly, we should promote a coherent approachfrom all United Nations institutions to a given crisis, forexample through the establishment of strategicframeworks.

Fourthly, we should devise more sophisticatedsanctions, with minimum impact on the civilianpopulation and maximum impact on warlords and theirassets.

Fifthly, we should try to do the same with ourmilitary capability, that is, improve procedures to avoidcollateral damage involving innocent civilians.

And sixthly, we should make better use of existinginstruments of international humanitarian law. Oneexample would be that the International HumanitarianFact-finding Commission, pursuant to article 90 of theFirst Additional Protocol to the 1949 Geneva Convention,would be systematically called in whenever a breach ofhumanitarian principles is reported.

As the representative of the country that a centuryago hosted the Hague Peace Conference, I should like toconclude by briefly commenting on the centennial of thatevent. This centennial, together with the fiftiethanniversary of the adoption of the Geneva Conventions atthe end of the Decade of International Law, provides anexcellent opportunity to reflect on the item we arediscussing today. It is important in this respect to notealso that the Hague Permanent Court of Arbitration willcelebrate its one-hundredth birthday this year.

In this framework, the Netherlands and the RussianFederation will organize commemorative and seminarsessions in May and June in The Hague and St.Petersburg, respectively, in accordance with the relevantGeneral Assembly resolutions. The Secretary-General ofthe United Nations will attend part of these events. Thenon-governmental organization community will also holda major event in May in The Hague on the subject ofpeace as a human right.

It is important to address the deficiencies in severalareas of the law, and a number of highly respectedinternational lawyers are in the process of preparing

12


reports which will serve as the basis for discussions in TheHague and St. Petersburg with a view to reporting andsuggesting recommendations for progress in the newmillennium to the fifty-fourth session of the GeneralAssembly.

The Netherlands congratulates OCHA in general andMr. Vieira de Mello in particular on the progress achievedso far. We will continue to support the importanthumanitarian work of this Office and look forward to closecooperation in future.

Mr. Fowler (Canada)(interpretation from French):Mr. Vieira de Mello raised a number of important questionsthat the Security Council must consider. In this connection,we attach particular importance to continuing the practiceof holding briefings and discussion meetings onhumanitarian activities relevant to the Security Council.

The statement made by Mr. Vieira de Mello rightlystresses the role that the Security Council can play insupport of measures to protect civilians in time of armedconflict. This is not mere theory: since we took up ourposition in the Council at the beginning of January, theCouncil’s deliberations have dealt mainly with conflicts thatthreaten civilians and humanitarian personnel. Let me giveas an example Angola, Iraq, Kosovo and Sierra Leone.

(spoke in English)

The recent tragic history of Sierra Leone is especiallyinstructive. It underscores the fact that the Security Councilneeds to consider threats to security in a broader context —beyond what States do or threaten to do to each other —and to consider threats to security in the context of broad-based threats to individuals caught up in all kinds of armedconflict.

Lawless banditry, acute violence against innocentcivilians, the employment of mercenaries, the use of childcombatants, vast numbers of hungry and sick displacedpersons: these are the challenges which the internationalcommunity must confront in Sierra Leone and in all toomany other circumstances. The sad fact is that the SecurityCouncil is only beginning to define appropriate responses.This small country of 4.5 million people contains, inmicrocosm, many of the conceptual challenges to which theCouncil must find answers if it is to remain relevant,credible and effective.

Humanitarian, refugee and human rights law providethe international community with a legal framework which

enshrines the protection of war-affected civilians. Yet itremains evident that this legal framework is not evenlyapplied or enforced, and that violations are oftencommitted with impunity. The establishment of anInternational Criminal Court and the two ad hocTribunals, for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, areconcrete examples of how we have begun to address suchgaps. Much remains to be done. In this context, allow meto express my very deep concern that Madam JusticeArbour continues to be prevented from fulfilling herresponsibilities in Kosovo.

Peacekeeping operations have been employed as amechanism to separate warring factions, monitor ceasefireagreements and support the delivery of humanitarianassistance. As Mr. Vieira de Mello suggests, however, wehave not adequately considered how peacekeeping forcescould be used to better protect civilians from the conflictswhich rage around them.

In carrying out humanitarian operations, theinternational community has tended to place emphasis onthe delivery of assistance to affected populations. Lessattention has been devoted to how we ensure the safetyand security of displaced and other war-affectedpopulations or to considerations of how we curb threatsto humanitarian workers and others who act at great perilin the service of peace. The passengers and crew of theUnited Nations-chartered aircraft recently shot down overUNITA-controlled territory in Angola are a tragicreminder of that grim fact.

The Council has begun to address such issues — forexample, insecurity in refugee camps, the impact ofarmed conflict on children and the protection of personnelseeking to provide humanitarian assistance, often indesperate and dangerous situations. This is welcomeindeed, but much remains to be done. In particular, theCouncil should build on its efforts thus far and focus itsattention on the broad issue underlying Mr. Vieira deMello’s concerns: the protection of civilians in armedconflict. Only by dealing with the issue in acomprehensive manner can the Council begin to acquit itsresponsibility for reducing the vulnerability of civilianswhere international peace and security are at risk.

We take careful note of Mr. Vieira de Mello’sconclusion regarding the need for the Council to examinepractical ways in which we can ensure greater levels ofprotection for civilians. We agree with him that this issueis of direct relevance to the Council’s core

13


responsibilities. From our perspective, this is indeed apressing task for us in the weeks and months ahead.

The Canadian delegation would like to thank you, Mr.President, for making it possible for Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello to address the Council thismorning. His eloquent, forceful and persuasive presentationis, we believe, a timely and effective reminder of theimportance of widening our appreciation of the broaderdimensions of security.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of Canada for the kind words headdressed to me.

Mr. Andjaba (Namibia): We would like to thank you,Mr. President, for organizing this important meeting today.My delegation would like to thank Under-Secretary-GeneralVieira de Mello for providing us with an overview of thecurrent situation surrounding the provision of humanitarianassistance. Indeed, it confirmed our concerns about theoverall humanitarian situation, which is worsening,especially in Africa, despite concerted efforts by theinternational community. In our view, it is indeed theprimary responsibility of each Government to provide forthe socio-economic needs of its people. In an emergencysituation, however, the primary responsibility must rest withall of us.

We are all aware that conflicts create situations for themost outrageous conditions in the world, since the mostvulnerable in society — women, children and the elderly —are often targeted and deprived of the most basic humanright, the right to life. Furthermore, impeding access tothose vulnerable groups for the delivery of humanitarianassistance has become a tactic in conflict. Recent reports ofmassacres in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and inKosovo are but two examples. Overall, it is howeverimperative for efforts to be devoted to the elimination ofconditions that provoke the violation of human rights.

Namibia is particularly disturbed by reports thatchildren remain specifically targeted for attack by warringfactions. Furthermore, they are recruited, sometimesforcibly, into militia forces and are used as war instruments.They are subjected to hunger, famine and malnutrition anddeprived of education and basic medical services, such asvaccination. The situation of girls is even more precarious.We urge those who are engaged in such conduct to refrainfrom those activities.

My delegation commends the efforts of humanitarianorganizations and their personnel, both international andnational, who work tirelessly under extremely difficultcircumstances, sacrificing their comfort and, increasingly,their own lives, to provide humanitarian assistance to theaffected population. It is disheartening to know that thosemen and women are often targeted in the performance oftheir duties. We therefore deplore the increased level ofviolence against humanitarian personnel.

We are also disturbed by the fact that it has becomea regular phenomenon for those who are fighting to denyhumanitarian personnel access to those in need. Thisobvious disregard for international humanitarian lawshould not and cannot be condoned.

The recent debate of the Security Council on thesafety and security of humanitarian personnel is a step inthe right direction and should be taken further with theaim of adopting measures that should be adhered to by allparties concerned. Here we would like to stress thatdeliberations of the Security Council on humanitarianactivities should be confined to the proper context. Thetechnical role of coordination of humanitarian activities inthe future should remain with the Economic and SocialCouncil.

The time has now come for the internationalcommunity to turn words into concrete action by ensuringthat necessary steps are taken to protect the providers ofaid and assistance. We must pool our efforts together toensure that instruments are put in place to punish thosewho are violating those laws in the name of war. In thisregard, Member States must ensure that attacks committedagainst humanitarian personnel are investigated and thatthe perpetrators are brought to justice.

Finally, I wish to thank Mr. Vieira de Mello for theconcrete proposals advanced in his statement. We hopethat the Security Council will give them seriousconsideration. My delegation, for one, will support seriousmeasures aimed at improving the conditions for thedelivery of humanitarian assistance.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of Namibia for the kind words headdressed to me.

14


Mr. Türk (Slovenia): I wish to start by thanking you,Sir, for organizing this open meeting of the SecurityCouncil on this very important and difficult subject. I alsowish to thank Mr. Vieira de Mello for his extremelyinteresting and thought-provoking briefing.

Mr. Vieira de Mello ended his statement with aquotation of Václav Havel. Let me repeat it, because I thinkit is very relevant to our work:

“We must not be afraid of dreaming the seeminglyimpossible if we want the impossible to become areality.”

Now, let me reflect upon the implications of this importantthought.

Let me first ask myself what can be defined as the“seemingly impossible”. There are many illustrations whichcan be given and many examples from the current work ofthe Security Council can help us in discussing this. But Iwould like to dwell for a short while on an exampleprovided by Mr. Vieira de Mello, who placed, at thebeginning of his statement, an important emphasis oninternational humanitarian law. He explained that theproblem of respect for the norms of internationalhumanitarian law in contemporary conflicts has becomedramatic. The body of applicable international humanitarianlaw is impressive and a great achievement of civilization,but — as we learn and as we know from too manysituations — much too often the norms of internationalhumanitarian law are unknown, ignored or deliberatelyviolated.

I believe that the Security Council must always insiston the responsibility of all the parties to all conflicts forrespect for international humanitarian law and on thepunishment of all violations of humanitarian law. In thatregard, the Security Council must be consistent and mustshow the ability to persist. Consistency means that it has topay due attention to humanitarian law in all situations andthat it must be aware — and here comes the persistencyelement — of the non-applicability of statutory limitationsfor war crimes and crimes against humanity. Even in thosecases in which crimes have been committed years earlier,there is still very good reason to insist on full investigationof crimes and on punishment, because this is the only wayto prevent the culture of impunity from prevailing and theonly way in which a meaningful and systematic combatingof violations of humanitarian law can be pursued.

I believe that this is an important challenge for theSecurity Council and one which we should dream of assomething which is seemingly impossible but which, intime, may become a reality.

Many speakers have referred to specific tasks of theSecurity Council in contemporary situations, and I do notpropose to deal with these in any detail. I would like tomention, however, that the nature of contemporaryconflicts is such that most often they produce very serioushumanitarian consequences. There are very good reasonsto insist, in all situations, on humanitarian access topopulations in need, such as, for example, the presentsituation in Angola. It is necessary to include assistancethrough humanitarian action in the mandates of the UnitedNations military forces. One could quote several examplesfrom previous years.

It is very important that the Council pay specialattention to the problem of child soldiers — anotherproblem to which several speakers have referred thismorning — especially in the context of the eventualdemobilization and reintegration of children after theconflict. One would hope that the situation in SierraLeone would be one in which one could startmeaningfully to dream about the demobilization andreintegration of children.

Finally, as many have said, the protection ofhumanitarian personnel should be a very importantpriority for the Security Council.

All these tasks belong to the important work of theSecurity Council, but, in addition to these, I believe thatit is worth keeping in mind what Mr. Vieira de Mello toldus today: humanitarian action can never resolve conflictsthat, in essence, have political origins. I am mentioningthis because all too often in the past few years, theCouncil has ended up with humanitarian action being seenas a substitute for political action. It may be recalled thatSecretary-General Kofi Annan has often referred to thisproblem and explained that humanitarian action can beonly a palliative and no substitute for action aimed attackling the root causes of different crises.

A commentator in today’s issue of theInternationalHerald Tribuneemphasizes that humanitarian action mustnot be the only response of the political bodies to thetragedies resulting from armed conflicts. Certainly, theSecurity Council is primarily a political body, so thereforeit has to think seriously and hard about its basicapproaches to various armed conflicts and crisis

15


situations. This does not in any way diminish theimportance of the humanitarian dimension; at the sametime, when contemplating humanitarian action, the Councilhas to be aware of the need to address the political issues.

In this context, two thoughts come to mind. First, theCouncil should, in my opinion, put into focus preventiveaction in all situations, when possible. The Council shouldmore often engage itself at an early stage of a conflict or anemerging conflict and, perhaps, more often invite orencourage the Secretary-General to exercise his role as anactor of preventive diplomacy to prevent conflicts.

Prevention, of course, is not always possible andsometimes far-reaching decisions have to be taken by theSecurity Council. Here again, I think, the basic politicalrequirement is that these decisions be taken on time. Athreat to the peace must be addressed at an early stage. Ifirmly believe that the Security Council should not allowitself to be paralysed, should not allow national interests toparalyse its action in an early effort to address an emergingthreat to the peace.

Sometimes, the paralysing effect of national interestsis hidden behind the rhetoric of protection of the nationalsovereignty and territorial integrity of States. The principlesof protection of the sovereignty and territorial integrity ofStates are important principles, but they are not absolute.The Security Council must be able to distinguish betweenthe genuine protection of the sovereignty and territorialintegrity of States and the use or abuse of these principlesas quasi-justification for the commission of crimes againsthumanity and other atrocities which, in addition to being anevil in themselves, threaten the international peace.

In such situations, the Security Council must be ableto determine when and where the threat to internationalpeace actually starts. Action should be early and that action,in our opinion, should even include the possibility ofauthorizing the use of force in order to prevent the threat topeace from developing further into an open and broadconflict and from producing a humanitarian catastrophe.This is, in my opinion, one of the basic political challengesto the Security Council these days and something whichshould not be overlooked, even when we talk primarilyabout the humanitarian aspects of our work.

Let me conclude once again by quoting Václav Havel:

“We must not be afraid of dreaming the seeminglyimpossible if we want the impossible to become areality.”

The Security Council must not allow paralysis. It mustshow the ability to act in a meaningful way at thepolitical level.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of Slovenia for his kind wordsaddressed to me.

Sir Jeremy Greenstock(United Kingdom): I join inthe warm thanks to Under-Secretary-General Vieira deMello for his important and wide-ranging briefing. TheUnited Kingdom welcomes his involvement in this openmeeting. We are strong supporters of his role asEmergency Relief Coordinator, and I would like to paytribute to the success of the Office for the Coordinationof Humanitarian Affairs as an essential unit in the UnitedNations structure under his leadership. I hope this will bethe first of many occasions on which we will be able tohear his views and on which we will be able to addresshuman security issues.

As we all noted, we continued to see gross violationsof international humanitarian law and human rights law inmany bitter current conflicts. Such violations often feedthe hatred of parties to the conflict and perpetuate thecycle of violence. How do we break that cycle?

I agree with Ambassador Türk on many things thathe said, but particularly that one key issue here is thestate of the existing body of international humanitarianlaw. Is the problem that we need to implement existinglaw much more effectively? Or are there loopholes whichneed to be addressed in the body of law? Does the UnitedNations system, including the Security Council, need newinstruments to ensure compliance with international law?The establishment of the International Criminal Court isa vital step, but it is not enough on its own.

As Mr. Vieira de Mello has pointed out, the Councilhas a role in humanitarian issues. It seems to us that wehave seen some encouraging trends in recent years. TheCouncil needs to continue to ensure that peacekeepingoperations support the development of local law-and-ordercapabilities, the restructuring of armed forces on aconstitutional basis and the restoration of economicactivity through properly planned infrastructureprogrammes. Civilian police components, deminingprogrammes and the reintegration of former combatantswill often be essential elements of futuremultidimensional peacekeeping operations. Beyond this,we need to look at how best to strengthen civil society,build local democratic institutions and ensure that the

16


rights of men, women and children are protected. Does Mr.Vieira de Mello feel that more can be done in this area,particularly after a conflict may have died down?

I fully understand the accent he has placed on theeffects of conflict on innocent civilians. We seem to havebecome inured to a series of horrific stories. Kosovo is onesource, Sierra Leone is currently another. I read in mypapers this morning of a visit which a British diplomat hasjust paid to Freetown. He talked to the Minister responsiblefor broadcasting the views of the elected Government ofSierra Leone, and this Minister told the British HighCommissioner that he had to stop those broadcasts becauseon the outskirts of Freetown, when the rebels heard thevoice of the Minister on the radio, they were so angry athearing the sound of his voice that they went out in thestreets and killed the first civilians that they found. How doyou reach people who do that sort of thing?

Mr. Vieira de Mello said, “The gulf between existinginternational norms and respect for them on the ground hasnever been so wide.” (supra) As a response to that, verbaloutrage is just not good enough. How can we both ensurehigher humanitarian standards and fulfil our Charterobligations to respect the sovereignty and territorialintegrity of States, especially when they are led bymurderous regimes, and in the worst case when thoseregimes have used chemical weapons against their ownpeople? What is the overriding priority here? I agree withAmbassador Lavrov on this point, that this is an area whichneeds further analysis and may require changes.

The United Kingdom has worked a great deal with theUnited Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, theOffice of the United Nations High Commissioner forRefugees, the United Nations Children’s Fund, theInternational Committee of the Red Cross, the SpecialRepresentative for Children and Armed Conflict and non-governmental organizations to promote protection ofcivilians, and particularly of children, in armed conflicts.Does the Under-Secretary-General have ideas on how theSecurity Council can address the important issue ofcoordination with bodies such as these in this importantarea. Ambassador Lavrov, among others, has rightly drawnattention to this. The Security Council has a partial andrather ill-defined responsibility for an extremely complexarea. Are we approaching the issue of cohesion between theSecurity Council and the rest of the United Nations systemwith sufficient seriousness?

I am sure that the Secretariat will have been pleasedto see the adoption last November of resolution 1208

(1998), which addresses the need to maintain the civilianand humanitarian nature of refugee camps. Does theUnder-Secretary-General have further ideas on whatspecial measures might be considered for the protectionof such camps, in particular given the vulnerablesegments of the population they often house, such aschildren?

A further area which I agree must be highlighted isthe physical security of humanitarian workers. The UnitedKingdom is working with non-governmental organizationsin particular to study options for protection ofhumanitarian agencies and their personnel. I would like toask whether the Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs has done any further thinking in thisarea, and if so, what practical conclusions are beingdrawn.

Finally, I would like to commend you, Mr.President, for the excellent initiative of holding thismeeting. It is important that the Council should follow upand find answers to some of the questions I have raised,as well as ways of implementing the specific suggestionsmade by Mr. Vieira de Mello. The United Kingdom fullysupports the use of this effective and transparent formatand hopes that it will be taken up by other Councilpresidencies in the future on this and on other subjects.

Mr. Jagne (Gambia): Like previous speakers, mydelegation would like to thank you, Mr. President, forconvening this meeting on a subject of common concernto the international community. We are also grateful toUnder-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello for hiscomprehensive and thought-provoking briefing.

The question of humanitarian action has always beenon the agenda of the international community. But wecould also state, without any fear of contradiction, that theSecretary-General’s report on Africa rekindled interest inthis matter. Since the publication of the report, relatedissues to the maintenance of international peace andsecurity have gained renewed attention.

It will be recalled that Ambassador Olara Otunnubriefed us on the thorny issues of children in armedconflict and post-conflict peace building. Madam Ogata,the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, alsospoke to us on the work of her agency. Today, Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello is following in thefootsteps of Olara Otunnu and Madam Ogata.

17


We listened with great attention to Mr. Vieira deMello when he guided us step by step from theenvironment, to the nature of modern-day warfare, to thelegal instruments available to deal with the attendant evilsof war.

When wars are no longer fought in the battlefield butin cities and villages, what can we expect? More civiliansdie. The answer is simple. And among the civilians whobear the brunt of such conflicts are women and children,the most vulnerable groups. They are targeted for physicalelimination and abuse.

The situation in Sierra Leone is a classic example ofatrocities inflicted on civilians by armed rebel groups.Those who survive the atrocities are reduced to the statusof displaced persons and refugees. Even then, there is stillno mercy, because humanitarian workers are often deniedaccess to them. Nothing can be more criminal than to denyfood and water to the needy.

In addition to that, humanitarian agencies aresometimes left alone in extremely hostile situations,exposed to all sorts of dangers and difficulties. In order todeal with these issues, Under-Secretary-General Vieira deMello cited a number of international legal instrumentsranging from the Convention on the Rights of the Child tothe most recent, the Convention on the Safety of UnitedNations and Associated Personnel. As in similar situations,all that we can do is join the appeal for States parties torecommit themselves to the aims and objectives of theseinternational legal instruments and internationalhumanitarian law.

The problem is made even more difficult because ofthe nature of conflicts today, when we are dealing witharmed groups that have no regard for the sanctity of life.This is why we understand both the United Nations andother international humanitarian agencies when they insiston minimum guarantees from all the parties to a conflictbefore moving in or resuming work.

As we tackle the problem of impeded access to theneedy, we should also redouble our efforts in dealing withthe question of impunity. In this connection, we follow withkeen interest the work of the International Tribunals forRwanda and the former Yugoslavia. With the establishmentof the International Criminal Court, we, the Member States,should cooperate even more closely to pursue and bring tojustice perpetrators of gross violations of human rights.

In this regard, it is important to use the mediajudiciously for the dissemination of information, as widelyas possible and in all languages, so that all nations willuphold international humanitarian law. It is certainly notan easy task, but let us start.

This briefing has been an eye-opener. It has beenvery useful, and we are convinced that, through concertedinternational efforts, we can together make a bigdifference in the lives of the less fortunate members ofthe family of nations.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of the Gambia for his kind wordsaddressed to me.

Mr. Hasmy (Malaysia): My delegation would like,at the outset, to express our appreciation to you, Mr.President, for convening this open formal meeting on thisimportant subject, which contributes to the furtheropenness of the deliberations of the Council. My remarkswill be brief.

My delegation would also like to thank Under-Secretary-General Sergio Vieira de Mello for hiscomprehensive and informative briefing on the subject ofhumanitarian activities relevant to the Security Council inthe context of promoting peace and security. Mydelegation welcomes this briefing and future briefings onthis important subject, which has a direct bearing on theprimary responsibility of the Council in the maintenanceof international peace and security as it deals more andmore with the issue of the humanitarian dimensions ofconflicts around the world, especially given the new andmore pernicious forms of conflict in our contemporaryworld. This briefing and future briefings on this subjectserve the purpose of highlighting this issue, as well assensitizing Council members and the general membershipof our Organization to the need for full observance of andcompliance with existing international laws.

On the question of security of humanitarianoperations and personnel, my delegation shares theconcern of the Secretariat and other members of theCouncil over the disturbing increase in the number andscale of direct, calculated attacks or use of force againstUnited Nations personnel, as well as those of otherhumanitarian organizations. Such actions are reprehensibleand must be condemned wherever and whenever theyoccur, and justice must be meted out to those responsible,without fear or favour.

18


Clearly, the authorities in States in conflict situationsmust bear final responsibility for ensuring the safety andsecurity of these courageous and dedicated workers as theygo about performing their increasingly indispensable workin the name of humanity. As recognition of theiroutstanding work and selfless dedication in extremelydifficult and often dangerous situations, these humanitarianpersonnel and organizations should be commended by theUnited Nations and other international organizations andGovernments in appropriate ways — as we do, for instance,in respect of our peacekeepers.

On the issue of compliance with international law, itis imperative that the Member States of the United Nationsreaffirm and comply with the existing norms, principles andprovisions of international law to ensure the protection ofand assistance to refugees, displaced persons and vulnerablepopulations in conflict situations, as well as their access tointernational protection and humanitarian assistance.

As regards the mechanisms to ensure compliance withinternational law, it is important that the prevailing cultureof impunity be brought to an end and violators ofhumanitarian law be brought to justice. Clearly, States havethe primary responsibility in prosecuting perpetratorsthrough the national justice system or through relevantinternational criminal tribunals, when appropriate.

My delegation will be prepared to support, forinstance, the idea of holding combating parties and theirleaders financially liable to their victims under internationallaw, in cases where civilians are made deliberate targets ofaggression. Appropriate legal machinery will, of course,have to be established for this purpose.

There are many other aspects of the humanitariandimensions of conflict that are of concern to my delegationand that I would have liked to address, were it not for theinterest of brevity and the fact that they have beenadequately and eloquently addressed by other Councilmembers, with which my delegation associates itself.

Under-Secretary-General Sergio Vieira de Mello madea number of suggestions and proposals in his excellentpresentation. We commend them for the serious and earlyconsideration of the Council. In thanking Mr. Vieira deMello for his thought-provoking suggestions and proposals,my delegation would like to assure him that the Malaysiandelegation will take an active and constructive attitude inthe Council’s deliberations on these ideas, as we aregenerally in agreement with many of them.

In conclusion, I would like to associate mydelegation with the remarks made by the representative ofChina with respect to the need for the Council to alsoaddress the humanitarian dimension of sanctions imposedby it. In the view of my delegation, the issue of thehumanitarian impact of sanctions is relevant and, indeed,pertinent in any discussion of the subject of thehumanitarian dimensions of conflict situations.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of Malaysia for his kind wordsaddressed to me.

Mr. Dejammet (France) (interpretation fromFrench): Allow me to join all those who have thankedyou personally, Mr. President, for suggesting andconvening this meeting and for having invited yourcompatriot, Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello, to share hisviews. As always he has expressed them in an extremelyclear, precise, well-documented and thought-provokingway. We trust that this debate convened on yourinitiative, and which was so ably opened by the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, will indeedencourage the members of the Council to continue to givethought to these matters so that this fundamental issue ofsimple respect for human beings caught up in conflictsituations can really begin to be resolved.

We are all aware of the considerable change that hasoccurred in recent years in dealing with these complexproblems. It is striking that now 90 per cent of thevictims of armed conflicts are civilians, whereas it usedto be that this 90 per cent represented combatants.Civilian populations have become the principal victims ofconflicts, and sometimes deliberate targets. I am thinkingin particular of the most vulnerable group: children. It istherefore essential, as Mr. Vieira de Mello said, thatmeasures be taken to raise the minimum age at whichchildren can be inducted into armed forces and to ensurebetter, effective protection of children during armedconflicts. But this, we must admit, is but one example ofthe significant worsening of respect for humanitarian lawin recent years.

Of course, everyone knows the principles. Theyremain fundamental. These principles include assured andunimpeded access to victims and to all affectedpopulations. This is a fundamental right. It is oftenflouted. Sometimes it is respected, which proves thatsometimes in difficult situations it is possible for there tobe respect for some principles. In this connection, Mr.Vieira de Mello was right to mention the crisis in Guinea-

19


Bissau where, happily, it has been possible to provideassistance to the parties involved.

Another fundamental principle is the protection ofrefugees and displaced persons. Yet another, of course, isthe distinguishing and separation of civilians fromcombatants. In the report submitted to us in September theSecretary-General once again stressed the urgent need tomake this distinction. Other principles include protection ofhospitals and, lastly, protection of humanitarian personnel.Since here again there is a good example, I would like tojoin in the tribute that Mr. Sergio Vieira de Mello paid tothe representative of Russia for the role his country playedin the release of Vincent Cochetel, a member of thehumanitarian staff of the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees.

Clearly, we must remind ourselves of these principles,and we are being given the opportunity this year, it beingthe anniversary year of several conventions: the GenevaConventions and their Additional Protocols, and also ofcourse the Hague Conventions. These anniversaries shouldlead us to take action to ensure that these Conventions arebetter respected and ultimately to strengthen the guaranteesthey provide.

But beyond these necessary reminders, beyond thework we can do to strengthen these legal instruments, we,the members of the Security Council, must act. We musttake long-term measures, as we have, for example, inestablishing International Criminal Tribunals for Rwandaand the former Yugoslavia, which are charged with tryingthose responsible for serious violations of international law.

Another long-term and positive undertaking is theestablishment of the International Criminal Court, whichwill sanction violations of the Geneva Conventions. This isa major step forward, and France, which is proud to havesupported early on to the establishment of the InternationalCriminal Court, hopes that it will soon be able to takeaction.

However, in the short run, during which we are almostdaily confronted with crises that are at once political andhumanitarian, we Council members must strive to providea response, and to do so immediately. This will lead us, aswe reflect on the maintenance of peace, to anticipatehumanitarian problems and, above all, the need to protectinnocent civilian populations. We must strive to act beforethere is a crisis, as, for example, recently when we held adebate on peacekeeping, trying to do all we could inadvance to avoid humanitarian disasters.

Here again there are examples that show this ispossible. I am thinking for example of the multinationalforce authorized by the Council, Operation Alba inAlbania. But we also have to keep in mind theshortcomings, setbacks and failures; I am thinking of ourinability at the end of 1996 to avoid the disaster ineastern Zaire, the humanitarian tragedy that took place inthat region of Africa, as everyone knows.

This leads us to reflect on how to draw lessons frompast experience. Within the Council, of course, wealready know that we must strive from now on to defineprecise mandates, to distinguish the political, military andhumanitarian tasks to be done, and to preserve theneutrality of humanitarian activities. As several speakershave said, such as the Ambassador of Slovenia, we mustin any case remain well aware that, by leading toextensive movements of refugees and displaced persons,the risks of humanitarian catastrophes can themselvesthreaten peace and international security. Thus, theSecurity Council has the responsibility and the duty toprovide a response to this.

To be very specific, we must be well aware of thechallenging tasks facing those who deal with humanitarianproblems. One of these tasks is indeed distinguishingbetween the humanitarian and the political solution. Thehumanitarian response cannot always substitute fordealing with conflicts and their causes. Sometimes therepresentatives of humanitarian agencies bear a heavyresponsibility, the heavy responsibility of saving, “We aredoing what we can, but the problem goes deeper and it isup to the Security Council to take political decisions, andsometimes also military decisions.” We must realize thatthe Council cannot completely shed this responsibility,entrusting it to the humanitarian actors.

Another responsibility weighs heavily on those incharge of humanitarian agencies: to what extent can thoseagencies accept departures from the principles ofneutrality and non-discrimination in order to carry outtheir mission? This is not a theoretical question; it aroserecently in very practical terms in several conflictsituations in Africa and in Afghanistan. In other words,what are the acceptable limits on the constraints that localauthorities may seek to impose on the presence and thework of humanitarian personnel? This is a seriousquestion that involves ethics, the agencies’ responsibilityvis-à-vis their immediate obligation to provide assistance,and also respect for more general legal principles.

20


My last point relates to the topic of existing standards,and in a way it is a question for Mr. Vieira de Mello. Doeshe believe that new standards of international law must beintroduced in view of the changing nature of armedconflict, the fact that the civilian population has become byfar the main victim and target, and that the distinctionbetween civilians and combatants is becoming increasinglyblurred?

Mr. President, this debate, which you have taken theinitiative of convening, must not only lead to the SecurityCouncil’s becoming more active in monitoring andresponding to conflicts politically, militarily or at thehumanitarian level; it must also lead us, together with theSecretariat, to reaffirm certain principles and also to reflecton ways of supplementing or fine-tuning them if necessary.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of France for the kind words headdressed to me.

Mr. Dangue Réwaka (Gabon) (interpretation fromFrench): My delegation wishes to join those that havealready spoken in thanking you, Mr. President, for havingconvened this meeting, whose significance is clear to all.We paid close attention to the important statement justmade by Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello on theproblems related to security and freedom of access andmovement that often confront governmental and non-governmental organizations entrusted with humanitarianassistance, particularly in times of conflict. In thisconnection, my delegation would like once again to expressour deep gratitude for the tireless efforts deployed by theUnder-Secretary-General and the department he heads toensure enhanced coordination and distribution ofhumanitarian assistance to those in need.

It is most regrettable to note that despite all of theefforts made to substitute peaceful measures for the resortto war, we cannot but acknowledge that human sufferingand the material damage caused by war continue unabated.As emphasized by Under-Secretary-General Vieira deMello, the United Nations and the international communityas a whole have at their disposal a considerable body ofnorms and instruments based on international humanitarianlaw that were adopted to prevent and protect civilianpopulations in areas of armed conflict.

I should like to add that last year, in considering thereport of the Secretary-General on the causes of conflict inAfrica, the Security Council adopted a number ofresolutions, including those on the protection of refugee

camps, and in particular resolution 1208 (1998), whichwas mentioned by the representative of the UnitedKingdom in his statement. We agree with Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello that the Council, in thecontext of its responsibilities, must consider other, morespecific measures that would afford increased protectionto humanitarian personnel and civilian populations, takinginto account the Charter of the United Nations. We willdo our utmost to see to it that the Council responds in asatisfactory manner to the measures proposed by Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankthe representative of Gabon for the kind words headdressed to me.

I shall now make a statement in my capacity as therepresentative of Brazil.

Let me begin, of course, by thanking the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Mr. Vieira deMello. He is my compatriot, indeed, but he is first andforemost an international civil servant whose career hasfocused mainly on the humanitarian area and whoseknowledge of the matters he has spoken of here is veryextensive. It is for this reason that he was able to speakto us not only with his mind but with his heart, includingthe two excellent quotations he mentioned.

Let me first comment on the quote from PresidentHavel. It is very important to recall that it was astatesman who said what he did about making dreamscome true and dreaming the impossible if we want theimpossible to become a reality. But perhaps, to paytribute to a great author who wrote in the language that Iam using — if not misusing — today, I should recall thatthe same thought, though phrased differently, wascontained in the works of authors such as Cervantes. Thisgives us some measure of the Iberian spirit, representedhere by the representative of Argentina and, perhapsindirectly, by Brazil.

The other quotation has a direct bearing on some ofthe issues I wanted to mention: the quotation by Burke,which says that the only requirement for evil to prevail isfor good individuals to do nothing. I would say, though,that if such people do nothing, then they are not good.They may be well-intentioned, but there is a distinction tobe drawn between being truly good and having goodintentions. For us, I think, it is a ray of hope in the rathergloomy picture painted for us by the Under-Secretary-General to know that good men and women in the true

21


meaning of the word — not just well-intentioned — areready and willing to make the sacrifices they have agreedto and to risk their own lives for the sake of humanitarianideals.

But this thought leads me to another: the Weberianconcept of distinguishing between individual morality,which is based on conviction, and political morality, whichis based on responsibility. This is the task that all of us —humanitarian agencies, in particular the United Nationshumanitarian agencies, but especially and principally theSecurity Council, must undertake: to make that distinction,because for us, the Security Council, what is important ismorality based on responsibility.

The difference between the two is that the morality ofresponsibility cannot permit the belief that no sin has beencommitted, that the right thing is being done from thestandpoint of the conscience; rather, it is necessary toobtain results. The morality of responsibility involves theconcept of a morality oriented towards results. I believe thatthat is extremely important in our daily work, because withregard to certain issues we often feel the urge simply to callupon parties to engage in dialogue or to reach a peacefulresolution. But what is expected of us in the humanitarianand in the political fields goes beyond that. I believe thatthe comments of some of those who spoke earlier,including the Ambassadors of the Netherlands and ofFrance, on the need for a political strategy which couldincorporate humanitarian activity are extremely important.Otherwise, we will be left with good intentions but withoutresults. We must go beyond people’s individual qualities ofcourage and generosity and demand political vision.

I should also like to make a brief comment on anissue that was raised a few days ago: the question of thenature of current conflicts. There have been many analysespointing to a change in the nature of conflicts in the post-cold war era, which today seem to be more internal incharacter and to involve civilians. No one needs to bereminded of the fact that, tragically, many conflicts in thepast also involved civilians. However, it also seems to methat such analyses have implications for today’s debate.

An interesting article published in the review,ForeignAffairs, a few years ago by Professor Stephen JohnStedman of Johns Hopkins University states that internalconflicts are not in fact more frequent today than they werein the past, or more violent. The American Civil War, forexample, took the lives of more than 600,000 people. TheSpanish Civil War in the 1930s and the Nigerian civil warof the 1960s also led to fatalities on a similar scale. During

the cold war, the conflicts in Korea, Viet Nam, ElSalvador and Nicaragua were essentially internal conflictsin which there was, of course, outside intervention. Onthe other hand, many of today’s humanitarian problems,especially with regard to the issue of refugees, relate toconflicts that cannot be classed as internal conflicts, as isthe case in the Middle East.

I say that simply so that we may take with a grainof salt, as we did when discussing the issue ofpeacekeeping, the idea that conflicts today are completelydifferent in character from those of the past. What mayhave changed is that, with the end of the cold war, themajor Powers have become considerably less interested inintervening in internal conflicts. Clearly, on the one handthat is a positive development, because no one wantsexternal intervention in internal conflicts, which veryoften simply leads to the perpetuation of such conflictsbeyond the period of the intervention, as was the case inAngola, a subject with which we are so often occupied inthe Security Council. However, one consequence of thefact that today the major Powers are less involved, atleast militarily, is that many of those conflicts havebecome “orphaned” in a way, with the Security Councilbecoming a forum of last resort to check the levels ofviolence.

I believe that that is what is happening, rather thanthere being a great difference in the nature of theconflicts. I believe that it is important for the Members ofthe Organization, and especially for the members of theSecurity Council, to arrive at an understanding amongthemselves on the limits of Security Council action in thehumanitarian area, with the Council reserving its attentionand energy for those cases that truly threaten regional orinternational stability — such cases are not infrequent —while other bodies, such as the Economic and SocialCouncil and its strengthened humanitarian segment, dealwith the other issues. In this context, I am pleased to saythat yesterday, in my capacity as President of the SecurityCouncil, I received a visit from the President of theEconomic and Social Council, Ambassador Paolo Fulci,who indeed intends to take up the invitation that weissued to the Economic and Social Council in severaldocuments with a view to dealing with situations of post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation, including theimplementation of Article 65 of the Charter.

I believe that in the Council we must resist thetemptation to establish an automatic correlation betweenthe concept of collective responsibility, which does indeedexist at the humanitarian level, and the effort to achieve

22


collective security, a concept which is specifically theresponsibility of the Council. Collective responsibility in theface of a humanitarian emergency can be effectivelydischarged by other bodies, as the Secretary-Generalpointed out in his report on protection for humanitarianactivities. Clearly, that is almost a tautology, but sometimesit is appropriate to stress tautologies. The Council mustshoulder its responsibilities when it intervenes in long-standing questions that can be defined as collective securityissues in the context of regional or international instabilityand dealt with if possible by means of diplomacy and withthe consent and cooperation of the beneficiary country.

Another issue relates to the various options for theprotection of humanitarian operations with serious securityproblems which States either cannot or do not want to dealwith in a satisfactory manner and with regard to which oneor more parties to the conflict will not accept externalsecurity forces. With regard to such situations, it isworthwhile reaffirming that the report of the Secretary-General states that no intervention that is deemedhumanitarian can be without a political strategy. In thisrespect I am repeating to some extent the comments ofAmbassador van Walsum. In other words, protectionmeasures that are not part of a political or diplomatic planundermine the effectiveness of humanitarian action and canactually make the situation worse.

Furthermore, we should recall that the humanitarianorganizations themselves are very often afraid that the useof military force with humanitarian goals, especially in thecontext of Chapter VII of the Charter, can compromise theirimpartiality and neutrality and have a negative impact ontheir ability to assist the victims of all the parties to theconflict and may increase violence against the personnel ofthe United Nations and of other humanitarian organizations.That is another issue that has been mentioned here andwhich we consider to be very important.

Given such considerations, perhaps we might engagein some self-criticism and ask ourselves whether a certaininclination to contemplate the use of force for humanitarianpurposes or eventually to adopt a position that is favourableto one of the parties, abandoning the impartiality that mustbe part of the code of conduct of humanitarian workers,might, at least in some cases, be the source of an increasein violence against humanitarian workers in conflictsituations.

My comments do not exclude the possibility that theremay be cases in which force may be truly indispensable asa last resort, but it is clear that in any case the approval of

the Security Council is essential. Article 51 of the Charterof the United Nations sets forth a single exception for theuse of force without prior authorization of the Council:legitimate self-defence. Otherwise, accepting unilateralmilitary action in humanitarian emergencies would implythe recognition in some form of one nation or a group ofnations not only wielding greater power, but having acertain moral superiority of which they could takeadvantage in such situations.

That having been said, however, we must alsoconsider the other side of the coin, which also seems tome to be important. In order for the Security Council topreserve its authority, it is necessary first to avoid anyerosion of that authority by actions taken outside theCouncil. However, it is also necessary for members of theCouncil — particularly the permanent members, who areable to veto draft resolutions — to deal with specificsituations not from the standpoint of their own specificinterests but rather from the standpoint of ensuring peaceand security in the world and from the perspective of theOrganization as a whole. Because actions that take placeoutside the Council may undermine the Council’s action,the Security Council itself may also be undermined byhaving its activities blocked, perhaps withoutconsideration of very serious elements that arouse thefeelings of the entire world.

As I have already spoken at some length today,particularly from this seat, I wish to make a final point onthe subject of sanctions. As all know, the GeneralAssembly adopted a resolution on the important topic ofan Agenda for Peace, but the Security Council has yet toexpress its view in this respect. Proposals were made bythe Chairmen of the sanctions committees in 1998 —among whom was Ambassador Dahlgren, who is nolonger with us — that are being considered by theCouncil. We hope that it will soon be possible to adoptcertain specific guidelines for these committees,particularly on the humanitarian issues that we areaddressing today. However, a broader and moreconceptual discussion will be necessary, and it would beuseful for such a discussion to be held in this Chamber.

I now resume my functions as President of theCouncil.

Mr. Burleigh (United States of America): I justwanted to make a brief comment. Excuse me for takingthe floor twice, but I thought that several of theinterventions today have been extremely interesting andthought-provoking — in particular your comments just

23


now, Sir, but also issues raised earlier by AmbassadorLavrov and then commented on, in one way or another, byAmbassadors Türk, Greenstock and Dejammet and again byyourself.

There is one aspect of them that I should just like tonote for the record, because it is a subject that has come uprepeatedly in the Council and which I think you, Sir, werealluding to again. I would describe it as the question of theuse and misuse of the sovereignty concept. I am justthrowing this out for possible future discussion amongCouncil colleagues, because I know it is controversial anda very difficult issue.

It is my Government’s view that there arecircumstances — such as the humanitarian crisis in Kosovothis past fall and currently looming, or the repression of thecivilian population in Iraq — in which the internationalcommunity should and must be willing to act to protectcivilians against the depredations of their ownGovernments. It is sad but true that the sovereigntyarguments can be used and sometimes have the practicalresult of finding excuses for repressive, even murderousGovernments which are engaging in gross violations of thehuman rights of their own citizens. These arguments alsooften lead to the incapacitation of the internationalcommunity, as you alluded to just now, Sir.

We do not believe that such extreme examples ofGovernments’ mistreatment of their own populations shouldbe tolerated.

The President (interpretation from Spanish): I shallnow call on Under-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello torespond to comments and questions.

I wish first to make a very brief comment. It is clearthat we are not going to exhaust every aspect addressedhere today, but I believe that it is only fair to call onceagain on the Under-Secretary-General for some briefcomments since, as members know, we still have anothermeeting to convene on an equally important item.

Mr. Vieira de Mello (Under-Secretary-General forHumanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator):I thank you, Sir, and all members for this opportunity tospeak again, for the strong support they have expressed andfor their recognition that the humanitarian consequences ofconflict are of direct concern to this Council and itsmembers and to the maintenance of international orregional peace and security. It is a very importantencouragement to my colleagues — United Nations and

non-United Nations alike — and indeed to myself and tomy colleagues in the Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs.

(spoke in Spanish)

On your example, Sir, I too shall use — and perhapsbutcher — the language of Cervantes to refer to thestatement made by the Ambassador of Argentina and tothank him for his comment to the effect that this Council,and Argentina in particular, will show zero tolerance forviolations of international humanitarian law andhumanitarian principles. I wish to ask AmbassadorPetrella and all the other members of the Council to helpus translate this zero tolerance into specific actions inspecific geographic areas.

(spoke in English)

I also wish to thank other members who indeedinsisted on something that is key to our concerns here:that humanitarian problems are key to political solutions.As the representative of China indicated, the focus mustbe — not least in a preventive sense, as also suggested bythe Permanent Representative of Slovenia — onprevention and on tackling the root causes. All heads ofhumanitarian agencies have insisted on this and Iwelcome this clear recognition by members of theCouncil.

I wish to thank the representative of the RussianFederation — and to apologize for not being able toexpress myself in his language — for mentioning thecurbing of arm flows as an important element. As amatter of fact, I had thought of including it in mystatement, but for the sake of brevity decided to refrainfrom doing so. This is also central to the concerns ofhumanitarian organizations. We welcome the EuropeanUnion initiative and the West African moratorium, whichI think is a model of what can be achieved at thesubregional and regional levels with strong internationalsupport. We must continue a well-coordinated effort andachieve something similar for the Ottawa Convention onanti-personnel landmines.

The representative of Bahrain, later supported by therepresentative of the United Kingdom, asked me whatconcrete steps could be taken to protect humanitarianworkers. First of all, let me thank the representative ofMalaysia for repeating here a statement he made at thehumanitarian segment of the Economic and SocialCouncil last year on the need, perhaps, to better recognize

24


the sacrifices made by humanitarian workers, particularlythose who have lost their lives in action. I thank him forthat and I can assure him that, since he last spoke at thehumanitarian segment of the Economic and Social Council,we have been working hard and the Secretary-Generalhimself has decided to pay personal attention to this.

Obviously, as in peacekeeping operations, thecooperation and consent of the parties are essential but, aswe remarked, seldom present. As the Ambassador ofBahrain indicated, in extreme circumstances, in extremeconditions of insecurity, the only choice humanitarianagencies have is to suspend and withdraw, although clearlywe wish to avoid such decisions from having to be taken.Therefore, deterrence is essential, which is why wewelcome statements, such as those made by therepresentative of the United States and others, that the 1994Convention on the Safety of United Nations and AssociatedPersonnel must be broadened and strengthened. I have alsospoken of the role of the International Criminal Court inproviding us with a modicum of deterrence by includingsuch attacks against humanitarian personnel in its purview.

Other active protection mechanisms are, obviously,peacekeeping operations, whether United Nations,multinational or others, including verysui generisarrangements, such as the United Nations guards innorthern Iraq or, indeed, the Zairian contingent for securityin refugee camps in eastern Zaire, which was also entrustedwith providing humanitarian workers and supplies withprotection.

The role of the Security Council is also essential, asnoted by Namibia and others. I must say, that therepresentative of Namibia alluded to a point I made onlyyesterday, in connection with Angola, and I welcome verymuch that support. Local arrangements are also essential,and I wanted to point out that we have, to the extentpossible, worked out practical agreements, such as thesecurity protocol signed with the Taliban movement inIslamabad at the end of October of last year, and indeedanother such security agreement, signed with theGovernment of the Sudan and the Sudanese People’sLiberation Movement at a technical meeting held in Romelast December. These, we hope, will increase our ability toensure a security regime on the ground.

I was also asked by the Ambassador of Bahrain whatthe new obstacles are to humanitarian work. I mentioned afew. So did he. Financing is one, and he asked me whatthe gap is between needs and contributions. The gap lastyear was about 50 per cent globally, although some

operations, such as those in the Sudan and the formerYugoslavia were financed up to 80 or 82 per cent, whileothers, such as in Tajikistan, were financed up to only 23per cent. This year, the 1999 consolidated appeals haveglobally been reduced by one third as an expression ofour realism and also of our expectation that what isavailable in terms of humanitarian assistance will actuallycome forward. So we very much hope that this reductionin the overall humanitarian budget for 1999 will bringabout greater generosity on the part of the donorcommunity — without forgetting the generosity of hostcountries, whose contribution is seldom acknowledged.

Regarding access, I think I described that in myintroduction, but I wish to welcome the statement by thePermanent Representative of the Gambia supporting ourcall for minimal guarantees, as he also did yesterday in adifferent debate. Long and protracted conflicts and thesearch for political solutions is another obstacle tohumanitarian work. It is practically impossible forhumanitarian personnel in humanitarian operations touphold impartiality and to be perceived as impartial whenconflicts are prolonged for so many years. This is one ofour major dilemmas, the only answer to which is,obviously, greater efforts in terms of prevention and earlyresolution of conflicts.

The representative of the United Kingdom asked mewhat could be done to support the development of civilsociety and greater cohesion and cooperation amongagencies, particularly as conflicts die down. Obviously, anearly strategy which, in Afghanistan we have called, asmembers know, a strategic framework — although itcame belatedly in that case — might be the answer. Ibelieve that member States now strongly support thisapproach, as did the Permanent Representative of Franceand others.

I think the integration here and the consultations inthe Secretariat with our colleagues in peacekeepingoperations and political affairs are excellent, as they arewith our colleagues in the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme and, it goes without saying, with humanitarianagencies. But we need to broaden such coordination andconsultations to include other actors, not least theinternational financial institutions. As the Council knows,the Deputy Secretary-General is considering applying thestrategic framework approach to new in-conflict or post-conflict transitional situations from conflict to peace. Oneof the options is, in fact, Sierra Leone, where a lot needsto be done and where we must act now, as in that countrywe are back, unfortunately, to square one. I also welcome

25


what the Permanent Representative of Brazil and ourPresident stated about the role of the Economic and SocialCouncil and its humanitarian segment in bringing about thiscohesive approach, in particular in post-conflict situations.

I think I have mentioned a few ideas on how toimprove protection to refugee camps, such as the role ofnational authorities. One example is the support that theOffice of the United Nations High Commissioner forRefugees (UNHCR) has provided the TanzanianGovernment, and its Ministry of Home Affairs in particular,in improving its capacity to ensure the strictly humanitariannature of Burundian refugee camps in north-westernTanzania. The Zairian contingent on security and camps ineastern Zaire in 1994, 1995, and 1996 is another exampleof what can be done to provide training and financialsupport to local forces. Peacekeeping operations andmultinational forces would also be welcome, but, as therepresentative of France remarked, they cannot always becounted upon, as was the case in eastern Zaire with themultinational force approved by this very Council, butwhich never saw the light of day.

Finally, one important element in reply to the UnitedKingdom is strategies to counter disinformation. We havedeveloped those in the humanitarian community, but I mustsay that they are not always effective when the grip, thepsychological grip, exercised by criminal elements thatcontrol refugee populations is more powerful than the truthwe try to provide them with.

There was a question from the representative of theUnited States on the situation in the Democratic Republicof the Congo. As members know, there have been ups anddowns in the situation in Kinshasa, and the situation inKisangani is dire. In the south, Angolan refugees keeppouring in, and UNHCR has great difficulties in copingwith the problem. And we have the situation in the east,where refugees remaining from the dispersion of the camppopulations in 1996 and 1997 — refugees, as distinct fromcriminals, from génocidairesand from members of theinterahamweand of the Rwandese Armed Forces — thesepeople are still in need of international protection, as areothers who have entered eastern Zaire in recent months aswell.

We also have populations of internally displacedpersons fleeing discriminatory treatment and, indeed,persecution on both sides. They need support. We havebeen discussing this with President Kabila and hisGovernment, and my deputy, in fact, is there today. Wehope to obtain the explicit agreement of the Government of

the Democratic Republic of the Congo to provide supportfor the needy in rebel-controlled areas, using the territoryof Tanzania, because it is much easier from a logisticalpoint of view and much cheaper. I shall report back to theCouncil on the success of those talks.

I can only say, as far as the Great Lakes region isconcerned, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo inparticular, that what we need is not a humanitariancoordinated response — we have a plan of action for theDemocratic Republic of the Congo which we will try toimplement in coming weeks — what we need is progressin the Lusaka political process, to which the Secretary-General, and, indeed, Council members themselves paypriority attention, leading to a ceasefire and all that shouldfollow in terms of bringing stability, tolerance andreconciliation to that area.

(spoke in French)

The Permanent Representative of France askedwhether new rules of international law might be neededin order to fill the gaps that are of concern to us today. Iwould like to say, and I hope I am not misinterpreting mycolleagues in the Red Cross Movement, and in theInternational Committee of the Red Cross in particular, bysaying that the current instruments and the existingconventions, those of 1949 and 1951, the Organization ofAfrican Unity Convention on refugees, the GenocideConvention, and the Convention on the Rights of theChild obviously could and should be improved. But thereis always a risk, and often when one tries to fill gaps ininternational law there is a risk of opening the door to aweakening or an erosion of existing law.

Thus, the current priority of the Red CrossMovement, and our own priority, is to strengthen respectand to find ways to ensure respect for existing norms.This was emphasized by the representative of Gabon andother speakers. Perhaps the best opportunity to obtain thiscommitment to existing instruments will be theInternational Conference of the Red Cross and RedCrescent, which is to be held in Geneva next November.That could be the most important event of 1999, and weall want to contribute to it, starting with today’s debate.

(spoke in English)

I would like to thank the representative of Canada inparticular for his suggestion that a thorough study by theSecurity Council of its role in ensuring the protection ofcivilian populations, which is central to our concerns, be

26


given priority attention by members of the Council. This isimportant, as I have just said, in creating momentum for theInternational Conference of the Red Cross and RedCrescent, which will be held next November in Geneva.

We welcome what the representative of theNetherlands stated, i.e., that there is a dominant role forhumanitarian concerns in the Security Council’s agenda.Nothing, I would suggest, is more logical. Peace andsecurity are about ensuring order and ethics in internationalrelations for the good of humanity and for the prevention ofconflict. That is to say, to make humanitarianism, as such,unnecessary, redundant and, hopefully, anachronistic.

You may count on us as your servants to make theseemingly impossible a reality.

I thank the representative of the United Kingdom forstating that verbal moral indignation is important but thatit is definitely not enough; and Brazil for reminding usthat the Security Council’s collective moral responsibilityis aimed at results. As the Ambassador of Sloveniastated — and I fully share this comment — please helpus make sure that the evil does not prevail.

The President(interpretation from Spanish): I thankUnder-Secretary-General Vieira de Mello for hiscomments and responses.

I think that all would agree with me that this hasbeen a very interesting meeting. The presence of so manyMember States, in addition to the members of theCouncil, is an illustration of this, as is the amount of timewe have very productively dedicated to it.

There are no further speakers inscribed on my list.The Security Council has thus concluded the present stageof its consideration of the item on its agenda.

The meeting rose at 1 p.m.

27

Documents

Security Council 396865BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C...Security Council 3968th meeting Fifty-fourth year 21 January 1999 than was ever before the case. This is a major achievement of humankind