A/67/PV.40 General Assembly

Before we proceed, I would like to consult members with regard to our consideration of sub-item (h) of agenda item 121, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Council of Europe”. Members will recall that, pursuant to paragraph 7 of the annex contained in resolution 55/285, of 7 September 2001, “A joint debate shall be held on the cooperation item, during which all or some aspects of cooperation between the United Nations and regional and other organizations may be addressed”. I have been informed that a request has been made that sub-item (h) be taken up separately at a later date to be announced. May I take it that the Assembly agrees to take up that sub-item accordingly?

Before we proceed, I would like to consult members with regard to our consideration of sub-item (j) of agenda item 121, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. Members will recall that, pursuant to paragraph 7 of the annex contained in resolution 55/285, of 7 September 2001, “A joint debate shall be held on the cooperation item, during which all or some aspects of cooperation between the United Nations and regional and other organizations may be addressed”. I have also been informed that a request has been made that sub-item (j) be taken up separately at a later date to be announced. May I take it that the Assembly agrees to take up that sub-item accordingly?

I now give the floor to Mr. Tibor Tóth, the Executive Secretary of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test- Ban Treaty Organization, to present the report of the Preparatory Commission.

This year marks the fifteenth year since the establishment of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization. As the Executive Secretary of the Commission, I am here today not to read out my prepared statement, which has been circulated, but rather to talk more freely about the past and what is ahead of us. I hope that members will not only listen but also hear what I will be saying. In that respect, I am not just reporting on the period behind us but, from the bottom of my heart, I would like to thank the 183 States members of our organization, which is nearly as many as the membership of the United Nations. I would also like to thank the bodies and organizations of the United Nations, as well as the Secretary-General, for their historic support in the past and, hopefully, unwavering support in the future. The Member States have not been just good-weather companions of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. They have shown themselves to be marathon runners in the course towards its implementation. From the early years, when President Nehru of India first spoke in 1954 of the goal of a comprehensive nuclear- test-ban agreement, they have believed in silencing nuclear explosions and continue to do so. They believed in the cause in 1958 when there was a three-year moratorium that provided a window of opportunity. Unfortunately, that was shattered in 1961 and 1962 by a frenzy of nuclear tests. There were more explosions in those 17 months than in the previous 17 years. It is not surprising that that frenzy of nuclear tests led to the Cuban missile crisis, which is a euphemism because it was, in fact, a new marathon of global security. Member States upheld their belief in the cause of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty in 1962, when, on 28 October, the last day of the Cuban missile crisis, it was acknowledged that such a treaty was possible. It had not been possible for eight years but that day it became possible and imperative. Although we had hoped for more, Member States supported its start as a partial test-ban treaty. Member States believed in the spirit of the Treaty in 1968, when its essence was enshrined in the preamble of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. From 1978 onward, they maintained that belief for the nearly 20 years that the Treaty was being negotiated, before it became open for signature. Member States continued to run the course following the adoption of the Treaty in 1966. They persevered and prevailed in 1998, when two series of nuclear tests were carried out, and again in 1999, when a major Power failed to ratify the Treaty. They continued to believe in the Treaty in the first half of 2000, when the organization faced financial and political challenges and, in 2006 and 2009, when the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea carried out unnecessary testing of both the norm and the system. Member States expressed their unshakeable faith, while proving not blind to the challenges. On the contrary, notwithstanding the challenges, they continued to believe in the cause. What all that perseverance achieved is now unfolding in front of us. From 1945 onward, each decade witnessed an average of 500 explosions. The past 10 years saw only two tests, which, for all of us, is two too many. However, Member States jointly succeeded in putting the genie of nuclear explosions back into the bottle. That genie used to have 2,000 ugly heads. It must not be let out and can be sealed in by the ratification of the eight annex 2 countries, which will bring the Treaty into force. I would also like to mention that Member States have turned the grand design into reality. First, they established the no-test norm. They created a near-universal membership around that norm, a membership that is more than the mathematical sum of all of the countries belonging to the arrangement. It is a democracy of all, with all equal with regard to obligations to be verified and equal in the right to verify those obligations. Member States also turned another aspect of the grand design of the system into a reality. They set up a monitoring system of approximately 300 stations, creating what I call a round-the-globe system owing to its size, range and seamlessly operating technologies. They have invested $1 billion and 10,000 scientists to operate the system and make it happen. It has become the largest and, for me and many of us, the greatest joint venture in verification and, I would add, even beyond verification. It is a one-for-all and all-for-one verification. Even the smallest nation, one with no army, can participate in the debate, as was the case in 2009 with Costa Rica, sitting as a non-permanent member on the Security Council and contributing to the discussion of North Korea’s breach of the no-test norm. The system that members established has also proved itself at tragic moments, such as the dark days of tsunamis and earthquakes, and in many complex disasters, providing a return on investment to citizens. But the international community has created that norm and that system to be used — to be used to delineate a clear line between what is peaceful and what is not peaceful, to be used as a benchmark of behaviour in non-proliferation and disarmament, to be used as a catalyst to generate deeper cuts in nuclear arsenals, to be used as a glue for the non-proliferation regime and for confidence- and transparency-building measures, subregionally, regionally or globally, and for the so- much-needed insurance policies in subregions of the Asia-Pacific or the Middle East. We know that that tool is missing from the security toolbox. We need more than a hammer in the toolbox. The lessons of the Cuban crisis should not be forgotten today, 50 years later. It will be too late if we discover one minute — or more precisely, one second — before midnight on the doomsday clock that cooperative security is fatally missing from our toolbox. Today, for nations or subregions, no seconds would be available to rectify that deficit. The international community has created innovative ways to overcome the gravity preventing us from moving towards entry into force. We know that there are too many tasks and too few hands. To overcome that, we have created an open source of growing universalization and verification, supported by mass collaboration in science and technology through scientific conferences and joint research and underpinned with unprecedented mass education — mass, open, online-course education — whereby this year the organization enrolled four times more people than the size of the organization itself. To translate that into United Nations numbers, that would mean educating half a million people a year. I am sure that, 15 years after the creation of the Commission, the international community will pledge to overcome the last obstacles impeding entry into force. The one and only force that can remove those obstacles is statesmanship. Allow me to cite President Kennedy’s words from his 1962 space effort speech: “We choose to go to the moon in this decade, and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” Those words are as relevant to today as they were 50 years ago, now at a time when we once again must overcome through statesmanship what is holding us back.

I now give the floor to the Director- General of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, His Excellency Mr. Ahmet Üzümcü, to present the report of the Organization.

Please accept, Sir, my congratulations on your election as President of the General Assembly at its sixty-seventh session. The annual report of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) on its activities and programmes and on the implementation of the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) in 2010 and the draft report for 2011 have been circulated (see A/67/209). I will summarize the salient aspects of our work, which over the years has made the OPCW one of the most successful examples of multilateralism. I will also call attention to the need to sustain our collective efforts to ensure that the organization will adapt so as to deal effectively with future challenges. Fifteen years ago a new chapter was opened in the history of disarmament. The first-ever treaty to establish a complete ban on an entire category of weapons of mass destruction under international verification had come into effect. As a legal document, the Chemical Weapons Convention was in itself a remarkable achievement. The complex machinery and mechanics of verification included in the Convention were then transformed into an operational regime. With the hard work of scores of men and women, supported by the political will consistently shown by States parties, we stand today poised to realize the vision of a world that is free from the threat of chemical weapons. This year we commemorated the fifteenth anniversary of the entry into force of the Convention. Among the various events organized during the year, we celebrated that landmark here in New York last month, at the OPCW high-level meeting. A large number of States parties participated, in testimony to their steadfast commitment to the goals of the Convention. The meeting also underscored the value that the international community attaches to the Chemical Weapons Convention as one of the most successful multilateral instruments in disarmament and non-proliferation. I would especially like to express my appreciation to the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Ban Ki-moon, for his support of the event. His participation symbolized the continued support of the United Nations for the Convention, and it added strength to our mission to rid the world permanently of the threat of chemical weapons. The theme of the OPCW high-level meeting was “Fifteen years of the Chemical Weapons Convention: celebrating success, committing to the future”. It is not often that a project in disarmament elicits acknowledgments of unqualified success. The members of the international community represented here at the top world body deserve full appreciation for their unfailing support for the implementation of the CWC. Another strong symbol of that support is the annual consensus resolution adopted by the General Assembly. As a result of our collective endeavours, the aspiration to a world free of chemical weapons is today closer to realization. In total, nearly 70,000 metric tons of category 1 chemical weapons have been declared by the possessor States. Of that amount, as of 31 October, nearly 55,000 metric tons, or 78 per cent, had been destroyed under strict verification by the Technical Secretariat of the OPCW. Given the large quantity of toxic agents, the high costs and the human and environmental considerations involved, in certain cases the destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles has proved to be very challenging. The two major possessor States — the Russian Federation and the United States — continue to make progress towards completing the destruction of their respective stockpiles. Libya, which stopped the destruction of its chemical weapon stocks in 2011, is likely to resume it in 2013. Those States, however, were not able to meet the final deadline for the destruction of their chemical weapons. During the sixteenth session of the Conference of States Parties, held last year, States parties agreed on a constructive and forward-looking solution to enable them to continue their destruction activities under conditions of increased transparency and enhanced reporting. In taking that decision, the Conference took into account the steadfast commitment those States parties had shown towards the complete destruction of their declared stockpiles. I have no doubt that they will also fully respect the spirit of that decision and will steadily move to complete the task in the shortest time possible. The destruction of chemical weapons abandoned by Japan on the territory of China continued throughout the year. Both China and Japan reported that the mobile destruction facility in Nanjing had completed the destruction of over 35,000 items. China and Japan continue to work together to facilitate the redeployment of the mobile destruction facility from Nanjing to Wuhan and are preparing for test operations in Shijiazhuang. Preparations are also ongoing for the start of the excavation and recovery operations in Haerbaling. Our verification efforts related to the prevention of the re-emergence of chemical weapons are continuing uninterrupted. We have completed more than 2,300 industry inspections, and we aim to gradually increase the focus, the intensity and the quality of our efforts in that area. Over 98 per cent of the world’s chemical industry is located on the territory of States parties to the Convention. We recognize and applaud the support of the world’s chemical industry for the objectives of the Convention. Such support boosts the Convention’s confidence-building function. The negotiators of the Chemical Weapons Convention provided States parties with a four-pillared foundation. Beyond the two pillars of disarmament and non-proliferation, States parties joining the Convention agree to provide one another with assistance and protection against chemical weapons and are committed to promoting the peaceful uses of chemistry under the umbrella of international cooperation activities. Between the Convention’s entry into force and the end of 2011, there were 3,800 beneficiaries of the OPCW’s international cooperation programmes. In the area of assistance and protection against chemical weapons, the OPCW Technical Secretariat organizes courses and workshops to provide training to Government experts and emergency response units. The purpose of such programmes is to build and develop national and regional capacities and emergency response systems against the use, or threat of use, of chemical weapons. More than 2,200 participants have so far benefited from those programmes. While those are achievements for which our States parties can rightly take credit, we must also remain cognizant of the challenges that lie ahead. They are organizational as well as strategic. Thus far, a major part of our resources has been dedicated to verifying the destruction of chemical weapons. The significant progress already registered in that area implies a progressive phasing out of that activity. That will impact our human resource requirements and force internal changes in the Secretariat. The task ahead of us is to ensure that we are operationally effective and that our ability to respond to contingencies is unaffected. Such contingencies include the responsibility to conduct challenge inspections at short notice and investigations of alleged use of chemical weapons when required. An overarching objective for all States parties is to ensure that the Convention will remain relevant and effective in accomplishing all its goals, and responsive to future challenges. The Convention was negotiated nearly two decades ago. Since then, science and technology have seen major advances. It is therefore crucial that we take stock of the current state of the science and production technologies that are covered by the Convention and adapt our industry verification regime accordingly. The Scientific Advisory Board of the OPCW is mandated to assess relevant scientific and technological developments and advise the Director- General on those subjects. I am confident that it will play its part in creating the necessary bridge between science and policy. Our industry verification regime, together with data-monitoring of trade in relevant chemicals, is the backbone of the Convention’s non-proliferation objectives. Reinforcing the regime is necessary to maintain confidence in the Convention’s effectiveness against the re-emergence of chemical weapons. Continually refining our industry verification efforts and making them more intense, with a focus on facilities most relevant to the object and purpose of the Convention, remain a crucial undertaking for the CWC community. Another important aspect that requires us to remain focused on industry verification is the rapid evolution of the global chemical industry. Developments that must be carefully followed are increasing overlaps and possible convergence between the chemical and biological sciences, the integration of chemical engineering into the life sciences, and the fusion between them and information technology. New technologies, such as nanotechnology and the creation of new chemical manufacturing methodologies, must be kept under study and review, for therein lies the potential for abuse. Together with industry verification, the monitoring of imports and exports of relevant chemicals forms an essential plank of the Convention’s non-proliferation regime. The CWC requires States parties to control and report annually to the OPCW on all exports and imports of scheduled chemicals above certain thresholds. In certain cases, trade is restricted to States that are not parties to the Convention. With the information received from States parties, the OPCW implements a monitoring regime for the exports and imports of scheduled chemicals around the world. Such monitoring is an important aspect of the implementation of the Convention and will remain crucial in coming years. States parties are expected to reinforce their domestic rules and procedures as part of an enhanced CWC enforcement effort. However, industry verification and trade controls are not the only means of promoting non-proliferation. Deterrence against the possible acquisition, development and misuse of toxic chemicals and their precursors needs to be firmly and efficiently established within the domestic jurisdiction of Member States. They have to ensure that the prohibitions under the Convention are translated into domestic rules applicable to any individual or other entities operating within their jurisdiction or control. We still have a considerable way to go before we reach the stage where all States parties will establish the necessary tools for effective domestic implementation of the Convention’s prohibitions and provisions. What is noteworthy, however, is that the institutional support provided by the OPCW through a variety of support programmes is having a positive impact on its States parties. The role of the European Union and other donors in supporting various programmes designed to improve the implementation of the Convention worldwide has been crucial in that endeavour. Another issue that is vital to the CWC’s ultimate success is universality. With 188 members, the Convention has come close to but not has yet attained full universality. A few days ago the Secretary- General and I jointly addressed letters to the heads of State or Government of the eight countries that are not yet parties to the Convention. We have stressed how imperative it is that they join the Convention as part of the internationally endorsed goal of creating a chemical-weapon-free world. That shared goal has motivated every other nation to accept the obligations enshrined in the Convention. Whether they are States possessing chemical weapons or those with nothing to declare, all have expended energy and precious resources in demonstrating their commitment to this vision. It is naturally disconcerting to them that there remain a few who choose not to participate in this project, which is of great significance in terms of both security and the noble humanitarian impulse it is designed to serve. It therefore seems natural that concerns should be raised regarding the possible continued existence of chemical weapons in certain parts of the world after the declared possessors have completely destroyed their known stockpiles. A recent declaration by a country in the Middle East concerning possession of chemical weapons flew in face of the universally accepted international norm that regards any use or threat of use of chemical weapons as unacceptable. In the Middle East, three countries are not members of the Convention. In accordance with an important decision adopted by the 2010 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, a conference on establishing a zone free from weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East was scheduled for this year. The OPCW has been asked to contribute to that process. As a first step, we have provided our written input to the facilitator of that effort. We remain prepared to contribute further as required. It is my hope that that endeavour will serve to focus attention on the issue of the Convention’s universality in that delicate region. We will also continue our efforts with other remaining non-members, a task in which we can be considerably helped by those States parties that enjoy friendly and cooperative relations in the regions to which the remaining countries belong. It is expected that in five years 99 per cent of all declared chemical weapon stockpiles will have been destroyed. That fact, together with the challenges I have just enumerated, will require a refocusing of our resources and efforts in order to ensure that the Convention will remain a bulwark against the re-emergence of chemical weapons. At the same time, we have to be responsive to the expectations of States parties, which are cognizant of the new security environment and the challenges it creates. The threat posed by non-State actors is a major concern. The OPCW enjoys a number of advantages in its ability to offer assistance to States parties dealing with such threats. The discipline of a comprehensive and well-functioning regime against chemical weapons is accompanied by knowledge and expertise that is either available with us or is accessible. Our work with States parties and their national authorities creates channels of communication and networks that can facilitate national efforts in the larger context of anti-terrorism efforts or the specific one of chemical safety and security issues — an area in which the number of our programmes is progressively increasing. Security in the face of the wider notion of a chemical threat is also an area where OPCW’s cooperation with the United Nations manifests itself in concrete terms, including our support for United Nations efforts to implement Security Council resolution 1540 (2004) and for the work of the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, to name just two important areas. The OPCW also recently concluded with the United Nations a Supplementary Arrangement to its Relationship Agreement. The Arrangement establishes the necessary modalities for conducting an investigation of alleged use of chemical weapons in a State not party to the Convention, if requested by the Secretary-General. The third Review Conference of the Chemical Weapons Convention, which will be held in April of next year, will provide the OPCW with an important opportunity to continue to refine its priorities, goals and objectives and to chart a course for the mid- to long-term future. Given the transition that awaits the organization, the Review Conference obviously assumes critical importance. I am confident that the General Assembly, where most OPCW States parties are represented, will continue to extend its full support to our continuing efforts to ensure that the Convention will forever remain a solid barrier against the re-emergence or use of chemical weapons anywhere in the world.

I now give the floor to the representative of Kazakhstan to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.5.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the States members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), namely, the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation and the Republic of Tajikistan. The CSTO member States support the adoption of draft resolution A/67/L.5, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Collective Security Treaty Organization”. Its adoption will contribute to further strengthening and developing cooperation between our two organizations for the benefit of peace and stability. We believe that the United Nations is the basic multilateral structure for promoting international relations and equitable international cooperation. It has the universal legitimacy and necessary powers to adequately respond to the diversity of contemporary challenges and threats. An integral feature of the current evolving stage of international relations is the growing influence of regional organizations. We are convinced that in the modern world the effective work of regional structures is an important component in creating a new global architecture. Affiliated associations and organizations, including the CSTO, make a significant contribution to those processes within the Commonwealth of Independent States. The Collective Security Treaty Organization plays a fundamental role in ensuring peace and stability in the areas of its responsibilities. Having been established as a political and legal foundation for mutual assistance to address external aggression, the CSTO for the past 20 years has qualitatively changed and become a critical factor in the formation of the collective security system in Europe and Asia. Today, the CSTO is a multifunctional structure with the potential to respond adequately to a wide range of threats and challenges in the modern world. The CSTO makes a significant contribution to combating terrorism, illicit drug trafficking, organized crime and irregular migration, including with a view to consolidating security and stability in Central Asia. Those activities, undertaken within the CSTO framework by member States, are in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations. We note with satisfaction the progressive development of cooperation between the United Nations and the Collective Security Treaty Organization. In December 2004, the CSTO was granted observer status in the General Assembly. The importance of cooperation between the United Nations and the CSTO was underscored in resolution 64/256, adopted in March 2010, on cooperation between the United Nations and the CSTO, and was again expressed in the signing of the joint declaration on cooperation between our organizations. In 2011 there was a systematic series of meetings between the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Secretary-General of the CSTO. The close joint efforts of the CSTO with the United Nations Regional Centre for Preventive Diplomacy, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime point to further mutual support and progress. The CSTO has also been involved in implementing the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The signing of the memorandum of understanding between the CSTO secretariat and the United Nations Department of Peacekeeping Operations, in September 2010, is another major contribution to increasing solidarity between the United Nations and the Collective Security Treaty Organization. That document provides an opportunity for practical cooperation in promoting peace. We are grateful to all the Member States that participated in drafting and supporting draft resolution A/67/L.5. Adopting it by consensus will provide an important impetus to further enhancing the comprehensive cooperation between the two Organizations.

I now give the floor to the representative of Ukraine to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.6.

On behalf of my colleagues, the representatives of the 18 member States of the Central European Initiative (CEI), and on behalf of sponsors of the draft resolution — Albania, the Czech Republic, Italy, the Republic of Moldova and Montenegro — I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.6, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Central European Initiative”. I would like to thank representatives for their input and to welcome the personal contribution of the Secretary-General of the Central European Initiative, Ambassador Gerhard Pfanzelter, as well as the Central European Initiative secretariat for their valuable assistance in the drafting of this document. The year 2012 coincides with the Ukrainian presidency of the Central European Initiative. We consider the draft resolution to be a further step after our organization was granted observer status by resolution 66/111, of 9 December 2011. Ukraine and the CEI member States attach high importance to promoting regional cooperation within the framework of the CEI and in all the fields of its operations, and we underline its importance for cooperation with the greater Baltic, Danube, Adriatic and Black Sea regions. The rationale behind the provisions of the draft resolution is that CEI endeavours to cooperate with all major international organizations and institutions. At present, we have working ties with more than 15 international and regional organizations. The Initiative cooperates with the United Nations, its special entities and other relevant international organizations. The Initiative acknowledges its commitment in contributing to a wide spectrum of United Nations specialized programmes and initiatives, as well as the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals at the regional and global levels. The Initiative intends to maintain its current momentum and to intensify further its communication and collaborative action with the United Nations on issues of common interest. On behalf of the CEI member States, I would like to convey to the General Assembly our joint plea to support by consensus at its sixty-seventh session the draft resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Central European Initiative.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Netherlands to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.7.

I have the honour to take the floor to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.7, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons”. The Netherlands, which is host country to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), does so on behalf of approximately 32 sponsors. The aim of this biennial draft resolution is to highlight the importance of continued cooperation between the United Nations and the OPCW. The OPCW contributes to international peace and security by verifying the destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles, works to prevent the re-emergence of chemical weapons through industry inspections, and promotes the peaceful use of chemistry for activities not prohibited by the Chemical Weapons Convention, through, inter alia, international cooperation and assistance. At present, 188 States are party to the Chemical Weapons Convention, and thus are members of the OPCW. There is good hope that further steps towards universalization will be taken in the near future. This year, the OPCW celebrated its fifteenth anniversary, with both a commemoration in The Hague and a high- level meeting here at the United Nations on 1 October. In April next year, the third Review Conference of the Chemical Weapons Convention will be convened in The Hague. The draft resolution makes reference to those events, in addition to taking note of the annual report of the Organization. I express the hope that, as on previous occasions, the draft resolution will be adopted by consensus.

I now give the floor to the representative of Costa Rica to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.8.

It is an honour for Costa Rica, as current Chair of the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO), to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.8, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization“. The aim of the draft resolution is to ensure that this important item remains on the agenda of the General Assembly, given the leading role that the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test- Ban Treaty (CTBT) verification regime has played in nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. The CTBT has promoted a significant increase in international peace and security by prohibiting nuclear testing and the development of nuclear weapons. In the 15 years since the CTBT was opened for signature and ratification, 183 States have signed and 157 have ratified it. That degree of support can be considered a true success in comparison to the majority of treaties. However, the CTBT has still not entered into force, as eight annex 2 States have not yet ratified it. We hope that, in the near future, the international community will be able to attain the much-desired goal of its entry into force and that the Treaty’s legally binding provisions will become reality. We have a duty to make all necessary efforts to achieve that end. In that context, cooperation between the United Nations and the Preparatory Commission for the CTBTO is essential. Disarmament and non-proliferation are essential priorities of Costa Rica’s foreign policy. We therefore welcome the development of the near-operational CTBT verification regime. We would like to acknowledge the intensive work and the achievements attained by the Provisional Technical Secretariat of the Preparatory Commission and the leadership of Tibor Tóth, Executive Secretary for the past seven and a half years. Mr. Tóth will be stepping down in July next year, but we are certain that both his legacy and the memory of his tireless efforts will be upheld. We wish every success to his successor, Mr. Lassina Zerbo of Burkina Faso. Costa Rica thanks delegations for their support in co-sponsoring the draft resolution. We hope it will be adopted by consensus as a clear sign of the commitment of the Member States to the CTBT and its objectives.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Russian Federation to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.9/Rev.1.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the States members of the Eurasian Economic Community — the Republic of Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Republic of Tajikistan and the Russian Federation — to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.9/Rev.1, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Eurasian Economic Community”. The draft resolution is based on the relevant resolutions of the sixty-third and sixty-fifth sessions of the General Assembly and reflects the progress made in developing integrative processes within the Eurasian space. Since 1 July 2011, there has been a fully operational customs union for Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, and on 1 January 2012, 17 agreements entered into force establishing the single economic space. Its main task is to ensure the free movement of services, capital and the work force. On 1 February 2012, the Eurasian Economic Commission began its work as the single permanent regulatory body of the customs union and of the single economic space. The significant step was the adoption by Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, on 18 November 2011, of the Declaration on Eurasian Economic Integration, a kind of road map for further integration and cooperation in the form of a customs union and a single economic space. That lays down the long-term goals for Eurasian economic integration, including the declaration on establishing the Eurasian Economic Union by 1 January 2015. Having gained status as an observer in the General Assembly in 2003, the Eurasian Economic Community cooperates closely with the United Nations system on most of its mandates and areas of activity. In that regard, the draft resolution notes the progress made by the Eurasian Economic Community in cooperating with the Eurasian Economic Commission, the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, the United Nations Development Programme, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. The States members of the Eurasian Economic Community attach great importance to regional economic integration based on the rules and principles of the World Trade Organization, and support further efforts to strengthen mutually beneficial and supportive cooperation with the United Nations in order to address key issues being dealt with by our community. We would like to thank all delegations that participated in the work on the draft resolution, and we invite Member States to co-sponsor it. We look forward to the adoption of the draft resolution by consensus.

I now give the floor to the representative of the Sudan to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.10.

As Chair of the Group of Arab States for the month of November, it is my honour to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.10, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States”, on behalf of the following countries: Algeria, Bahrain, the Comoros, Djibouti, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, Palestine, Qatar, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the Sudan, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen. The draft resolution before the General Assembly emphasizes the importance of strengthening cooperation between the United Nations system and its specialized agencies, on the one hand, and the League of Arab States, on the other, aimed at realizing the shared goals and objectives of both organizations. Similarly, the draft resolution states that the General Assembly welcomes the Security Council’s convening of a high-level meeting on 26 September (see S/PV.6841) that emphasized the value of activities consistent with Chapter VIII of the Charter; it also welcomes the presidential statement (S/PRST/2012/20) that the Council issued on that occasion in support of the intention of the United Nations and the League of Arab States to strengthen their cooperation across a broad agenda of multilateral concerns. The draft resolution also contains a request by the Assembly that the United Nations and the League of Arab States review their existing cooperation mechanisms and put forward recommendations and proposals for the purpose of strengthening and updating those mechanisms. I call on the General Assembly to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.10 without a vote and unanimously.

I now give the floor to the representative of Belize to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.11.

Speaking for Belize in its capacity as Chair of the Latin American Council of the Latin American and Caribbean Economic System (SELA), I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.11, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Latin American and Caribbean Economic System”. I wish, first of all, to make an oral correction to the draft resolution. The reference in the second preambular paragraph to “the Latin American Economic System” should read “the Latin American and Caribbean Economic System”. Since the submission of the draft resolution, the Bahamas, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Georgia, Guatemala, Jamaica and Nicaragua have joined its list of sponsors. The Latin American and Caribbean Economic System enjoys a membership of 28 Latin American and Caribbean countries, and provides a forum for those countries to consult and coordinate with a view to aligning their positions and strategies on economic issues in international bodies or with third countries, as well as to consult on cooperation and integration among the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. SELA has counted on cooperation with the United Nations as a means to deliver on its regional agenda. In that regard, SELA has benefited, since its inception in 1975, from collaboration with multiple United Nations entities, including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, UNESCO and, recently, the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Formalizing the relationship with the United Nations and its agencies has enabled SELA and its member States to create a dynamic and productive cooperation framework. The draft resolution before us reflects the implementation status of the cooperation agreement between the United Nations and SELA for the period 2008 through 2012. The types of cooperation that have taken place between SELA and the United Nations system range from participation by representatives of various United Nations entities as speakers or guests at SELA’s meetings and assemblies to joint sponsorship and development of regional programmes, including the UNDP-UNCTAD-SELA Joint Regional Programme for Trade, Investment and Development Issues in Latin America and the Caribbean for the biennium 2010-2012. Over the past four years, United Nations agencies have participated in 78 regional meetings organized by SELA on issues such as health, regional integration, trade, development cooperation, responses to natural disaster, small and medium-sized enterprises, public- private partnerships, cyberlegislation and information technologies. The most recent of those meetings, one on regional cooperation in the area of food security, which was held last month in Belize, included the participation of the FAO together with the Pérez-Guerrero Trust Fund of the Group of 77. SELA looks forward to continued cooperation with the United Nations system and appreciates the support of the General Assembly for the further intensification and strengthening of its relationship with the United Nations. In conclusion, my delegation thanks all Member States for supporting this draft resolution so as to enable its adoption without a vote.

I now give the floor to the representative of Turkey to introduce draft resolutions A/67/L.12 and A/67/L.13.

Turkey would like to introduce two draft resolutions on regional cooperation, namely, draft resolution A/67/L.12, entitled, “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization”, and draft resolution A/67/L.13, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. Turkey strongly believes that strengthening cooperation between the United Nations and those two organizations will further contribute to addressing regional challenges and achieving sustainable development, while enhancing peace, stability and security. The Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization (BSEC) was launched 20 years ago as a regional initiative, with a vision of promoting peace, stability, dialogue and prosperity in the Black Sea region by means of economic cooperation. It represents a region of 350 million people with a foreign trade capacity of more than $300 billion annually. The greater Black Sea area is the second-largest source of oil and natural gas in the world and has rich proven reserves of minerals. There are ample opportunities for increasing cooperation between BSEC and the United Nations, notably in the main priority areas for Turkey, the current Chair, such as transport, sustainable energy, trade and investment, education, science and technology, as well as in combating organized crime, terrorism, illegal migration and trafficking in human beings, drugs and weapons. The Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) is an intergovernmental organization involving seven Asian and three Eurasian nations. Over the past two decades, it has worked to accelerate the pace of regional development by using existing infrastructure and business links. ECO aims to make full use of available resources in addressing institutional and infrastructure deficits in the region. ECO member States pursue United Nations goals by, among other things, removing trade barriers, promoting intra-regional trade, making effective use of their regional agricultural and industrial potential, and cooperating in combating narcotics. ECO member States are generally pleased with United Nations efforts to extend technical and financial assistance to it and to encourage continued support for it in priority areas, including energy, trade, transportation and drug control. Finally, we would like to thank the sponsors and other Member States for their constructive engagement and cooperation during the informal consultations on the two draft resolutions. We hope that they will be adopted by consensus.

I now give the floor to the representative of Kyrgyzstan to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.15.

At the outset, I would like to express our gratitude to the Secretary-General for his report entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and regional and other organizations” (A/67/280), which gives us good insights into recent developments in the area of cooperation between the United Nations and international organizations, including the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. On behalf of the sponsors representing the member States of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) — China, Kazakhstan, the Russian Federation, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and my own country, Kyrgyzstan — I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/67/L.15, entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization”. The draft resolution is based on the previous General Assembly resolution 65/124, but contains several new elements reflecting the recent activities of the organization as well as the development of its cooperation with the United Nations. The new elements in the preambular part, among others, highlight the following efforts and aspirations of the member States of the SCO: to build the SCO region into a region of lasting peace, friendship, prosperity and harmony; to promote stability and security and to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security; to support the building of a world free of nuclear weapons, including in Central Asia; to promote cooperation in counter-terrorism, including through the Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure of the SCO; to continue to support the Afghan people in their construction of Afghanistan; to address international information security and to promote cooperation with other regional organizations. The new provisions also welcome the memorandum of understanding between the Secretariat of the SCO and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), which seeks to effectively address the production, trade and trafficking of drugs originating in Afghanistan and the protocol on cooperation between UNODC and the SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure. It recognizes the importance of the implementation of the 2011-2016 Anti-Drug Strategy and Action Plan of the SCO as an effective mechanism for regional cooperation in combating drugs. The updated paragraph 1 of the draft resolution acknowledges the important role of the SCO in securing peace and sustainable development, advancing regional cooperation and strengthening good-neighbourliness and mutual trust and takes note of the relevant activities of the SCO. The draft resolution is the result of several rounds of informal consultations conducted by Kyrgyzstan in its capacity as the current Chair of the organization. We would like to take this opportunity to thank all delegations for their active participation and valuable contributions to the text. In conclusion, let me express the sincere hope of the sponsors that the draft resolution will once again be adopted unanimously, as was the case of the resolutions of 2009 and 2010.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the Community of Portuguese-speaking Countries (CPLP), whose member States are Angola, Brazil, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Portugal, Sao Tomé and Principe, Timor-Leste and my own country, Mozambique. I wish to remind members of the General Assembly of the relevance of the Portuguese language in international affairs, unifying 240 million people in eight countries and four continents, and to highlight CPLP’s political commitment to promote the use of Portuguese in international and regional organizations, including the United Nations and its agencies, funds and programmes. We welcome the report of the Secretary-General on the cooperation between the United Nations and the CPLP (see A/67/280), reflecting the positive effects of joint actions that have materialized over the course of the past two years. Resolution 65/139 adopted by the Assembly at its sixty-fifth session in 2010, noted with appreciation that that dynamism also reflects the strengthened partnerships among the member States of the Community and the United Nations, including its agencies. The United Nations system continued to be an important partner, actively pursuing its cooperative ties with our community through concerted political and diplomatic actions. Similarly, that cooperation is expressly visible in several vital areas that contribute greatly to the development of our countries, particularly in the sectors of health, education, agriculture, public administration, and science and technology, among others. As part of its political coordination, the Community and its member States are deeply involved in coordinating efforts with the United Nations and other international partners aimed at restoring respect for human rights, democratic institutions and the rule of law in Guinea-Bissau. In that regard, we recall Security Council resolution 2048 (2012) and the need to harmonize, under the auspices of the United Nations, the positions of the relevant regional and international partners in order to promote Guinea-Bissau’s return to constitutional order through an inclusive political process, to which the CPLP remains fully committed. Bearing in mind the challenges facing the world today and taking into consideration the guidelines established by the United Nations with regard to poverty eradication and the achievement of sustainable development, the CPLP member States have undertaken important initiatives aimed at improving the lives of their citizens. It was in that context that the ninth Conference of Heads of State and Government of the CPLP, which was held in Maputo on 20 July on the theme “The CPLP and the challenges of food security and nutrition,” reaffirmed the commitment of the Community to the implementation of the human right to adequate food. Another important development was the agreement of principles for the establishment of the International Centre for Research in Climate Change for Portuguese-Speaking Countries and Africa, signed in Bragança, Portugal, on 19 November 2010, whose main objective is the promotion of applied research in environmental geosciences within the Community. It was decided that the headquarters of the Centre would be in Cape Verde. Those are very important actions in which CPLP member States would like to seek the involvement of the United Nations system. Allow me to take the opportunity to mention that the CPLP member States will, in the near future, submit to the current session a draft resolution on the “Cooperation between the United Nations and the CPLP”, for which we humbly ask the support of all States Members of the United Nations. I would like to conclude my remarks by reiterating the determination of the CPLP to strengthen its partnership with the United Nations in the pursuit of common objectives, including the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, as well as our commitment to continue to play a positive role in shaping the post-2015 development agenda of the United Nations under the framework reached at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development.

I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the members of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and to join others in thanking the President for convening today’s debate and the Secretary-General for his report (A/67/280). The two years since our last debate on this agenda item have been significant for relations between the members of the Pacific Islands Forum and the United Nations. In 2011, the Pacific Islands Forum celebrated its fortieth anniversary at its annual Forum Leaders meeting in Auckland, New Zealand. Over the past four decades, the Forum has made a profound contribution to regional integration and cooperation and has helped develop a common vision and coordinated action towards achieving sustainable development, poverty alleviation and the maintenance of peace and security in the Pacific. The United Nations has been an important partner in those endeavours, and it is fitting that the fortieth anniversary meeting was also marked by a historic visit to the Forum by the Secretary-General of the United Nations – the first-ever such visit, after four decades of invitations. Forum Leaders are profoundly grateful to the Secretary-General for making the long journey to our region and equally grateful that he also took the time to also visit several other Forum members, including two of the smallest and most vulnerable members of our regional family. To those who have not experienced it at first hand, it is impossible to adequately convey the reality of the challenges of size and isolation and the profound vulnerability faced by the small island developing States in our region. Similarly, it is difficult to explain to those who have not witnessed it the grave and imminent threat already posed by climate change to the livelihoods, the security and indeed the very existence of many Pacific communities. We thank the Secretary- General for taking the time to bear personal witness to those realities and for bringing those experiences back to New York and to the broader United Nations membership. The Secretary-General’s visit was also the setting for the first-ever joint statement between a Secretary- General of the United Nations and Forum Leaders. That statement clearly set out key priorities for Forum States at the United Nations, identified areas for enhanced cooperation and provided a framework for more regular and meaningful high-level engagement between Forum members and the United Nations. In September of this year we witnessed another historic first for United Nations-PIF relations — the first-ever summit between PIF leaders and the Secretary-General of the United Nations in New York. That meeting also included participation by a number of Under-Secretaries-General and the heads of several United Nations agencies active in our region. It concluded with another joint statement, which set out in even greater detail areas in which Forum members would like to deepen our engagement with the United Nations. Many of the issues identified in those discussions in terms of ensuring effective United Nations engagement in our region will be familiar to small States everywhere, not least the challenge of ensuring an adequate and effective United Nations presence on the ground and of promoting coordinated action across the whole United Nations system in a way that is fully aligned with national and regional needs and priorities. Among the other issues identified in those discussions were the difficulties that small States face in trying to meet onerous international reporting obligations and the importance for all Member States, regardless of size, of adequate data and statistics collection as indicators to guide national development efforts. In the coming months, we look forward to working with our United Nations system partners to take those discussions forward and to scheduling another meeting with the Secretary-General to review progress at the earliest opportunity. The challenges faced by Pacific island developing States are severe, but significant strides have been made in recent years in ensuring that a Pacific voice is heard loud and clear on issues of vital importance to Forum members. In addition to our cooperation through the Pacific Islands Forum, many Forum members have worked through groupings such as Pacific small island developing States and the Alliance of Small Island States to ensure that our region, regarded by many as being at the edge of the world but by us as home, maintains a voice in global discussions that have a profound impact on our collective fate. We will ensure that the voice of the Pacific continues to be heard loud and clear.

I thank the President for convening today’s important debate on the cooperation between the United Nations and regional and other organizations. In my capacity as the representative of Ethiopia and speaking on behalf of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), I would also like to extend my gratitude to the Secretary-General for his informative report on this agenda item (A/67/280). In recent years, we have witnessed an encouraging development in the increased cooperation between United Nations and regional organizations. Cooperation between the United Nations and the African Union at both the strategic and the operational levels are an important part of that emerging trend. We are indeed pleased to note the positive evolution in the relations between the United Nations, on the one hand, and the African Union (AU) and African subregional organizations, such as IGAD, on the other. Ethiopia welcomes the intention to consider further steps to promote closer cooperation. We note with appreciation that, in the last few years, significant strides have been made in joint preventive diplomacy and peacemaking activities. That welcome development has been ongoing since 2010, when the Joint Task Force on Peace and Security was launched by the Secretary-General and the Chairperson of the African Union Commission. Although more needs to be done in all areas, particularly in Somalia, much has been accomplished through cooperation between the two organizations in Somalia, the Sudan, South Sudan and in other situations. It is clear, for instance, that the AU relies deeply on its close working relationship with subregional organizations, such as IGAD. It is critical, therefore, that, in the process of enhancing cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, close attention be paid to the principle of subsidiarity and the flexible application of the underlying principles governing the cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. That is critical, particularly in the area of the prevention and resolution of conflicts and in the area of mounting peace support missions. We are indeed pleased with the much-improved dialogue between the Peace and Security Council of the AU and the Security Council of the United Nations. The latest developments have been encouraging. However, for there to be a truly productive cooperation between the United Nations and the African Union and its subregional organizations, including with respect to the broader issues of development, it is critical that the United Nations Office to the African Union, which was established in 2010, be more effective. That Office has already proved that its creation has added value to the cooperation between the two organizations, but much remains to be done in that area. Let me conclude by underscoring one critical point relating to where Africa is at present in its efforts to make progress in eradicating poverty, one of the overarching objectives of the international community, as was reiterated yet again at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. The cooperation between the United Nations and the AU should make a difference in that regard, particularly focusing on the least developed countries, the majority of which are in Africa. Closer cooperation among the United Nations, the AU and subregional organizations should be strengthened in those areas as well.

In accordance with resolution 54/5 of 8 October 1999, I now call on the Secretary-General of the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation.

Allow me to point to some of the important developments in the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) since the adoption of resolution 65/128 on 13 December 2010. The Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation celebrated its twentieth anniversary in June. At the twentieth anniversary summit of the Organization in Istanbul, the Heads of State and Government of the member States of the Organization adopted a declaration reiterating their conviction that multilateral economic cooperation contributes to enhancing peace, stability and security to the benefit of the Black Sea region. In today’s globalized world, BSEC needs to be responsive to the challenges of the evolving international environment. The threats and challenges differ from those of the past, when the concept of security meant the prevention of conflict and war between States. Today the international community is faced with new security threats and challenges, which not only threaten the security of States but also human security, and therefore they require urgent action. BSEC is viewed by the international community as an anchor of cooperation in the Black Sea area. In addition to 12 member States, we have 17 observers, 16 sectoral dialogue partners and a number of other partners in the region and beyond. Over the course of 20 years, BSEC has become the most inclusive and comprehensive organization in the wider Black Sea area and a forum for discussion and cooperation in a wide range of areas. Much has been done and is currently under way in those spheres. Agreements and common action plans on key issues have been elaborated. That fosters a spirit of dialogue and cooperation in our region. The BSEC summit also endorsed the new Black Sea Economic Agenda Towards an Enhanced BSEC Partnership, a strategic document by which member States reiterated their commitment to enhance the economic missions of BSEC and to implement the economic agenda, in accordance with their guidelines and priorities. BSEC has been a driving force in elaborating and realizing giant concrete regional projects, particularly in the field of transport, which will contribute to the development of Euro-Asian transport links. Within that framework, the memorandum of understanding for the coordination and development of the Black Sea Ring Highway and the memorandum of understanding on the development of the Motorways of the Sea of the Black Sea region have been concluded, and they entered into force in late 2008. In addition, a project to facilitate the transport of raw materials in the Black Sea region was launched in 2010. BSEC is committed to promoting fruitful cooperation with the United Nations and its specialized agencies, in particular to the development of practical and results-oriented projects in areas of common interest. It continues to contribute to the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals on the national, regional and global levels by implementing sustainable development strategies based on a balanced and harmonious relationship between social needs, economic activities and environmental protection, as indicated in documents adopted at various United Nations platforms, such as the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012. The continued implementation of the Black Sea Trade and Investment Promotion Programme — the first partnership project between BSEC and the United Nations Development Programme, launched in 2006 — represents a good example of concrete cooperation between the two organizations. The fruitful cooperation between BSEC and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) is the result of the elaboration and adoption in 2008 of the BSEC Regional Action Plan for Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Trafficking in Persons in the Black Sea Region within the framework of the joint BSEC-UNODC project. BSEC became a member of the Group of Friends of the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations in 2009 in order to contribute to the fulfilment of the objectives of the Alliance by promoting projects aimed at building bridges among diverse cultures and communities and fostering cross-cultural exchange and cooperation. In the context of enhancing relations with the Alliance, we expect that the BSEC secretariat and the Alliance will sign a memorandum of understanding on cooperation in the near future. Their established partnership and the synergies created by BSEC and other regional organizations represent added value and strength to global cooperation, stability and prosperity. Last but not least, I would like to re-emphasize the importance of the intensified cooperation between the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization and the European Union and to pledge our readiness to take concrete steps for the development of a mutually beneficial partnership. I would also like to invite specialized agencies and other organizations and programmes of the United Nations system to strengthen cooperation with the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation in order to continue programmes and create synergies with a view to preparing and implementing joint projects. Before I conclude, I would like to pay a well- deserved tribute to the Republic of Turkey for its efforts as Chair-in-Office of BSEC during the past six months and for preparing the draft resolution (A/67/L.12), which I hope the Assembly will adopt by consensus. I also wish to express my gratitude to the Black Sea member States and other States Members of the United Nations that have supported the draft resolution.

In accordance with resolution 66/111 of 9 December 2011, I now call on the Secretary-General of the Central European Initiative.

As Secretary-General of the Central European Initiative (CEI), I am delighted to have this very special privilege of addressing the General Assembly for the first time on the topic of cooperation between the United Nations and the Central European Initiative. As the Assembly knows, the Central European Initiative cherishes its relationship with the United Nations, and we are proud to be an observer in the General Assembly. That status was attained last year through resolution 66/111, of 9 December 2011. We strongly believe that regional organizations need to be in tune with the global agenda, and we know that we all benefit from a close partnership with the United Nations. We are convinced that the successful work of regional organizations contributes to the overall success of the global agenda and the United Nations. This was also the conclusion of the first global meeting of regional organizations, organized by the World Economic Forum and the Government of the United Arab Emirates in Dubai just a week ago, on 12 and 13 November. There was a strong consensus that regional organizations can serve as powerful catalysts for advancing global cooperation and the global agenda. The Central European Initiative is the oldest forum of intergovernmental cooperation in our region, established in November 1989 by Italy, Austria, Hungary and Yugoslavia. It has now become the largest regional initiative, comprising 18 member States of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe. Our membership includes nine European Union (EU) and nine non-EU countries and therefore puts our organization in a privileged position to act as a champion of regional cooperation for European integration. We also serve as a bridge between the Baltic, the Danube, the Black Sea and the Adriatic. It goes without saying that we share the values of the European Union and the United Nations. Due to a unique blend of multilateral diplomacy and project orientation, we have become a unique player and partner in the region. The CEI designs and implements projects in partnership with the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the European Union and United Nations agencies in such fields as energy, transport, science and research, regional cooperation and culture. As the CEI develops those projects and programmes, it also seeks to strengthen its ties to the United Nations. Our record of cooperation with the United Nations is quite impressive. Our cooperation with the United Nations specialized agencies over the past years has been substantive and manifold. For example, the CEI cooperates with the Economic Commission for Europe in the area of enterprise development, particularly small and medium-sized enterprises, and with the United Nations Environment Programme in the area of the environment. It cooperates with the United Nations World Tourism Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, and with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization in the area of science and technology. But the CEI also has close ties with the most important European organizations and institutions, such as the European Union, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Last but not least, we work closely with all major regional organizations and forums operating within and beyond the Initiative’s region, such as the Adriatic and Ionian Initiative, the Organization of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation — which was so eloquently represented by the speaker preceding me — the Council of the Baltic Sea States, the Regional Cooperation Council and the South-East European Cooperation Process. We firmly believe that we should explore ways to enhance cooperation among regional organizations and in partnership with the United Nations. Our discussion today represents a unique opportunity to forge a strategic partnership between regional organizations and the United Nations in pursuit of peace, security, development and the rule of law. Therefore, the creation of a global network under the umbrella of the United Nations might make sense. Such a global network would facilitate exchanges of know-how and best practices and would allow us to share experiences in projects and programmes in the various areas of activity. We are convinced that each regional organization has a comparative advantage to contribute to the global agenda, and I am also convinced that each one of us is contributing to the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals. In conclusion, I would like to express our sincere gratitude to the Permanent Representative of the Ukraine, Ambassador Yuriy Sergeyev, for all his efforts and those of the Ukrainian Mission to promote draft resolution A/67/L.6, which is before the Assembly. Our thanks also go, of course, to the sponsors and to all Member States that support this draft resolution.

In accordance with resolution 477 (V) of 1 November 1950, I now call on the Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States.

I have the honour, in my capacity as the Permanent Observer of the League of Arab States, to congratulate, on behalf of the League, Mr. Vuk Jeremić on his appointment to lead the Assembly at its sixty- seventh session. He can count on the full support of the League of Arab States in his efforts. I would also like to welcome the Secretary-General’s efforts in guiding our Organization to ensure that it can fully discharge its responsibilities. It goes without saying that devoting an entire chapter — that is, Chapter VIII — of the Charter of the United Nations to regional organizations was a significant gesture, and one that has proved effective when it comes to cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, especially in the maintenance of international peace and security. Cooperation between the United Nations and the Arab League began in 1950, when the General Assembly, at its fifth session, adopted resolution 477 (V) on 1 November of 1950, calling upon the Secretary- General of the United Nations to ask the Secretary- General of the League of Arab States to participate in the General Assembly sessions as an observer. Since then, relations between the two organizations have developed progressively and positively. Assembly resolution 36/24 of 1981 reflects the progress that this cooperation has achieved over the past 30 years. The Assembly has reiterated the resolve of the United Nations to cooperate with the League of Arab States in order to achieve the desired goals. It calls on the Secretary-General to continue his efforts to further enhance political, economic, cultural and administrative cooperation between the United Nations and the League, pursuant to the relevant Assembly resolutions. That cooperation was enshrined in the agreement signed between the League of Arab States and the United Nations in 1989. Since then our cooperation has taken a variety of forms through various mechanisms in the light of the circumstances that we have faced. Our organizations now seek to cooperate on the basis of new developments and events in the Middle East since 2010. A number of events have shaped the strengthening of that cooperation, such as the general meeting on cooperation between the secretariats of the United Nations and the League of Arab States and their specialized organizations, held in Vienna in July of this year, and the many biennial meetings held to build on gains and to assess that cooperation. Twenty-eight organizations and specialized agencies of the United Nations, together with specialized Arab organizations, participated in that meeting in order to identify areas for Arab and international cooperation. The League of Arab States established contact with a number of focal points and held a number of coordination meetings with specialized agencies and institutions of the United Nations. On 26 September, on the sidelines of the general debate of the General Assembly, the Security Council held a high-level meeting on the situation in the Middle East (see S/PV.6841). At its conclusion, a presidential statement reflecting the goal of enhanced cooperation between the two organizations was adopted. The statement recalls that cooperation with regional organizations in order to ensure the maintenance of international peace and security could further enhance collective security. It establishes the following: “The Security Council recognizes and further encourages the efforts by the League of Arab States to contribute to collective endeavours to settle conflicts in the Middle East peacefully as well as to promoting international responses to the transformations experienced in the region... “The Security Council welcomes the intensifying cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States in the wake of these transformations which reflect the legitimate aspirations of all peoples in the region for freedom, political participation and economic and social well-being in a pluralistic society.” (S/PRST/2012/20, p. 1) The statement further establishes: “The Security Council recognizes the importance of strengthening cooperation on capacity-building with the League of Arab States in the maintenance of international peace and security. “The Security Council expresses its determination to take effective steps to further enhance cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States, in accordance with Chapter VIII of the Charter.” (ibid., p. 3) Despite the clear position of the United Nations on the Palestinian question set out in its resolutions and the positive statements of the Secretary-General, which recall the importance of the principle of resolving the Israel-Palestinian conflict, as well as the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to establish their State on the basis of the 1967 borders, including East Jerusalem, the peace process has reached a stalemate. A comprehensive settlement that includes all stages of the Middle East peace process must be found. That stalemate is the result of Israel’s insistence on continued actions to further colonize the occupied Palestinian territory and its active aggression of the past week against Gaza, further exacerbating the socioeconomic and environmental situation and the destruction of properties and dwellings. Although the Security Council convened rapidly the day that the aggression began, to date we have seen no measure adopted on the ground. The Council has been unable to adopt any resolution or presidential statement that reflects its earnest resolve to maintain international peace and security, which is its primary responsibility. At its emergency meeting on 17 November, the Council of Ministers of the Arab League was therefore compelled to condemn the Security Council for its failure to adopt measures to put an end to Israel’s aggression against Gaza. The Council of Ministers called on the Security Council to fully discharge its responsibilities for the maintenance of international peace and security, as stipulated in the Charter, and to adopt the measures necessary to end Israel’s continued onslaught. The presidential statement adopted at the high-level meeting of the Security Council of 26 September must be implemented. We hope that the Council will act rapidly in order to meet Arab demands and to ensure cooperation between our two organizations. The Palestinian people hope to see concrete measures being adopted on the ground to enable them to fully exercise their inalienable right to self-determination, as a result of the common responsibility of the United Nations and the League of Arab States. The Arab League has sought to cooperate with the United Nations in order to try to resolve the Syrian crisis. The international community must also strive to put an end to the bloodshed and to launch a transitional phase that gives rise to a democratic system, in line with the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people. A political solution to which all parties can commit must be found by building on the efforts of Mr. Brahimi, Joint Special Representative of the United Nations and the League of Arab States for Syria. The Security Council must provide a positive response to the decisions taken by the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of the European Union and of the League of Arab States through the adoption of the Cairo declaration at a meeting on 3 November. The United Nations and the League of Arab States have agreed to continue their intensive efforts to support Yemen in the transitional phase of its reconstruction. We seek to promote political, socioeconomic and legal reform in that country and to provide it with the necessary technical expertise to train personnel in various areas. The League of Arab States is following the developments on the ground in Libya with great concern. In that connection, the international community must shoulder its responsibilities in a positive manner. It must work effectively with the Libyan Government to address the challenges that Libya faces by fully supporting the Libyan people in the reconstruction process and by providing the necessary technical expertise to help train personnel and to build capacity in all areas. Moreover, there must be further support for building capacity in the army and the police and for efforts to ensure disarmament and the retrieval of weapons throughout Libya. Given their geographical location and their ethnic and social composition, the Sudan and South Sudan are of particular importance in the Arab and African world and therefore must cooperate. They must avoid conflict and must refrain from acts of aggression. The Arab world does not wish to see our Sudanese brothers fall back into a conflict situation, and that is why the United Nations, the League of Arab States and the African Union must cooperate in order to help them find the necessary solutions that are acceptable to all and to address all pending matters so that the country’s national interests are given top priority. The League of Arab States has proposed and supported the humanitarian initiative in the Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan States, and the African Union and United Nations have followed suit. We therefore call for further cooperation and coordination between those three organizations in order to implement that initiative. The cooperation between the African Union, the United Nations, the League of Arab States and IGAD has made it possible to conclude the transitional phase in Somalia. The international community must now provide Somalia with all forms of support, whether political, financial or technical, in particular following the successful conclusion of the transitional phase. The current priority issues for the Arab world, and in particular for the League of Arab States, are common issues of concern to the League and the United Nations in the light of the current circumstances in our region, namely the global financial and economic crises, the food crisis, the energy crisis and climate change. That is why the first Arab Economic and Social Development Summit, held in 2009, and the second Summit, held in 2011, highlighted those goals. The same applies to the third Summit, to be held in 2013, which the Secretary- General of the League of Arab States is currently preparing for by calling upon the United Nations to participate in it. Finally, the League of Arab States cooperates with the United Nations in many areas, including in combating narcotics, human trafficking, organized crime, terrorism, corruption and modernizing our criminal justice systems. We would like to deepen our cooperation with the United Nations in the legal sphere in order to strengthen our coordination in those areas. We must further strengthen technical support to national efforts for the ratification of legal instruments pertaining to the fight against terrorism, corruption and trafficking in persons, and strengthen the legal implementation of those instruments. The necessary training must be provided in the area of criminal justice by enhancing the mechanisms for technical assistance. In conclusion, I would like to thank the representative of the Sudan, who introduced draft resolution A/67/L.10 on the topic. We are very pleased with it, and we call upon the General Assembly to adopt it by consensus.

In accordance with resolution 35/2 of 13 October 1980, I now give the floor to the observer for the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization.

On behalf of the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization (AALCO), I am very pleased to have this opportunity to report to the General Assembly on the cooperative activities undertaken by AALCO in the past two years. The Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization is the institutional outcome of the historic Bandung Conference, held in 1955. It comprises 47 African and Asian members across the two continents. Its principal role is to serve as a catalyst to promote the development and application of international law. AALCO has been a permanent observer to the United Nations since 1980, when the Assembly recognized the importance of AALCO’s work in the field of the development of the law of the sea. Since its establishment in 1956, AALCO has been constantly working towards the progressive development and codification of international law and the strengthening of the rule of law in international affairs. As an advisory body to the 47 member States, it ensures interregional cooperation and exchanges of information and views on matters of common concern in international legal matters. In those areas, AALCO closely follows and promotes the work of the General Assembly, the International Law Commission (ILC), the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law and other relevant agencies. I would like to highlight a few topics and activities undertaken by AALCO in the past two years. First, I turn to the work of the International Law Commission. AALCO analyses the work of the ILC and subsequently forwards the views of the member States to the Commission. That has helped to foster a closer relationship between the two bodies. It has also become customary for both bodies to be represented at each other’s sessions. At its fiftieth session, AALCO requested its Secretary-General to devote more time to the work of the ILC, and an intersessional meeting was therefore held to discuss some of the topics being considered by the ILC. They include the protection of persons in the event of disaster, the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction and the proposed new topics of the ILC. Those topics were again considered at the Abuja session this year. Alongside the legal advice meeting in October 2011, a joint meeting of AALCO and the ILC was held to discuss some of the topics being examined by the ILC, which included the expulsion of aliens, the responsibilities of international organizations and the protection of persons in the event of disasters. Many governmental legal advisers from outside Africa and Asia also attended the meeting. Now I turn to the area of the law of the sea. The law of the sea constitutes an important part of AALCO’s work. Its contribution to the negotiations on and the drafting of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is well-known. AALCO championed, for example, the concept of exclusive economic zones and helped to have that concept codified in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. In commemoration of the thirtieth anniversary of the signing of the Convention, AALCO organized a workshop on the mapping of maritime baselines by satellite or other means in May 2012. In order to stimulate innovative thinking on combating piracy and to identify countermeasures against piracy, AALCO organized a meeting to discuss the adequacy of international legal responses to piracy in the Gulf of Guinea and off the West African coast. The United Nations work on drug control was also considered in that connection. I now turn to the issue of international terrorism, which has been considered an important subject in the programme of work of AALCO. We held a special meeting to discuss the subject, and the issues discussed included the difficulties in reaching a definition of the term “terrorism” and an emphasis on the need for international legal cooperation in criminal matters to combat terrorism. The problem of countering the financing of international terrorism was also considered. I now turn to the issues of the trafficking in persons and the smuggling of migrants. Those are important issues, as they involve serious aspects of organized crime that affect many countries. Human trafficking affects national security and human rights and fosters illicit transnational migration. Coordinated efforts to combat that menace are required. Therefore, in 2011, AALCO convened a meeting to consider the adequacy of the legal framework for combating human trafficking and the exploitation and abuse of migrants. The work of UNICEF in protecting children was also considered in that context. Arbitration has in recent years become a preferred method of alternative dispute resolution in international commercial transactions in Asia and in Africa. AALCO has therefore established regional arbitration centres to facilitate that process. A meeting was held to discuss recent developments in the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law’s work in that area, as well as the revitalization process of AALCO’s regional arbitration centres. Participants also exchanged experiences and compared difficulties encountered in that context. International criminal jurisdiction is a subject to which AALCO attaches high importance. Legal experts convened in July 2011 to consider the following important issues: the preconditions for exercising International Criminal Court jurisdiction; the interpretation of article 98 of the Rome Statute in relation to bilateral immunity agreements; the principle of complementarity and its application; the criteria for the selection of situations and the opening of investigations; and, finally, the relationship between peace and justice. AALCO has also organized training programmes in international trade and humanitarian law. The main objective of the training programmes has been to provide practical and theoretical knowledge on selected topics of international trade law and international humanitarian law through interactive discussion. To facilitate wider dissemination of international law, AALCO publishes both a yearbook and a journal of international law. All of the aforementioned activities and programmes are intended to strengthen AALCO’s relationship with the United Nations, particularly in the field of the progressive development and codification of international law. AALCO is determined to continue its close cooperation with the United Nations. It pays tribute to the work of the General Assembly and strongly supports the Assembly in all aspects of its work.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on agenda item 121 and its sub-items (a) to (w). We shall now proceed to consider draft resolutions A/67/L.5, A/67/L.6, A/67/L.7, A/67/L.8, A/67/L.9/Rev.1, A/67/L.10, A/67/L.11, A/67/L.12, A/67/L.13 and A/67/L.15. Explanations of vote after the voting will be made after the adoption of the draft resolutions. Draft resolution A/67/L.5 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Collective Security Treaty Organization”. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.5?

Draft resolution A/67/L.6 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Central European Initiative”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I would like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution, the following delegations have also become sponsors of A/67/L.6: Austria, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Slovenia.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.6?

Draft resolution A/67/L.7 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I would like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those listed in document A/67/L.7, the following delegations have also become sponsors of A/67/L.7: Albania, Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Mexico, Montenegro, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of Moldova, Romania, the Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and the United States of America.

May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.7?

Draft resolution A/67/L.8 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I would like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those listed in document A/67/L.8, the following delegations have also become sponsors of A/67/L.8: Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Congo, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lesotho, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, the Republic of Moldova, Romania, the Russian Federation, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United Republic of Tanzania, the United States of America and Uruguay.

May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.8?

Draft resolution A/67/L.9/Rev.1 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Eurasian Economic Community”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed in the document, Armenia has become a sponsor of draft resolution A.67/L.9/Rev.1.

May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.9/Rev.1?

Draft resolution A/67/L.10 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States”. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.10?

Draft resolution A/67/L.11, as orally corrected, is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Latin American and Caribbean Economic System”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed in the document and during the introduction of the draft resolution, Haiti and Jamaica have become sponsors of draft resolution A.67/L.11.

May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.11, as orally corrected?

Draft resolution A/67/L.12 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed in the document, the following countries have become sponsors of draft resolution A.67/L.12: Armenia, France, Israel, Montenegro, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia and Spain.

May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.12?

Draft resolution A/67/L.13 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”. I give the floor to the representative of the Secretariat.

I should like to announce that, since the submission of the draft resolution and in addition to those delegations listed in the document, Turkmenistan has become a sponsor of draft resolution A.67/L.13.

May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.13?

Draft resolution A/67/L.15 is entitled “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization”. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/67/L.15?

Before giving the floor to speakers in explanation of vote, may I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

With regard to resolution 67/14, “Cooperation between the United Nations and the Economic Cooperation Organization”, which has just been adopted, my delegation wishes to state for the record that Cyprus has disassociated itself from the consensus on that resolution for the following reasons. First, in paragraph 2, the resolution takes note of the Baku Declaration, issued at the twelfth summit meeting of the heads of State and Government of member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization, held on 16 October 2012 in Azerbaijan. The Baku Declaration endorses the report by the Council of Ministers at its twentieth meeting and instructs the Secretary General of the Economic Cooperation Organization to ensure the full implementation of that report. We have been informed that that report recommends that a so-called Turkish Cypriot State be given the status of observer to the Economic Cooperation Organization. The Baku Declaration is, in effect, calling on the Secretary General of that organization to act against Security Council and General Assembly resolutions regarding Cyprus. I recall in that connection, in particular, Security Council resolutions 541 (1983) and 550 (1984), which state that the declaration of a purported secession of part of the Republic of Cyprus is legally invalid and call for its withdrawal. In those resolutions, the Security Council condemned all such secessionist acts and called on all States to respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus and not to recognize any Cypriot State other than the Republic of Cyprus. It also called on all States not to facilitate or in any way assist the secessionist entity. I also recall General Assembly resolutions on Cyprus, specifically resolutions 3212 (XXIX), of 1974, and 37/253, of 1983, also calling upon all States to respect the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus. My delegation reiterates those calls by the main bodies of the United Nations to all member States of the Economic Cooperation Organization. We strongly urge them and the Secretary General of the Economic Cooperation Organization not to act against United Nations resolutions by implementing the recommendation to accord observer status to a secessionist entity. We have decided not to break the consensus on that cooperation resolution, based on the good faith and spirit of cooperation demonstrated by its sponsors during the informal negotiations on the text. We hope that that same spirit will be demonstrated in response to our call on ECO and its member States to re-evaluate their position on the issue we have raised and, in view of their cooperation with the United Nations, to act in compliance with its Charter.

The United States welcomes cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. We also support international engagement in developing consensus on appropriate cyberspace behaviour, based on existing principles of international law. States must unite around the common goal of preserving and enhancing the benefits of information technologies by ensuring their security and integrity, while also maintaining an environment that promotes efficiency, innovation, economic prosperity, free trade and respect for human rights. In its current form, resolution 67/15 does not meet those criteria. The United States has therefore dissociated itself from the consensus on that resolution.

Canada agreed to join the consensus on the resolution on cooperation between the United Nations and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (resolution 67/15). We would, however, like to reiterate our concerns about the introduction of contentious language into what is supposed to be a procedural resolution reaffirming the importance of cooperation between the United Nations and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. We regret that development and, in that regard, Canada would like to formally dissociate itself from the language in the sixteenth preambular paragraph regarding the efforts of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to address international information security, a concept that we oppose and that does not belong in a General Assembly resolution of that nature.

I call on the representative of the Syrian Arab Republic, who wishes to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I remind him that statements made in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

The League of Arab States has made itself part of the problem, not part of the solution, owing to its early attempts to internationalize the Syrian crisis by calling for external intervention aimed at destroying Syria as a country and as a people. That is something that runs contrary to the most basic principles of the Charter of the League of Arab States and flagrantly contravenes the obligations of Arab countries and the Arab League secretariat to comply with the Arab Joint Defence Agreement. The League of Arab States has not respected the conclusions drawn by the group of Arab observers led by General Al-Dabi, and withdrew the Arab observers in order to undermine the Arab solution. The Arab League is not authorized either by the Syrian Government or by the Syrian Arab people to speak about the future of Syria on their behalf. It is shameful that the League continues to insist through its appeals to the so-called international community to guarantee peace, security and stability in Syria, at a time when the efforts of the League — if there really is a League of Arab States — should be focused on mobilizing that same international community to protect the Palestinian people from Israeli aggression. Since the emergency meeting of Arab foreign affairs ministers from all the members of the League of Arab States two days ago, the Lebanese Foreign Minister has called for a halt to the normalization of relations with Israel and for the severing of diplomatic relations with that country. Of course, we have seen no implementation of that call on the part of those Arab States that have relations with Israel. We have also not seen the representative of the League of Arab States here at the United Nations talk about the importance of implementing those two calls. It seems that the League of Arab States is suffering from colour blindness; it can no longer distinguish between friends, enemies and brothers. From this rostrum, we call on the League and its representatives to refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of Syria, since they no longer consider Syria to be part of the League of Arab States, and not to incite the so-called international community against Syria’s Government and people at a time when the international community should be focusing on dealing with Israel’s aggression against the Palestinian people.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-items (d), (f), (j), (k), (m), (n), (o), (t), (u) and (w) of agenda item 121?

I would like to appeal to those Member States intending to submit draft resolutions on the remaining sub-items to do so as soon as possible

In paragraph 7 of its report, the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly appoint the following persons as members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013: Ms. Jasminka Dinić (Croatia), Mr. Conrod Hunte (Antigua and Barbuda), Mr. Mohanad Ali Omran (Iraq), Mr. Babou Sene (Senegal) and Mr. Tesfa Alem Seyoum (Eritrea). May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to appoint Ms. Jasminka Dinić, Mr. Conrod Hunte, Mr. Mohanad Ali Omran, Mr. Babou Sene and Mr. Tesfa Alem Seyoum as members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013?

In paragraph 4 of its report, the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly appoint the following persons as members of the Committee on Contributions for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013: Mr. Andrzej Abraszewski (Poland), Mr. Syed Yawar Ali (Pakistan), Mr. Ihor Humennyi (Ukraine), Ms. Susan McLurg (United States of America), Mr. Josiel Motumisi Tawana (South Africa) and Mr. Kazuo Watanabe (Japan). May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to appoint Mr. Andrzej Abraszewski, Mr. Syed Yawar Ali, Mr. Ihor Humennyi, Ms. Susan McLurg, Mr. Josiel Motumisi Tawana and Mr. Kazuo Watanabe as members of the Committee on Contributions for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013?

The Fifth Committee recommends in paragraph 5 of the report that the General Assembly confirm the reappointment by the Secretary-General of Ms. Linah Mohohlo (Botswana) as a regular member of the Investments Committee for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013 and confirm the reappointment of Mr. Emilio Cárdenas (Argentina) as a regular member of the Committee for a one-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to confirm the reappointment by the Secretary- General of Ms. Linah Mohohlo as a regular member of the Investments Committee for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013 and to confirm the reappointment of Mr. Emilio Cárdenas as a regular member of the Committee for a one-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013?

In paragraph 6 of the same report, the Fifth Committee also recommends that the General Assembly reappoint Mr. Ivan Pictet (Switzerland) and appoint Mr. Gumersindo Oliveros (Spain) and Ms. Cecilia Reyes (Philippines) as ad hoc members of the Investments Committee for a one-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to confirm the reappointment of Mr. Ivan Pictet as well as the appointment of Mr. Gumersindo Oliveros and Ms. Cecilia Reyes as ad hoc members of the Investments Committee for a one-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013?

In paragraph 4 of the report, the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly appoint the following persons as members of the International Civil Service Commission for a four-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013: Mr. Fatih Bouayad-Agha (Algeria); Mr. Sergei Garmonin (Russian Federation); Mr. Mohamed Mijarul Quayes (Bangladesh); Mr. Wang Xiaochu (China); and Mr. El Hassane Zahid (Morocco). May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to appoint Mr. Fatih Bouayad-Agha, Mr. Sergei Garmonin, Mr. Mohamed Mijarul Quayes, Mr. Wang Xiaochu and Mr. El Hassane Zahid as members of the International Civil Service Commission for a four-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013?

In paragraph 4 of its report, the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly appoint the following as members or alternate members of the United Nations Staff Pension Committee for a four-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013: Mr. Dmitry Chumakov (Russian Federation); Ms. Valeria María González Posse (Argentina); Mr. Hitoshi Kozaki (Japan); Mr. Gerhard Küntzle (Germany); Mr. Lovemore Mazemo (Zimbabwe); Mr. Philip Richard Okanda Owade (Kenya); Mr. Mustafizur Rahman (Bangladesh); and Mr. Thomas Repasch, Jr. (United States of America). May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to appoint Mr. Dmitry Chumakov, Ms. Valeria María González Posse, Mr. Hitoshi Kozaki, Mr. Gerhard Küntzle, Mr. Lovemore Mazemo, Mr. Philip Richard Okanda Owade, Mr. Mustafizur Rahman and Mr. Thomas Repasch, Jr., as members or alternate members of the United Nations Staff Pension Committee for a four-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2013?

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-items (a) to (e) of agenda item 111?