S/PV.5007 Security Council

In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council’s prior consultations, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend an invitation under rule 37 of its provisional rules of procedure to His Excellency Mr. Luis Ernesto Derbez, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico. There being no objection, it is so decided.

On behalf of the Council, I extend a warm welcome to His Excellency Mr. Luis Ernesto Derbez, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico. I should like to inform the Council that I have received a letter from the representative of the Netherlands, in which he requests to be invited to participate in the discussion of the item on the Council’s agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite that representative to participate in the discussion, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure. There being no objection, it is so decided.

In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council’s prior consultations, and under rule 39 of the Council’s provisional rules of procedure, I invite the following representatives of regional organizations to take the seats reserved for them at the side of the Council Chamber: His Excellency Mr. Said Djinnit, Commissioner for Peace, Security and Political Affairs of the African Union; His Excellency Mr. Peter Feith, Deputy Director-General of European Security and Defence Policy of the European Union; His Excellency Mr. Amre Moussa, Secretary-General of the League of Arab States; His Excellency Mr. Alounkeo Kittikhoun, Chairperson of the Standing Committee of the Association of South-East Asian Nations; His Excellency Mr. Robert F. Simmons, Deputy Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; His Excellency Mr. Dmitry Boulakhov, Deputy Executive Secretary of the Commonwealth of Independent States; His Excellency Mr. Mokhtar Lamani, Permanent Observer of the Organization of the Islamic Conference; His Excellency Mr. Solomon Passy, Chairman-in-Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria; and His Excellency Mr. Effah-Apenteng, representative of the Chair of the Economic Community of West African States. The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations. I should like to draw attention to document S/2004/546, which contains the text of a letter dated 8 July 2004 from the Permanent Representative of Romania to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting a background paper on cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in stabilization processes. The Security Council is holding an important debate today. The topic is not new; nor is it ground- breaking. And it is certainly not anywhere close to being concluded. To paraphrase the words of the Foreign Minister of Mexico, Mr. Luis Ernesto Derbez, who presided over the Council in April 2003 during a meeting on a related topic (see S/PV.4739), as long as we aspire to build a secure, prosperous and democratic international environment that is governed by the rule of law, we shall continue to bear the unavoidable responsibility of bringing out the best there is in the cooperation between the United Nations and regional arrangements. Romania chose to convene a meeting on cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in stabilization processes to improve interaction between the United Nations and regional bodies and to determine ways forward for collaborative and reinforced relationships. I therefore invite those participating in the discussion today to give consideration to principles and mechanisms for enhanced cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in the future. I wish to express my appreciation for the presence among us of heads and representatives of regional organizations. Their participation in this meeting will greatly enhance the prospects for strengthening coordination between the United Nations and those organizations in stabilization processes. A final word on my part: I should like to recognize the presence in the public section of this Chamber of three remarkable students from Romania — Oana Amaricai, Adrian Cazan and Radu Pavel — who are here because they won a Security Council simulation contest. Joining them are students from the Seton Hall University School of Diplomacy and International Relations. I salute all those young representatives, who take enthusiastic interest in our work. I welcome the presence of the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan, and I invite him to take the floor.

I would like to thank you, Mr. President, for having organized this important debate in the Security Council. It is also good to welcome you to New York. It is not every day that we have a Prime Minister presiding over a Security Council meeting. In April 2003, when the Council last met to discuss the role of regional organizations in facing new challenges to international peace and security, I argued that we needed to move towards creating a network of effective and mutually reinforcing mechanisms — regional and global — that would be both flexible and responsive to the complex reality we live in today. On that occasion, many participants suggested measures to enhance cooperation to help build such a network. These included proposals to carry out, on a regular basis, a high-level dialogue between the Council and regional organizations, to improve the exchange of information and to promote early coordination. This meeting is, I believe, evidence that we are serious about implementing those proposals. Today, the United Nations is cooperating with regional organizations in stabilization processes in many countries. In Liberia and Côte d’Ivoire, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) played a key role on the ground before handing over to the United Nations. The United Nations Office for West Africa and the ECOWAS secretariat have agreed to improve cooperation in efforts to promote peace and stability in West Africa and to develop regional conflict prevention strategies, as called for by the Security Council. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the European Union (EU)provided critical support through Operation Artemis. In Burundi, the African Union (AU) deployed a mission to monitor and help consolidate the December 2003 ceasefire agreement, enhance stability and facilitate the overall implementation of the Arusha Peace and Reconciliation Agreement. In May of this year, the Council authorized the United Nations Operation in Burundi and the immediate “re-hatting” of the African Mission in Burundi. In Sudan, we have worked with both the African Union and the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development to broker a peace agreement and support the deployment of ceasefire monitors by the AU. In Haiti, the Security Council has stressed the importance of cooperation between the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti and the Organization of American States and the Caribbean Community. The United Nations is working closely with those regional organizations, especially on planning for elections in 2005. In Kosovo, the United Nations, the EU and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe have continued to work together, cooperating with the international security force led by NATO. In Afghanistan, the United Nations mission is working with the coalition forces, as well as the International Security Assistance Force, to support the extension of the Government’s authority throughout the country and to further the Bonn process, including national elections. We have seen that, in many instances, regional organizations can be on the ground much faster than the United Nations. Indeed, NATO, the EU and the AU have either established or are developing rapid response capabilities for peacekeeping operations. The United Nations welcomes, and indeed contributes to, those efforts. However, not all regional organizations can sustain their deployments over a long period, and the legitimacy that flows from United Nations operations is often needed for longer-term sustainability. Not all of our cooperative efforts with regional organizations have proceeded without problems. In Kosovo, for instance, after unexpected violence flared up earlier this year, we are looking at how we can do a better job. Clearly, the involvement of many organizations can be both a source of strength and a point of weakness in managing complex situations. Full integration is not always easy, due to different mandates, organizational cultures and leadership roles. So while our cooperation is being enhanced, we have to consider more thoroughly the comparative strengths of different organizations — whether global, regional or subregional — and move towards the creation of strategic partnerships that meet today’s and tomorrow’s challenges. Our cooperation with regional organizations is established across a wide range of activities, but it has often been ad hoc. I believe that more institutionalized channels of cooperation would help ensure greater efficiency and effectiveness and, perhaps, even economies of scale. To that end, my predecessor and I have engaged the heads of regional organizations in regular exchanges of views on issues of common concern, from conflict prevention, to peace-building, to international terrorism. We are also working with a wide range of regional organizations on electoral matters. The two most recent meetings between the United Nations and regional organizations established important frameworks for cooperation. The fourth meeting, on peace-building, in February 2001, together with the presidential statement of the Security Council at that time (S/PRST/2001/5), established a useful precedent for better interaction and cooperation. At the fifth meeting, in July 2003, participants agreed on a framework for cooperation to confront new challenges to international peace and security, including international terrorism. We will soon discuss with our regional counterparts cooperation mechanisms for monitoring the effective protection of civilians in armed conflict, practical measures to build tolerance and to promote a dialogue among civilizations and lessons learned from field experiences such as military-civilian cooperation, policing, institution-building and confidence-building measures. I will keep the Security Council fully apprised of the progress achieved. I am committed to implementing the specific points contained in the frameworks that have been laid down. The next high-level meeting is scheduled for mid- 2005 and, of course, the President of the Security Council will participate, as in the past. That will provide an important opportunity to see how far we have come in implementing the decisions taken in previous meetings. We are also considering making the high-level meetings more frequent — perhaps even annual — so that we can focus on practical cooperation on key issues and can follow up more effectively. I believe that this would help strengthen the cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations — not to mention between the Secretariat and the Security Council. In stabilizing war-torn nations, as in many other areas of peace and security, the United Nations needs the vital contribution of regional organizations. I therefore wish participants a fruitful discussion, and I hope that the Council will remain engaged in this crucial subject.

I thank the Secretary-General for his statement and for his kind words addressed to me. In accordance with the understanding reached among Council members, I wish to remind all speakers to limit their statements to no more than five minutes in order to enable the Council to carry out its work expeditiously. Delegations with lengthy statements are kindly requested to circulate their texts in writing and to deliver a condensed version when speaking in the Chamber. As another measure to optimize the use of our time in order to allow as many delegations as possible to take the floor, I will not individually invite speakers to take seats at the table or invite them to resume their seats at the side of the Council Chamber. When a speaker is taking the floor, the conference officer will seat the next speaker on the list at the table. I give the floor to Mr. Luis Ernesto Derbez, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico.

First, I wish to thank the delegation of Romania for its kind invitation to me to participate in this meeting to consider cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in stabilization processes. I can only welcome this initiative of the Security Council presidency because of the relevance of the question and because it follows up on the reflection initiated by Mexico in April 2003 during our term as an elected member of the Security Council (see S/PV.4739). I therefore especially thank the Romanian delegation. Recent experience underscores the growing importance of regional organizations as partners of the United Nations in the prevention, management and settlement of conflicts, as well as in peace-building and stabilization processes once conflict has ended. In fact, this issue arises repeatedly in the debates of the Security Council with respect to both specific cases and thematic debates. It can be seen that as peacekeeping operations grow exceptionally in number and scope, cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations must be examined in a radically different light. The focus on crisis management and strategies for peace must not lack medium-term and long-term perspectives. Peace-building, institutional reconstruction, the continuation of confidence-building measures and strategies to encourage development are undeniably important for preventing conflicts from recurring or becoming chronic cycles of instability. While it is understandable that the international community places high priority on putting an end to armed conflicts, equal attention should also be given to stabilization processes. In the end, such measures represent our only chance to prevent the recurring resurgence of crises, as we have so regrettably witnessed in various parts of the world. The United Nations has a range of particularly valuable capacities and facilities for treating crises and promoting the peace process. Those capacities should be maintained and further strengthened. However, once a conflict has ended, it would be desirable that regional organizations increasingly take responsibility for the tasks of reconstruction, institution-building and the promotion of development and well-being. On the basis of the principle of complementarity, it is possible to make more rational and effective use of the comparative advantages of each organization. On the one hand, it is necessary fully to take advantage of each regional organization’s unique experience within its own sphere of action and its precise knowledge of local cultural conditions and mechanisms of understanding for treating post-conflict situations. However, equally important is the work of prevention, early warning and the monitoring of potential conflict situations. Last year’s discussion highlighted the view shared by most regional organizations that their cooperation with the United Nations should be carried out under Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter, according to the modalities and capabilities of each organization. It was concluded that the United Nations, specifically the Security Council, has primary responsibility for the duties of peacekeeping and international security. Participants considered that the role of regional organizations should further concentrate on the root causes of conflicts, in particular factors such as poverty, discrimination and the lack of opportunities. One of the recurring themes of last year’s meeting was the importance of creating partnerships. Mexico believes that it is essential that, in stabilization processes, such alliances should include the Bretton Woods institutions and other possible promoters of development. Based on the consensus reached at the International Conference on Financing for Development, held in Monterrey, Mexico, in 2002, we can note that there are unprecedented bases for promoting the creation of broad partnerships of that kind. In order to carry through such proposals, the Council should weigh, when renewing peacekeeping operation mandates, whether those mandates could more systematically include elements that, in collaboration with the respective regional organizations, would promote long-term stability, such as financing, electoral assistance, respect for human rights and institutional restructuring. In that context, perceptions of conditions affecting the security of States are closely linked to the regional and subregional context in which they unfold. Coordination between the United Nations and regional organizations would be enhanced by a better understanding of those perceptions and the factors influencing them. Thus, one of the most important political developments experienced by the Organization of American States (OAS) in the past year was the OAS Special Conference on Security, held in Mexico City in October 2003, which concluded with the adoption by consensus of the Declaration on Security in the Americas. American States adopted a new concept of security of multidimensional scope, encompassing both traditional and new threats. Thus, the Declaration states that “the States of the hemisphere recognize different perspectives regarding security threats and priorities”. There was a unanimous rejection of creating a hierarchy among the various types of threats, since all were considered equally legitimate. Based on that analysis, the States of the American hemisphere identified the mechanisms and instruments of regional cooperation for addressing the various security concerns and challenges and made specific commitments to strengthen such cooperation. I am fully confident that by identifying innovative forms of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, the commitments made at the OAS Special Conference on Security will create new opportunities for forging productive alliances for peace and development. From the viewpoint of Mexico, the mere fact that the Security Council and regional organizations can periodically hold this kind of dialogue will enhance the decision-making process, identification of opportunities for cooperation among organizations and the taking into account of the views and concerns of each region in the delicate tasks of peacekeeping and the promotion of development. In the end, the multilateral system, in effect, comprises the sum of the United Nations, the regional and subregional organizations and the specialized institutions. The right cooperation and the full exploitation of their capacities and comparative advantages could create a powerful engine for finding solutions, new areas of focus and new understandings in order to tackle today’s complex international agenda. This concerted contribution can be equally valuable for tackling new threats that are sometimes even without specific national origin, such as international terrorism, organized crime, the major epidemics, ecological disasters and the private circulation of weapons and dangerous materials. Faced with this new category of challenges, it is essential to correctly use all international instruments at our disposal in order to provide collective responses possessing the due effectiveness, legitimacy and forcefulness. Given this scenario, Mexico recognizes and highly esteems the decision of the Government of Romania to hold this discussion, which we trust will define new modalities of international cooperation between the Council and its regional partners.

I thank Mr. Luis Ernesto Derbez for his kind words on this initiative, which, in fact, continues the excellent proposal that our Mexican friends made. I would also like to stress the fact that the principle of complementarity, underlined by Mr. Derbez, is indeed a basic building block of this new international architecture, where the global and the regional are symbiotically interlinked. I now call on His Excellency Mr. Said Djinnit, Commissioner for Peace, Security and Political Affairs of the African Union.

At the outset, I have the pleasant duty, on behalf of the Commission of the African Union and its Chairperson, Mr. Alpha Oumar Konaré, to extend our warm gratitude to the President of the Security Council for his country’s initiative to bring us together at an open debate of the Council to discuss the issue of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in the stabilization process. I would like to thank him in particular for kindly having involved the Commission of the African Union in this debate. I would also like to thank the Secretary-General and all others who have contributed to promoting our consideration of this extremely important subject at the heart of the partnership for peace, which we must continue to make a reality. This debate began several years ago as a result of the ongoing scourge of conflict, in order to take into account the emergence of new regional players and of their growing role in advancing and supporting the maintenance of peace and security. For the African Union, this debate is all the more relevant because it is taking place after the establishment of its Peace and Security Council, which is a continental system for collective security. The Protocol relating to the establishment of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union defines the relation of the Council with the Security Council of the United Nations. It also reaffirms the Security Council’s primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Under the Protocol, the Peace and Security Council and the Chairperson of the Commission of the African Union must maintain ongoing and close relations with the Security Council and its African members, as well as with the Secretary-General, inter alia through periodic meetings and regular consultations. Now that the Peace and Security Council is functioning, it must establish the practical modalities for those relations, including the format and periodicity of the meetings to be held. I would like to emphasize the crucial role that the African members of the Security Council — in particular those holding seats in the Peace and Security Council — can play in strengthening that relationship. But the debate regarding the relationship between the United Nations and the Security Council on the one hand, and the African Union as a continental organization and its Peace and Security Council on the other, cannot be separate from other debates of equal concern to us as regards the relationship between the continental organization and regional African mechanisms. In that regard, it should be emphasized that article 16 of the Protocol of the Peace and Security Council stipulates that regional African mechanisms are an integral part of the basic security architecture of the Union, which has the primary responsibility for promoting, security and stability in Africa. The spirit of article 16 also recalls Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations. We therefore have as many lessons to learn from cooperation between the Security Council and the African Union as we do from cooperation between the African Union and regional African mechanisms. Under article 16 of the Protocol, there are also plans for drawing up a memorandum of understanding between the African Union Commission and regional African mechanisms. Allow me to make a few comments and suggestions on the subject before the Council. It seems to me that there is a need at the outset to reaffirm our dedication to the collective security system of the United Nations and to the Security Council, which must continue to bear primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. However, in order to continue to shoulder that global responsibility, the Security Council must better adapt to meet the aspirations and concerns of today’s world. It should also be noted that the United Nations is not always in a position to address every crisis situation. In some situations in the past, the United Nations — and the international community as a whole, including Africa — have not been able to meet the challenge of peace in Africa. In other, more recent cases, such as in Burundi, the United Nations did not seem ready to intervene, given the lack of a peace to keep. An African peacekeeping mission had to be deployed, with great difficulty, under the aegis of the African Union until the Security Council decided to authorize the deployment of a United Nations operation, which it ultimately did. That scenario could be repeated in the future. The question therefore arises as to the extent to which the Security Council can authorize logistical and financial support for such operations as are deployed under its mandate or with its agreement, endorsement or backing. No doubt, the spread of conflicts and crises, with all their complexities, do not permit the Security Council alone to cope with all challenges to international peace and security. Continental and regional arrangements must assume their share of responsibility within the framework of subsidiarity. The principle of subsidiarity must also be accompanied by the principles of solidarity and complementarity. Thus, when a regional organization undertakes efforts to establish or maintain peace, it must be able to benefit from the political, financial and logistical support of the continent and of the international community as a whole. However, such solidarity requires a high level of information exchange. There is also a need to take into account the comparative advantages of the various organizations involved in the promotion of peace and security. Action begun by a regional organization may thus offer definite comparative advantages. I am thinking in particular of the efforts undertaken to date by the African Union in Darfur, as well as those of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development in the Naivasha peace process, which has the very strong support of the international community. In addition, in the interaction between the United Nations and regional organizations, preference should be given to the regional approach to peace and security problems, whether conflicts or issues linked to the spread of small arms and light weapons or terrorism. The joint United Nations-African Union initiative to hold a conference devoted to the Great Lakes region, as well as the United Nations approach shared by the Economic Community of West African States with regard to the West African region, both merit strong support. Finally, it seems to me important to emphasize the need to better address the challenge of post-conflict reconstruction through cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. In conclusion, allow me to reiterate the readiness of the Commission of the African Union to build, together with the United Nations and regional African organizations, cooperative relations that better support the determination of the peoples and the leaders of Africa to overcome the challenges of peace and security.

I thank His Excellency Mr. Said Djinnit for having stressed the importance of regional players in addressing issues related to the maintenance of peace and security, as well as the need to act in solidarity. On behalf of the Security Council, I extend a warm welcome to His Excellency Mr. Cristian Barros, Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs of Chile, and invite him to take the floor.

I would like to thank the Prime Minister of Romania for giving us the opportunity to address an important issue in the building of a multilateral system that is both operational and forward-looking. This initiative forms part of a series of open debates whose objective has been to consider various aspects of the way in which the United Nations should respond to the search for improved conditions for peace and stability. The debate that brings us together today challenges us as a civilization. The battle for peace must be fought on two fronts: on the level of security and in the socio-economic sphere. The Charter of the United Nations assigns a prominent role to the action of regional organizations in the maintenance of international peace and security. Chapter VIII reaffirms the principle of subsidiarity and complementarity in the regulation of relations between the Security Council and regional bodies. Although the Charter affirms the primacy of the Security Council in the enforcement of its resolutions, it also creates an ample framework for cooperation between the global system represented by the United Nations and regional mechanisms. The Millennium Declaration called for stronger cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, based on the premise that underlies the international system: shared responsibility for carrying out socio-economic development throughout the world. This creates a dilemma at both the global and regional levels, for which these mechanisms are the best suited to achieve stability and peace and to promote cooperation. The forging of an effective link between the global and regional levels requires steps that will enable both to respond jointly to the challenges of a multidimensional approach to the issues of peace and security and to the new dangers that threaten contemporary society. The increase in demands related to peacekeeping has exceeded the capacity of the United Nations to confront them, due to qualitative and quantitative changes in international threats. Such threats, which have become more complex over time, now include intra-State conflicts, terrorism, small arms and light weapons trafficking, the recruitment and use of child soldiers, the diversion of resources to feed conflicts and the collapse of State structures, all of which have created humanitarian disasters. In the light of this reality, it is vital that we strengthen the interaction between regional organizations and the global system in order to give practical content to the principle of complementarity envisioned by the authors of the Charter. In that context, the responses of the international community are gradually adapting to the multidimensional character of crises and their demands. The new context also requires enhanced capacity at both the global and regional levels, not only to work towards the prevention of conflicts and the peaceful solution of controversies, but also to help, in the aftermath of conflicts, with the process of national reconciliation and reconstruction. The complex design of conflict prevention, implementation of peace and political rehabilitation is a permanent challenge for the United Nations. The Organization must systematize its experiences, improve its policies and adopt a regional peace perspective in its process of internal reform. The Security Council has already begun to incorporate the regional dimension into its treatment of conflicts. In that context, cooperation between the United Nations and the regional organizations must be guided by certain considerations. Regional organizations have the advantage of physical proximity to the threats, as well as a greater understanding of those threats and the political sensitivities involved. Concerted action allows them to exploit this advantage and facilitates an appropriate interpretation of the provisions of the Charter, particularly with respect to peacekeeping actions and support for the delivery of humanitarian aid. Globalization creates a framework that extends the effects of conflicts. The response of local actors to a regional threat can benefit from a more homogeneous socio-cultural vision. These actors have a special incentive to maintain security in the area and their proximity facilitates a timely response. Regional action also facilitates the development of particular formulas for confronting conflicts, which can enrich the debate and help create a wider range of instruments for the maintenance of peace and security. The Americas have also been involved in that process. The work of the Organization of American States in the protection of democracy as the foundation of hemispheric security is particularly noteworthy. The adoption and implementation of the Inter-American Democratic Charter provide a useful example of a regional initiative to promote mechanisms that strengthen peace and security. Association and cooperation with regional organizations are one way to enhance the legitimacy of actions to maintain peace and security and provide an incentive for regional actors to assume their responsibilities. Measures to develop mutual confidence and security in such areas as open military spending, balanced military strength or armament accountability are facilitated by cooperation and coordination in stabilization processes that, in turn, help to strengthen regional collaboration on security issues. The case of Haiti has provided a valuable experience in cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in a process of stabilization. The participation of the majority of the region in the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti reflects the commitment assumed by Latin America and the Caribbean with respect to the poorest country in the hemisphere. Recognizing the comprehensive and long- term character of the international community’s involvement, Chile has proposed a resolution intended to integrate the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean into reconstruction efforts. The objective of developing the potential for regional involvement in issues relating to the maintenance of peace and security in stabilization processes leads us to reflect upon concrete ideas for the promotion of a constructive relationship between those two bodies. We believe that it would be useful to consider the following proposals. First, we should seek formulas for incorporating the vision of regional organizations into Security Council debates relating to Chapters VI and VII. The preventive emphasis will surely help avoid the complexity of deploying of a peace operation. Secondly, we should encourage the Secretariat to support and coordinate the activities of regional organizations on issues of peace and security, which could take the form of a mechanism for consultation and information exchange. Thirdly, within the Secretariat we should coordinate and facilitate the procurement of resources from international financial bodies in order to enhance institutional response capacity at the regional and global levels in the maintenance of peace and security. Bringing regional identities and realities into harmony facilitates the management of a globalized world. It is impossible to create improved conditions of stability without attending to the specificities of each region. The strengthening of regionalism complements and emphasizes multilateral action at the global level and strengthens the universal values that are the foundation of stable and lasting peace. We should like to reaffirm our commitment to continuing to work in that direction in order to improve cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in stabilization processes.

I should like to emphasize that, as stressed by the representative of Chile, subsidiarity and complementarity can be important elements in addressing the dilemma between the regional and the universal and, in some cases, the existing overlaps at those levels.

At the outset, I thank you, Sir, for having taken the felicitous initiative of organizing this public debate and for ensuring the high level of representation here by presiding over it yourself. We also welcome the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico and the Vice- Minister for Foreign Affairs of Chile. I should also like to welcome the presence of the Secretary-General and to express our gratitude to him for having shed light on our deliberations today, which will be considerably enriched by the contributions of the high-level leaders of the regional organizations invited and present here. Today’s debate is being held at a critical stage in the development of international relations. It provides us with a timely opportunity jointly to consider a common strategy to strengthen synergy between the United Nations and the regional organizations in order to meet the challenges facing the international community today. Given its universal mission, the United Nations, since its founding, has endeavoured to fulfil the role entrusted to it: that of the primary guarantor of international peace and security. Indeed, the Charter authorizes it to use regional organizations for support. The United Nations has therefore been able to establish partnership relations with a number of such organizations that have a mandate in this area. On the other hand, the work of the Security Council has become more complex and more multidimensional, to the extent that, in the context of its initiatives to maintain peace and security, it has had further to rely on regional organizations through the establishment of networks for the exchange of information and mechanisms for capacity development. In Africa, the proliferation of internal armed conflicts has forced regional and subregional African organizations to shoulder increased responsibility in the area of conflict management in that region of the world. The Security Council has consistently endorsed such initiatives, thus reinforcing their legitimacy under the Charter, which, in Article 53, states that “no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council.” From the point of view of subsidiarity, it would seem, therefore, that the member States of a given region should, through regional agreements, build up a rapid-reaction capacity in order to be in a position to deal with situations that pose serious threats or that could lead to a breach of the peace, and that the launching of United Nations peacekeeping operations would take place only in the face of an increased threat that cannot be dealt with through regional mobilization alone. It is also important that a genuine complementarity be developed between the actions of the Security Council and regional contributions to peace and security. Depending on the seriousness of the situation and the speed of the action required, regional organizations may offer a comparative advantage in terms of their capacity to intervene rapidly to prevent a situation from spiralling out of control. It is therefore important that a strategic partnership be established between the United Nations and regional organizations for more effective interaction. But that division of labour is not a given. It can be credible only if it is based on a proactive strategy that involves the creation and strengthening of regional capacity, so that that responsibility can be fully shouldered at the appropriate time. From that point of view, we welcome the decision taken by the Group of Eight to assist regional organizations in acquiring their own capacity for the maintenance of peace, particularly in Africa, in the context of support for the implementation of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). We deem it important that there be increased coordination with regional mechanisms for the prevention and management of regional conflicts and crises, such as the African Union’s Peace and Security Council and the Mediation and Security Council of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). Interaction between the United Nations and regional organizations should therefore be based not only on consultations but also on the rational use of the possibilities and resources that are available, with pride of place given to the leadership role of the international world Organization, on the basis of a rational division of tasks. From another point of view, NEPAD and ECOWAS are clear examples of the awareness of the genuine link that must be established between peace and economic and social development, which regional integration organizations must promote. The fact that most of the regional organizations that are United Nations partners have economic objectives, particularly in Africa, gives them genuine potential for contributing to the elimination of the root causes of armed conflicts within States through the advancement of rational economic policies. They also should benefit from increased attention from the United Nations to that end. Indeed, genuine regional integration can also serve as an effective remedy to counter rebellions and irredentism. The example of the European Community would seem to be the best illustration in that respect. Clearly integration is not something to be found only in texts; it must be effective and, indeed, truly experienced by the peoples of the region or subregion involved. Cooperation with regional organizations can promote the implementation of the regional approach that is now being tried out in West Africa within the framework of the stabilization process for post-conflict countries or countries that are working to overcome a serious political crisis. In my delegation’s view, that is an unprecedented, and most welcome, development in the search for a coherent solution to several conflicts. Conflicts in West Africa, for the most part, are spawned by the same underlying causes, even though their manifestations differ from one country to another. In that context, we welcome the cooperation between the United Nations Office for West Africa, ECOWAS and other actors working for peace in the subregion, as well as the emerging possibility for the countries of the region to pool their efforts to resolve, in close cooperation with the United Nations, trans- border and transnational problems. It is important that that approach receive ever-greater support from the States Members of the United Nations.

It is my hope also that our debate will provide an important background for future actions aimed at ensuring synergies between the United Nations and regional organizations. I now give the floor to the representative of the Netherlands.

Sir, the European Union is honoured by your presence here today presiding over the Security Council’s deliberations today. We also welcome the participation of the Secretary-General and of Mr. Luis Ernesto Delbez, who chaired the high-level of the Security Council on regional organizations last year. The European Union welcomes the Romanian initiative to carry this issue forward focusing on cooperation and stabilization processes. As the Council is aware, Javier Solana, the High Representative for the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, whom it had invited to participate in this meeting, cannot be here today. He has therefore designated Mr. Peter Feith, Deputy Director-General for European Security and Defence Policy of the Council Secretariat to speak on his behalf. Heeding your call for brevity, Sir, I would therefore ask you to give the floor to Mr. Feith.

I give the floor to Mr. Peter Feith, Deputy Director-General of European Security and Defence Policy of the European Union. Mr. Feith: Let me first mention the overall context in which the European Union wishes to operate in the stabilization processes: the European security strategy. That strategy was born when Europeans acknowledged that we are more capable and more effective when we have a common perception of the threats and risks and of how to deal with them. That is true not only for Europe, but also for the international community as a whole. Threats and risks are never more dangerous than when the international community is divided. Europe’s security strategy rests mainly on two pillars: preventive engagement and effective multilateralism. Let me start with preventive engagement, which is at the heart of our approach. Today’s threats are dynamic: left alone, they will grow. We need to be able to act at the first signs of trouble. That requires a strategic culture that fosters early, rapid and, when necessary, robust intervention. It is to be hoped that we have learned lessons from the past, when inaction bred further violence. The EU wants to become more active and more effective in conflict prevention. That is why Javier Solana is now in the Middle East to provide a European contribution, to facilitate and to help contain the violence and tensions that have once again unfolded as part of the Palestinian conflict. Permit me to recall the efforts of your own country, Mr. President, as Chairman-in-Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in the person of Foreign Minister Geoana, in preventive engagement, together with NATO and the European Union, in the Balkans in 2001. The European Union is strongly committed to enhancing dialogue with all actors involved in conflict prevention through more structured dialogue and closer joint work in addressing security challenges. The second pillar on which our security strategy rests is effective multilateralism. Europe’s security will depend more — not less — on an effective multilateral system, on a rule-based international order and on well-functioning international institutions. Those are the refuge not of the weak, but of the wise. Acting collectively before crises erupt, supporting the central role of the Security Council and defending and developing international law are principles that from the outset have underpinned the Union’s external actions and that are now more formally laid down in the European Security Strategy. The Strategy also reflects a clear European consensus that military power is to be seen as one means among others, to be used on the international scene: neither the only one nor the first. As the document says, “none of the new threats is purely military; nor can any be tackled by purely military means”. Accordingly, the Union is uniquely encompassing a complete set of instruments for international crisis management. The political solution of regional crises, development aid and support for democratic forces in all crises form part of the wide range of instruments that, together with the means for applying coercion by force, are available. And civil instruments such as police and expertise in the rule of law, civil administration and civil protection are key elements in the post-conflict stabilization phase. I should now like to refer briefly to the current operational engagement of the European Union in stabilization processes. We are currently running three operations — all of them civilian — in the Balkans and in Georgia, and we are now well advanced in preparing to take over responsibilities for implementing the Dayton provisions in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as recently recognized by the Council in resolution 1551 (2004). Last year, at the request of the Secretary-General, we conducted an autonomous military operation called Operation Artemis, intervening in a timely manner in the area of Bunia in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The lessons we drew from that operation are the following. We need the political will and the flexible mechanisms to reach decisions quickly; we need to be prepared to use diplomatic instruments in support of military action; we should use the Community Rapid Reaction Mechanism for immediate relief of the population and for rehabilitation; and we must use civilian crisis-management instruments to help train and equip the local police. But, above all, we saw the need to further develop our arrangements for early warning and cooperation in peacekeeping with the United Nations, including the Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO). But we also concluded that the Union is not to intervene in every potential crisis area. For example, work is in hand with a view to developing a coherent and comprehensive EU response to peace-building in Africa and support for the development of African capabilities in order to better allow the African Union and subregional organizations to deal with conflict on the continent. Central to that is the principle of African ownership. In that context, I should mention the support that the EU, together with the United States, provides to the African Union-led ceasefire monitoring mission in Darfur. I should now like to say a few words on our cooperation with the United Nations. Cooperation with the United Nations is essential, and we are developing a structured dialogue based on the direct exchange of information and frequent contacts at the political and working levels. Building on the Joint Declaration on United Nations-EU cooperation In Crisis Management, of 24 September 2003, four priority areas have been identified: planning, lessons learned, training and exercises, and communication. The conceptual thinking behind our cooperation with the United Nations is also evolving. The European Council recently endorsed proposals for broadening EU support for the United Nations in conducting crisis management operations. Arrangements — which have been the subject of consultation with DPKO — include the availability of rapid-response battle group units and concepts such as the EU establishing a clearing house mechanism to assist force generation or bridging operations in support of United Nations operations. Similarly, we are developing our thinking with regard to supporting the United Nations with rapidly deployable civilian instruments. In conclusion, the Council may ask: will these arrangements come at the expense of traditional contributions by European Union member States to United Nations-led operations? Let me recall the long- standing and distinguished record of European service under United Nations command and the firm intention to continue that tradition. But, with continuing low and stagnant defence budgets, the number of deployable, usable military forces and police ready for crisis- management duties is still too limited given the steadily increasing demand. That is a problem that all of us — the United Nations and organizations supporting the United Nations in crisis management — are grappling with. However, if the political will exists, they can be overcome.

I thank Mr. Feith for his statement. He was correct in quoting from the European Security Strategy, which is very relevant to what we are discussing. None of the new threats is purely military, nor can any be tackled by purely military means. Addressing this is, in fact, what we are trying to do now.

Today’s meeting is very important and very timely. I wish to welcome you, Mr. Prime Minister, and to thank you for personally presiding over this meeting in New York. I should also like to welcome the presence of Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico and representatives of regional organizations. The world is experiencing complex and profound changes, and we are facing many threats and challenges. Both traditional and non-traditional security issues are increasingly assuming a transboundary character. An effective response to those threats and challenges depends on the concerted efforts of all countries, the important role of the United Nations and cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. For more than a decade, the United Nations has been steadily enhancing its coordination and cooperation with regional organizations both in conflict prevention and resolution and in post-conflict peace- building. This has had a positive effect in strengthening the role of the United Nations and in the maintenance of peace and stability. We appreciate the renewed initiative by Romania to convene a debate on strengthening cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. In that connection, I wish to highlight a number of points. First, the Charter of the United Nations confers on the Security Council primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. The Council is thus at the core of the international collective security machinery. Regional organizations too can contribute to the peaceful settlement of disputes. The Charter serves as a guide for United Nations action and as a framework for the activities of regional organizations. Chapter VIII provides for a role by regional organizations in the settlement of disputes and defines the relationship between the United Nations and such organizations. Here, let me underscore in particular Article 53, which states that “no enforcement action shall be taken under regional arrangements or by regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council”. Secondly, effective cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations should be further enhanced in order to create synergy based on their respective assets; the United Nations should maintain open communication with regional organizations. Geographical proximity and similarities in the historical and cultural backgrounds of their members give regional organizations a unique advantage with respect to the maintenance of regional peace and security. Prior to debating or taking action on a conflict situation, the Security Council must, as appropriate, listen to the views and suggestions of the regional organizations concerned so that it can take informed decisions that are feasible, pertinent and effective. Regional organizations, particularly those from Africa, should be able to count on as much support and cooperation as possible from the United Nations in actions they initiate to resolve conflicts. At the same time, as required by the Charter, regional organizations should, on their own initiative, maintain closer contacts with the Security Council in order to provide the Council with timely and comprehensive updates on actions they are taking. That is essential to ensure that regional actions are correctly oriented. Thirdly, the United Nations should actively help regional organizations, especially those in Africa, to build their capacity for peacekeeping. The African Union, the Economic Community of West African States and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development have all made very effective contributions to addressing conflicts in Africa. The United Nations and the international community at large should provide resources, personnel, training and logistical support to those organizations with a view to enhancing their overall capacity in early warning and peacekeeping so that they can make full use of their strengths in maintaining regional peace and stability. In recent years, regional cooperation has been on the rise in Asia, thanks to joint efforts by Asian countries. The Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has continued to play an active role in regional affairs, and the ASEAN Regional Forum has become an important venue for multilateral dialogue on security in the Asia-Pacific region. The 10- plus-3 cooperation arrangement among ASEAN, China, Japan and the Republic of Korea has also been playing an increasingly prominent role in promoting regional peace and development. As a new mechanism for cooperation oriented towards Asia as a whole, the Asia Cooperation Dialogue forum has been making steady progress. That shows the willingness of Asian States to cooperate among themselves. It is equally worth noting that the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) too is developing into an effective mechanism for promoting regional security, stability and development. The recent declaration adopted at the Tashkent summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization stressed that the SCO would cooperate with the United Nations and would make its proper contribution to the maintenance of security and stability in its own region and throughout the world. I am confident that, over time, cooperation between the SCO and the United Nations will continuously grow in importance.

I agree with the representative of China that very effective responses to threats to international peace and security should be the result of common efforts by all Member States, the United Nations and regional organizations, in accordance with the Charter. I now invite the Secretary-General of the League of Arab States, His Excellency Mr. Amre Moussa, an old friend, to take the floor. Mr. Moussa: I am very happy to see you, Mr. Prime Minister, presiding over the Security Council. I express our deep appreciation for your initiative. (spoke in Arabic) I was very pleased to receive the President’s invitation to participate, on behalf of the League of Arab States, in this important Security Council meeting on cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in stabilization processes. Here let me recall that the Council met in April 2003, under the presidency of Mexico, on the item entitled “The Security Council and regional organizations: facing the new challenges to international peace and security” (see S/PV.4739). I turn now to the subject of today’s meeting: cooperation in stabilization processes and peacekeeping. Here, a question of concern is whether stabilization and peacekeeping are really two separate elements. Is stabilization an objective in itself? Is the purpose to cool down conflicts that are growing? Sometimes we find that, even when a situation is calm and when concerns are allayed, danger will remain if the status quo continues. The notion that stability will lead to peace and reconstruction has yet to be confirmed. It is in fact possible to take the opposite course: first to establish peace in order to ensure the success of peacekeeping operations, and then to pursue security, reconstruction, reconciliation and stability. Cooperation among countries, the Security Council and regional organizations is needed: specifically cooperation within the framework of the Charter. Such cooperation should include peacekeeping and peacemaking operations that encompass development and that lead to peace and stability. Chapter VIII of the Charter and relevant resolutions of the General Assembly provide the framework for consultation and coordination between the United Nations and other international organizations; these are supplemented by cooperation agreements signed between the United Nations and individual organizations. In fact, there now exists a network of cooperation going far beyond security matters in their narrow, traditional sense. As the representative of the European Union said earlier, international threats are no longer limited to the military and security areas, and they can no longer be addressed solely by military means. In that connection, as we are now discussing the establishment of a new international system to face unprecedented new challenges, the subject of cooperation with regional organizations takes on increasing importance. Effective cooperation of that kind is now imperative. These organizations are an important element of the United Nations, with a view to confronting international problems that are on the upswing and that have spread throughout the world. This prompts me to say that the high-level committee established by the Secretary-General to deal with international threats and challenges takes into account the role of regional organizations and the need to adjust and concentrate that role with a view to dealing with international and regional circumstances, urgent and new situations which are not only political in nature, but also economic and social situations the causes of which are poverty, disease, underdevelopment and terrorism. You will agree with me that there is a need to amend Chapter VIII of the Charter to take into account new international development and the needs of development and the role played by international organizations. The question of reform and modernization in different parts of the world has become an essential item on the international agenda. As we in the League of Arab States see it, we have tried to face the needs of this era and the normal trend of events. The last Arab Summit, held in Tunisia, adopted documents that show how to move towards a broad modernization in the Arab world in order to achieve clear democratization, strengthen protection of human rights and freedoms, empower women and achieve independence of the judiciary, on the basis of economic and social development procedures based on regional cooperation and opening up economic and development policies. In that regard, we must develop cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States as a regional organization. We all recall the report of the United Nations Development Programme on human development in the Arab world. It is an important report, adopted by the United Nations through the Arab League. All the Arab countries have taken it into account quite seriously. I think that is a new sphere of cooperation between the United Nations and the Arab League and all regional organizations. The basis of that cooperation is to be found in Chapter IX of the Charter, which speaks of international economic and social cooperation, especially in Article 55. This is a responsibility in which all regional organizations should share as part of the cooperation between the United Nations and organizations. Let me speak of the improvements in the work done by the Arab League — considering that it is a regional organization, and especially the Economic and Social Council of the Arab League — in order to open up to all civil societies of the Arab League the possibility of achieving consultative status, as it is done with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, and also with a view to creating an Arab parliament as the basis for taking steps globally towards democracy in the region. We have signed a human rights charter in the Arab world. Let me stress the importance that should attach to horizontal cooperation between regional organizations. That is a question that the Arab League considers natural, especially in our relations with the African Union, which encompasses most of the members of the Arab League in the African continent, who have made a commitment to implement the goals and principles of the Charter of the African Union. That is a question to be considered when we take up the advantages of horizontal cooperation between regional organizations. These special and geographical relations between the two organizations have led to many advantages, especially in the framework of peace negotiations in the Sudan and in cooperating to follow the present situation in Darfur and deal with it, and in relation to Somalia and its progress towards stability. Tripartite cooperation between the United Nations, the African Union and the Arab League could lead, I believe, to positive results in achieving stability and development, especially in the Horn of Africa. The United Nations, and the Security Council in particular, recently have been facing unprecedented challenges with repercussions on the effectiveness of multilateralism and the role of regional organizations. However, international and regional attempts to marginalize the United Nations and regional organizations, which were not long in coming, have been rejected. It appears that the international community does want an international system of global security and is affirming the importance of multilateralism and the importance of the United Nations Charter and its purposes. We have seen clearly the gravity and complexity of the question of Iraq and how difficult it was to deal with this question outside the United Nations. The Israeli-Palestinian situation is deteriorating and threatening peace and security throughout the Middle East. That means that the role of the Security Council is necessary and essential in order to save the situation. Hesitating in that area brings us back to the starting point, where the role of the Council and its credibility in protecting international peace and security are concerned. In the decision of the International Court of Justice concerning the Israeli wall of separation and Israeli practices in the occupied territories we have seen a strong and wise response to those who are seeking to make use of negative measures against principles of international law or who are following a double standard. The International Court has adopted one standard — the Charter, the principles of justice — and I believe that that is also the view of the Security Council when it makes use of its wisdom and plays its role in keeping with the Charter to affirm its credibility and effectiveness. The United Nations and regional organizations together, seeking to maintain international peace and security, to achieve economic and social development and to achieve international progress towards reconstruction and modernization, I propose that the Security Council, under your presidency, Sir, in a joint operation with the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, should lend support to that approach and that this be done in the framework of the Charter and the provisions of international law. We wish to strengthen cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, and we call upon the international community to work towards assuring respect for these rights, to prevent international organizations from being marginalized in the process, and to take into account its role and confirm its role, as has been done in past decades, to strengthen democracy and the principles of freedom and human rights in the face of oppression and hegemonistic policies. In the past we have stressed the need to use the Security Council and regional organizations when we deal with different crises. Once again — under your presidency, Sir, as we did under the presidency of Mexico last year — we appeal for an international conference to examine questions or issues that are threatening international peace and security, and for a regional meeting to prepare for that conference. I hope that the Security Council will take these proposals on board and seek to mobilize international efforts to that end to achieve concordance of international opinion around the principles of freedom, the primacy of law and the Security Council and the United Nations as the guarantors of those ideas and the guarantors of international peace and security.

We have, indeed, a broad range of tools, developed in accordance with Chapter VIII of the Charter, to facilitate cooperation. But we need fresh ideas in order to improve such cooperation and to make sure that stability can be achieved as a result of cooperation and interaction.

Thank you, Mr. President, for your timely initiative to address this important subject. It is a particular pleasure for me to speak at this meeting, presided over by the Prime Minister of Romania, in the presence of distinguished representatives of regional and subregional organizations from all continents. The topic of this meeting — cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in stabilization processes — goes right to the heart of Germany’s political philosophy. Ever since the Federal Republic of Germany was founded 55 years ago, its foreign policy has been based on two principles: regional integration and international multilateralism. These principles served us well in the years when Germany re-emerged from the darkest years of its history; they served us well as we pursued, achieved and consolidated our national reunification; and they will guide us in living up to the responsibilities that we are prepared to assume within the United Nations. Regional integration and multilateralism — the two pillars of peace and security — can best join forces and generate mutual benefit on the basis of complementarity, as enshrined in Chapter VIII of the Charter, with the United Nations at the centre of the international security system. As a member of the European Union (EU), Germany has reaffirmed its commitment to a cooperative and effective multilateralism. Indeed, the EU Security Strategy, adopted in December 2003, enshrines the objectives of enhancing stability, the rule of law and good governance and of tackling both new and old threats to international peace. The European Union promotes a commitment to a more responsive, rule-based international order through, inter alia, the strengthening of international justice, including by means of the International Criminal Court. In the context of the statement made by Mr. Feith, who spoke on behalf of Mr. Solana, the High Representative for the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, let me highlight one element that illustrates the practical benefits of the EU approach to effective multilateralism. I am referring to the recently concluded strategic partnership agreement between the United Nations Development Programme and the European Commission on conflict zones and democratic governance. This new partnership, the first of its kind — although more are to follow — between the European Commission and other United Nations agencies, is also a step closer to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals, because stabilization is not only a post-conflict task, but also an everyday development effort. As the purpose of today’s meeting is to identify new methods of cooperation and interaction between the United Nations and regional organizations, I would like to put the spotlight on two particular elements: first, complementarity between the United Nations and regional actors; and secondly, some very significant recent developments in Africa. On the first point — complementarity — stabilization efforts cover a wide range of activities and are not confined to the post-conflict phase, as you, Mr. President, have rightly pointed out in your non-paper. For each of these activities in the different stages of post-conflict stabilization, one actor — whether the United Nations or a regional organization — will offer a comparative advantage. The situations in the Balkans, in western Africa and in Haiti all make this point. Bringing together the right partners at the right moment is a daunting challenge. Division of labour can be successful only if three conditions are met. First, all relevant actors — institutional and inter-governmental, from within and outside the United Nations system — must be involved. Secondly, one actor — normally the United Nations, but potentially a regional organization — must take the lead in integrated planning and coordinated implementation. Thirdly, funding problems must be resolved. To optimize each actor’s input, enhanced cooperation among regional organizations, as well as between those organizations and the United Nations, and — notably — increased exchange of information and dialogue, are essential. The channels of specific and regular communication may vary according to the needs of the particular stabilization process. We agree with the Secretary-General that the practice of high- level meetings between the Secretariat and heads of regional organizations is welcome. Germany supports the idea of increasing such meetings. If they are well prepared, and if they produce meaningful, practical results, they may be an important contribution towards a coordinated and consistent multilateral approach to crisis management and peace-building. My second spotlight is on important and encouraging institutional developments in Africa. Indeed, the African Union is now endowed with its own conflict prevention mechanism and, since March 2004, with its own Peace and Security Council. Recently, the Economic Community of West African States announced its decision to create robust special task forces. Those are tremendous leaps forward. They nurture hope for particularly effective cooperation between the United Nations and African regional and subregional arrangements. It is in the interests of the international community to strengthen the capabilities of these African mechanisms. A test case for such cooperation and interaction is the humanitarian crisis currently being experienced in the Darfur region of Sudan. With the deployment of 120 monitors to the crisis region and, potentially, of 300 peacekeepers, the African Union has assumed an important engagement in crisis management. The United Nations and the African Union will very soon be able to assess the extent to which the agreement between the Sudanese Government and the Secretary- General has been implemented with regard to disarming the Janjaweed, stopping the killing and pillaging and allowing humanitarian access. On the basis of that joint assessment, we will calibrate our future course of action without delay. We look forward to close cooperation with the African Union in this regard. Another encouraging development in Africa is the African Union’s increasing preparedness to prevent or mediate conflicts. The series of African mini-summits is a case in point. The forthcoming summit in Accra on 29 July regarding the situation in Côte d’Ivoire will be of particular relevance. We all hope that it will generate serious commitments. In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that the means to achieve, and the conceptual underpinning for, a multilateral division of labour for peace and security are already in place. What is now needed is the political will to make good use of the possibilities.

I thank the representative of Germany for his comments on cooperative and effective multilateralism. That should, indeed, be the guiding principle in addressing threats to international peace and security, as well as in achieving greater coherence and, eventually, a structured approach to cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations.

We are pleased to welcome the Prime Minister of Romania, who is presiding over the Security Council. His presence in this Chamber, as well as the participation in today’s meeting of the Secretary- General, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Mexico and the high-level representatives of a number of leading regional organizations, provide compelling evidence of the importance of the issue under discussion. Against the backdrop of ominous challenges facing the international community, particularly in the security sphere, the goal of consistently improving cooperation of the United Nations and the Security Council with regional and subregional organizations is becoming increasingly valuable. Such cooperation must continue to be based on the firm foundation of the United Nations Charter, in particular Chapter VIII. Of no less importance is the growing awareness among Member States of the need for strict compliance with the fundamental principles and standards of international peacekeeping activities at all stages of the process of conflict prevention and settlement and post- conflict peace-building. Here, we are referring, above all, to the immutable nature of the primary responsibility of the Security Council for the maintenance of international peace and security. The optimal solution would be for all regional and coalition peacekeeping operations to be authorized by the Security Council and to be accountable to it. Those conditions are necessary in the case of operations whose mandates include elements of peace enforcement. Successful experiences in carrying out operations authorized by the Security Council — such as the NATO operation in Afghanistan, the European Union operation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, those of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in Côte d’Ivoire and Liberia and the regional coalition in Timor Leste — constitute a partial list of positive examples of compliance with those fundamental principles. Considerable experience has been acquired in positive cooperation between the Security Council and regional partners such as the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the African Union, the Organization of American States and subregional organizations such as the Southern African Development Community and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. The League of Arab States and the Organization of the Islamic Conference must play an important role in finding peaceful solutions to the numerous problems of the Middle East. Russia continues to vigorously promote the intensification of cooperation, above all, in the peacekeeping field, between the United Nations and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). CIS peacekeepers continue to assist in the effective settlement of the crisis in Tajikistan. Now, together with the United Nations Observer Mission in Georgia, they are maintaining security and stability in the zone of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict. The cooperation now being established between the United Nations and the Collective Security Treaty Organization has great potential. In that framework, intensive work is being conducted to develop that organization’s peacekeeping potential, inter alia, for use in United Nations peacekeeping operations. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization plays an important role in ensuring stability and security in the Eurasian region. Its members have indicated their readiness to develop interaction with the United Nations in a great number of relevant areas such as the combat against international terrorism, the illegal trafficking of drugs and assistance for post-conflict rehabilitation in Afghanistan. Regional and subregional organizations must come forward more actively in making use of their resources and comparative advantages. Meanwhile, the United Nations must pay unflagging attention to enhancing coordination of its efforts with those organizations, rationalizing the division of labour and preserving the prerogatives of the Organization and the Security Council. We welcome the important contribution towards achieving these goals made through the Secretary- General’s regular high-level meetings with the leadership of regional organizations. That practice should be continued, all the more so as the agenda of United Nations cooperation with regional partners is becoming increasingly broad and diverse. In addition to peacekeeping and peace-building objectives are the issues of countering the spread of weapons of mass destruction and the illegal circulation of small arms and light weapons, solving other destabilizing cross-border problems and combating the drug trade and organized crime. In that context, it seems useful to reflect on the possibility of establishing in the United Nations an updatable data bank on the forms and practical parameters of the Organization’s cooperation with regional organizations, on available resources and on proposals for cooperation with the United Nations. Of course, we are not thinking of any kind of attempt to formalize such cooperation or to make it fit onto a Procrustean bed of computers. Quite the contrary, there is a need to seek out opportunities for strengthening the coordination of efforts and for more flexible cooperation. We hope that the outcome of today’s debate will enable us to take forward the process of improving multidimensional cooperation with regional organizations and, in doing so, more fully to realize the potential of the system for worldwide collective security enshrined in the United Nations Charter.

Recent discussions of the Security Council have confirmed that cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations and arrangements is based upon the United Nations Charter, including when it comes to peacekeeping and stabilization processes. This practice and some of Ambassador Konuzin’s suggestions should be attentively considered in the future as well. I now give the floor to Mr. Alounkèo Kittikhoun, Chairperson of the Standing Committee of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN).

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the States members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), namely Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet Nam and my own country, Laos. ASEAN congratulates you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Council for this month and appreciates your initiative of convening this very important meeting. We are honoured by your presence as you, the Prime Minister of Romania, preside over our deliberations. (spoke in English) Touching upon the topic of our discussion today, we would like to share some of the views of ASEAN. For several years, the Secretary-General has been exploring modalities for cooperation between and among the United Nations and regional organizations through, inter alia, the regular convening of the high- level meetings between the United Nations and regional organizations. In that regard, we are pleased to recall that the Secretary-General of ASEAN attended the fourth high-level meeting between the United Nations and regional organizations, held in February 2001. A delegation from the ASEAN secretariat also attended the fifth high-level meeting, held in 2003, which focused on new challenges to international peace and security, including international terrorism. The search for appropriate modalities for cooperation between regional organizations and the United Nations aims to promote a speedy response to situations likely to disturb regional or international peace and security. It hopes to optimize the mobilization of the resources of concerned regional organizations and the various components of the United Nations system, based on their comparative advantages, so as to lead to the complementarity of efforts and the elimination of duplication. Moreover, cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations could strengthen or build institutional capacity at the regional level for conflict prevention and post-conflict peace-building. In the field of peace-building, ASEAN notes that the high-level meetings between the United Nations and regional organizations have identified four main areas for cooperation. The first is the identification of situations where peace-building is required. That involves monitoring all such potential situations, acting as sources of early warning and determining at which point a particular situation is ripe for peace-building action. The second area involves the definition of political objectives, including the deployment of joint preliminary assessment missions and ensuring a realistic negotiated political settlement. The third area entails the development of an integrated operational response through mutual consultations. Those could be promoted through regular and systematic working group meetings on specific peace-building issues between the United Nations and regional organizations. The last area pertains to joint monitoring of the results of peace-building by keeping all parties informed of the progress achieved or the obstacles encountered, as well as by identifying remedial measures. Meanwhile, the General Assembly’s significant resolution 57/35, which was adopted on 21 November 2002 and dealt with the issue of cooperation between the United Nations and ASEAN, has encouraged more active cooperation between the two organizations. That landmark resolution is expected to lead to activities between ASEAN and the United Nations in various areas as appropriate, including in the field of political and security issues. Since 2001, ASEAN and the United Nations have held annual conferences on conflict prevention, conflict resolution and peace-building. I should also like to recall that, following the ASEAN-United Nations summit held in Bangkok on 12 February 2000, where ASEAN leaders met with Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the annual conference has been organized jointly by the United Nations Secretariat, the ministries for foreign affairs of ASEAN member countries, the ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies and the ASEAN secretariat. Since 1999, through the Chairman of the ASEAN Regional Forum, a multilateral security forum of 23 countries in the Asia-Pacific region plus the European Union, ASEAN has maintained contacts with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Secretary- General of the Organization of American States and the Secretary-General of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. That continuing exercise aims at exchanging experiences and best practices in promoting regional security. ASEAN foreign ministers also hold regular consultations with their counterparts from other regional organizations at the margins of the annual sessions of the General Assembly in New York. Those meetings serve a very useful purpose in promoting mutual understanding of regional concerns. In recent years, ASEAN foreign ministers have met their counterparts from the Rio Group, the Gulf Cooperation Council, the Economic Cooperation Organization and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation. It should be noted that ASEAN foreign ministers, at the thirty-seventh ASEAN Ministerial Meeting, held in Jakarta from 29 to 30 June 2004, were encouraged by the important progress in the development of the ASEAN Security Community, which they believe will lead to an ASEAN whose members are at peace with each another and with the world at large. They also agreed that the ASEAN Security Community would strengthen ASEAN’s capacity to deal with security challenges, including those having to do with both traditional and non-traditional security issues. The ASEAN Security Community would strengthen ASEAN relations with its dialogue partners and its other friends and would enhance ASEAN’s role as the Regional Forum’s primary driving force. It is difficult, if not impossible, to generalize about the comparative advantages of regional organizations vis-à-vis the United Nations in various fields. In that context, we believe that the inputs of the present deliberations will generate a new impetus for further enhancing the cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, including ASEAN, in the stabilization processes, on the basis of the principle of consent and national sovereignty and in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations. Last, but not least, we wish Romania’s presidency of the Security Council great success.

I thank the representative of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) for his kind words addressed to our delegation. Allow me to emphasize that the comparative advantages the representative of ASEAN has just mentioned are truly very important in our debate, as are the annual meetings that ASEAN holds with the United Nations. These are practical measures. I believe this is a subject of interest to other regions as well.

My delegation is grateful for the convening of this meeting, which we see as very timely. I extend warm greetings to you, Mr. Prime Minister, and to the representatives of the various regional organizations present here today. Regional organizations have an increasingly relevant role to play in the overall international effort at peace and security. Their framework is more flexible, and, by definition, they are closer to security threats and their root causes. As stated in the excellent non-paper prepared by the Romanian delegation, regional organizations have unique advantages: “they are the main depositaries of regional expertise, major stakeholders when it comes to regional security and, as the instruments that organize dialogue and cooperation, are effective conflict prevention tools”. (S/2004/546, annex, para. 3) We agree entirely. Regional organizations are in a better position to detect early symptoms of conflict and to act promptly, thereby preventing intra-State differences from evolving into intolerance, prejudice, hatred, killing and massive crisis. Human rights monitoring is another example of a task best carried out by organizations closer to the area of observation. Complementarities between the United Nations and regional organizations can, and should, be further developed and utilized, although the Security Council remains the only legitimate organ to determine enforcement action. As we see it, the primary role of regional organizations is preventive. Their main efforts should be targeted at root causes, and those may be region-specific. The root causes of conflict in Kosovo might be very different from those in Darfur, which might in turn widely differ from the Haitian problem. It is also true that not all regional arrangements work in the same manner and regional peculiarities ought to be respected, but there is a wide array of areas on which cooperation between the United Nations and smaller regional or subregional organizations can be enhanced. Haiti is an issue in which the United Nations could seek more cooperation from the Organization of American States, for instance, in the light of previous political and electoral experience, as mentioned by the Secretary-General. The spread of small arms trafficking is also an area demanding closer cooperation from regional organizations. Many conflicts escalate today to major crises because of the widespread access to illegal weapons. Clashes within societies — between tribes or different communities — may be ancient, but the arms they have available now are modern, much more sophisticated and much deadlier than in the past. Clashes therefore escalate quickly to widespread killings and all sorts of outrageous violations of human rights. That is why we have to pursue our efforts to tackle the loopholes in the legal transference of arms that allow a diversion to the illegal market, as we have consistently stressed. When the Council discussed complex crises two months ago, the need for conflict prevention was self- evident, as is the link between peace and development. It also became clear that our responses to crises have to start earlier and encompass a human approach to security. We should adapt our Organization to the challenges presented by the complexities of the current security situation in the world. Revitalization and institutional change are at the core of our appropriate response to the needs of the peoples, and the initiatives undertaken by the Secretary-General have opened a window of opportunity to reform this institution and to incorporate new ways of dealing with old and new threats. The sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations in 2005 represents the ideal occasion for demonstrating our renewed commitment to its high purposes and principles by promoting change — institutional, on the one hand, and substantive, on the other — by increasing political commitment to the Millenium Goals. Underdevelopment, poverty and hunger are at the core of most conflicts in the world. They are present before conflict occurs, they will worsen while conflict is building up and they will degenerate into major humanitarian crises even after conflict itself has been quelled. Governments, international organizations and civil society have to get involved in the fight against the root causes of conflict. Regional organizations can detect potential threats faster and they can be very useful in an early-warning system. Together with non- governmental organizations, they are the natural watchdogs for the early stages of crises and for anything with the potential to become a threat to peace and security and that would require the attention of the Council. When action is needed, it does not necessarily entail peace and security operations by the United Nations alone. The international community can assist in equipping regional organizations to respond to immediate threats, as proven very successfully with the Economic Community of West African States in West Africa. I wish to say a word on mechanisms to be used by regional organizations. They have better access to local media and we cannot stress enough the role of the media in the resolution of conflicts. The same holds true for the prevention of conflicts. Regional organizations are in a much better position to monitor the influence that local, national and even international media exercise over incipient conflicts and to take appropriate action to defend the free and impartial dissemination of information. Political will and creativity are needed to connect various initiatives and different actors and to make them work in favour of peace and security. As President Lula stated during the Global Compact Leaders Summit, recently held here at the United Nations: “At stake is the world we want to build; a world divided by asymmetries and inaction in the face of exclusion and misery or a world capable of transcending irrationality and reconciling economic efficiency with justice and social progress.” My delegation believes that the concerted efforts of regional organizations and the United Nations will become one of the various important tools for attaining that political objective.

I thank the representative of Brazil for his kind words addressed to me. We fully concur with the view that regional organizations are the most effective tool of conflict prevention. Their efforts should be targeted to addressing the root causes of any conflict and instability worldwide. I also welcome the representative of Brazil’s remarks about early warning, the contribution of non-governmental organizations and the media in that respect.

Allow me to express our pleasure at seeing you, Sir, preside over this most important meeting of the Council. The debate you have organized gives us an opportunity to explore together the vast resources of Chapter VIII of the Charter and I hope to exploit it for the greater good of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. The statements made by the Secretary-General and the various representatives of regional organizations have broadly laid the groundwork and opened extensive prospects for exemplary cooperation on stabilization between the universal Organization and regional organizations. Promising approaches and ambitious partnerships are already taking shape and it is now up to us to give them substance by establishing appropriate frameworks for our work, harmonizing our methods and pooling our capacities and resources in a spirit of complementarity and cooperation. The moment is all the more auspicious in that the United Nations is generously opening itself to the outside world, experiencing far-reaching changes and deeply committed to a vast and bold reform movement in order to adapt itself to today’s realities. It is undeniable that the role of regional organizations and their activities with respect to the United Nations have taken a quantum leap forward since An Agenda for Peace called for cooperation between the United Nations and those bodies in order to strengthen our Organization’s capacities in preventive diplomacy, peace-building and peacekeeping. The new approach has generated a wide variety of instruments for cooperation under Chapter VIII, as well as mechanisms for periodic consultations, such as the meetings held between the Secretary- General and the leaders of regional organizations. More recently, the Millennium Declaration relevantly recalled that the multidimensional nature of the challenges facing the Organization calls for a multidisciplinary approach involving multiple actors at both the diagnostic and the treatment phases of a crisis. That awareness opens new avenues for the potential uses of Chapter VIII at a time when the globalization of threats calls for a global definition of the concept of security and for a concerted, collective response. For some 10 years now, the United Nations has continuously broadened and strengthened its conflict- management instruments through increased cooperation with regional organizations. The fact remains, however, that the principal responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security lies with our universal Organization. The Security Council remains the chief forum for international conflict management and its primacy is key to the preservation of the very foundations of international law, as enshrined in the Charter. It is therefore imperative that regional security operations be pursued under a Council mandate, in the understanding that regular dialogue should be maintained between our Council and those organizations, some of which — the African Union in particular, but also such African subregional organizations as the Economic Community of West African States and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development — are today playing an active and vital role in conflict prevention and settlement and in the maintenance of peace. While it is generally acknowledged that today peacekeeping and peace-building operations have become multidisplinary in nature, stabilization processes constitute a sensitive, often precarious stage at which achievements can never be considered irreversible, because they depend on a multitude of factors which are often difficult to contain and whose effects are magnified by institutional vacuums, the imperatives of reconciliation and the requirements of reconstruction, which are sometimes, it must be said, exacerbated by external actors. Those requirements, which are indispensable to affirming and enshrining a lasting peace, underscore the increased importance of peace-building missions. Thus stabilization is one of the most complex elements of conflict resolution, because of the way interests and actors are interwoven. Faced with those challenges, regional organizations do not all have the same institutional, material and human advantages, nor do they operate within the same context, regardless of the political will that they may have. The Organization of American States has a long historical tradition, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) relies on the concept of integrated security and enjoys positive synergies with the European Union. Likewise, the African Union has, for two years now, had at its disposal institutions that are essential to the development of a comprehensive and coherent approach to security. Those historical and contextual regional differences do not prevent us from envisaging the creation of a mechanism for the systematic exchange of experiences. Indeed, they call for the formulation of a framework for cooperation that is imaginative and flexible and that takes into account the specificities of each situation and the degree of involvement of the regional or subregional organization concerned. In the case of Africa, and probably on other continents, it seems to us that the stabilization process, which is by definition complex, must necessarily involve the development dimension and therefore requires coordinated economic and political approaches. That vision is based on the institutional advancements brought about by the African Union, especially the establishment of the Peace and Security Council and the NEPAD strategic initiative. That visionary political will, which is based on the indivisibility of peace and development and demonstrated by the African States and their Union, needs to be shared by the United Nations system, which should provide its full support. In the case of Europe, the principle of subsidiarity, which the European Union has successfully used in its internal procedures, can, if applied on the basis of previously agreed arrangements, ensure the harmonious effectiveness of joint action. The division of operational tasks must be supported by a periodic consultation exercise between the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Department of Political Affairs on the one hand, and regional and subregional actors on the other. The rich experience gained in the context of the complementarity of efforts between the OSCE and the United Nations seems to us, from that perspective, a useful and promising source of inspiration. We believe that the time has come for the United Nations and the League of Arab States — itself committed, as its Secretary-General has just reminded us, to a far-reaching process of reform aimed at enhancing its effectiveness and relevance, especially in the area of security — should give thought to the establishment of a framework of cooperative efforts that is based on the comparative advantages of each. The periodic meetings between the Secretary- General and regional organizations is an ideal means not only to fine-tune ongoing actions but also to organize our common response to possible threats to stability. Similarly, the meetings held by the Counter- Terrorism Committee, as a subsidiary organ of the Council, with regional organizations are quite useful, because they lead to enhanced cooperation and to the harmonization of our actions to combat this modern- day scourge. It seems to us that the time has come for the Security Council itself to undertake a responsible and fruitful dialogue in order to achieve a real partnership with mechanisms and structures worldwide that contribute to the maintenance of peace and security. In that regard, we deem it timely and necessary for an institutional relationship to be established as soon as possible with the Peace and Security Council of the African Union, which after only three months of existence, is already shaping up to be a solid and credible partner for the Security Council. That means that the Security Council, without giving up its central role, should increasingly adopt a regional approach and consequently rely more and more on the contributions of regional organizations in the context of the many demands placed on it. The complexity of present threats and of the crises deriving from them calls for strengthening complementarities between the United Nations and regional organizations, not only to give our joint actions true coherence but also to rationalize our mechanisms for cooperation and mutual consultation while ensuring the establishment of the necessary synergies.

I thank the representative of Algeria for the kind words he addressed to me. We fully agree that the Millennium Declaration and the Agenda for Peace are fundamental documents and that we all must take a multidimensional approach to contemporary challenges to peace and security. We are convinced that today’s debate will bear fruit and yield innovative approaches, including those proposed by the representative of Algeria, as well as genuine partnerships between the United Nations and regional and subregional organizations. (spoke in English) I now call on the Deputy Assistant Secretary- General for Political Affairs of NATO, Mr. Robert F. Simmons. Mr. Simmons: It gives me great pleasure today to address this gathering on behalf of the Secretary- General of NATO and to represent that organization in today’s very important discussion. Allow me first to express my thanks and congratulations to Romania for having called for and prepared this timely and important event. I should like also to thank the Prime Minister of Romania and you, Mr. Foreign Minister, for joining us in this important discussion. I also very much welcome the participation of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and his comments, which show his own confidence in, and important stress on, the cooperation between regional organizations and the United Nations. Our new century offers no shortage of challenges, and, under the United Nations, all the organizations that are represented in today’s discussion have recognized them and are trying to deal with them. Globalization in this century offers our societies the opportunity to become more independent, creative and prosperous, but it also makes them more vulnerable. The rapid dissemination of technology and information makes entirely new ways of production available to many people, but it has also brought the spectre of more States’ developing weapons of mass destruction and the spread of small arms and light weapons. More than in any other place, in this city we are aware also of the challenge of terrorism and the risk it presents to us all. Regional conflicts confront us with a cruel choice between costly indifference and engagement. The breadth and diversity of these challenges can be addressed only once we adopt a broad concept of security — a concept which, as many others have said, moves beyond military matters alone and includes political, economic and social elements. Only such a broader approach will enable us to move beyond dealing with mere symptoms. To put such a broad approach to security into practice requires the cooperation of all major institutions — global, regional and subregional. Over the past decade, such cooperation has emerged, including between the United Nations and NATO. After four decades of respectful distance between them, both institutions have come a long way, not only in formulating common goals, but, most importantly, in pursuing them together. Indeed, since the end of the cold war, the interdependence between NATO and the United Nations has consistently grown. Since the cold war ended, the United Nations has been able to play a much more visible and more welcome role in managing global security. That role has also put tremendous burdens on the Organization — politically, militarily and financially. Not surprisingly, therefore, the past decade has also seen a stronger reliance on regional organizations, not as a challenge to the primary role of the United Nations, but, rather, to support it. NATO is proud to be one of those organizations. Although the alliance does not consider itself formally a regional organization under Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter, NATO’s transition from a purely collective-defence organization into a security manager in a broad sense has enabled it to act in that same spirit, first in Europe and now beyond. NATO is currently undertaking United Nations-mandated peace support operations in the Balkans and Afghanistan and is now exploring options to help train Iraqi security forces, in close consultation with the interim Government in Baghdad, in response to the call of this Council. It is not important today to recall the history of interaction between the United Nations and NATO, from the early cooperation in Bosnia all the way to Afghanistan. But that good record has been set, and we should look to the future and, to possibilities for additional cooperation. Let me raise three areas where, I believe, we can develop such cooperation. First, NATO and the United Nations should seek to broaden their areas of dialogue. We now have, and should continue, regular exchanges with the Secretariat, both the Department of Peacekeeping Operations and the Department of Political Affairs. The current dialogue naturally concentrates on our peace support operations. But as Afghanistan has demonstrated, what we call failed States and terrorism are sometimes connected. Hence, our peace support operations, such as the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), are often based in the effort to combat terrorism. We all know that to fight terrorism effectively, the response must be multifaceted and comprehensive, and that requires continued close cooperation among international organizations. The Security Council’s Counter-Terrorism Committee has an important role to play in that respect, and NATO welcomes the recent enhancement of that body through the creation of its Executive Directorate. We believe that the issue of terrorism, as well as the threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, will warrant being added to the agenda of our regular and intensive discussions, as the Secretary-General has indicated. In our long-standing cooperation in peace operations, I also see room for further improvement. NATO has proved its ability to act outside Europe — as our recent summit declaration indicated — wherever threats, crises or challenges arise. As Secretary-General Annan argued in his address to NATO and parliamentarians last March, he could also envisage NATO playing a role in Africa, either directly or over the horizon. Such a role is not likely being discussed, but we think that NATO’s recent offer to help Iraq indicates that NATO and the United Nations in fact need to prepare for the possibility of cooperation in regions other than Europe and Central Asia. It is in that context that I would also recall the decision taken by NATO’s recent summit in Istanbul to develop its cooperation with its Mediterranean dialogue partners and to open a discussion with other countries in the broader Middle East. Secondly, we need to reflect on how to build a more structured relationship between NATO and the United Nations. In our collaboration so far in the Balkans and in Afghanistan, cooperation has been particularly good, as we say, on the ground, and we have developed means of cooperating with the United Nations representatives in Sarajevo, in Kabul and in other areas. Those things must continue. We also regularly inform the Secretary-General and the Council about our activities. To advance that goal, we have liaison arrangements here at the United Nations that have proved very useful. The groundwork for such enhanced cooperation has certainly been laid. The long record of NATO-United Nations interaction and operations in support of training and in exercises in education has underscored the merit of an ever- deepening dialogue in ensuring the transparency of our efforts. But we should examine options to go forward. That is why I am pleased to note that just recently a United Nations team visited NATO to gain insights into how NATO plans peace support operations and whether NATO commands can offer further support to the United Nations in that area in the future. While that may fall short of a structured relationship, it bodes well for a future discussion between our organizations to cooperate pragmatically and without inhibitions. That brings me to my third point: the need for a flexible and pragmatic approach to regional cooperation. Notwithstanding some similarities, each crisis — as many have noted here — has its own peculiarities. Hence, it does not pay to strive for strategies or models that are universally applicable. Indeed, judging from NATO’s experience with regional crises, it pays to be more imaginative. I shall mention here only NATO’s decisions to appoint political representatives, the Secretary-General’s special representatives, first in southern Serbia, later in Macedonia and finally in Afghanistan. Initially, NATO members were perhaps sceptical of that effort, but it has become a characteristic of our engagement in dealing with peace support operations. And it shows that, in fact, we must be flexible in managing these situations. To repeat, dealing with the challenges of the twenty-first century requires a multi-institutional approach, a true architecture of institutions. In Europe, the key elements of such an architecture are already in place with NATO, the European Union and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Working together, those organizations can bring a distinct approach, but also their different capabilities, to providing for greater security. Together, they offer the chance to establish a new quality of security in Europe and beyond. Their cooperation must expand as we expand our cooperation with the United Nations. Our experience in Europe is unique; it cannot be transferred wholesale elsewhere, but it can make an impact and have a positive influence elsewhere as well. NATO, for its part, wants to be engaged where it can make an additional contribution. It can serve as a model of how various institutions can cooperate and in so doing can generate the positive political momentum that this meeting demonstrates. Again, I should like to thank you, Mr. President, and your Government for convening it. As we look forward to the sixtieth anniversary of the United Nations Charter, that is an important and encouraging step for the future.

I thank Mr. Simmons for his contribution. We also look forward to seeing more structured dialogue in the future with that important organization, which is playing a greater role in the global security architecture. I should also like to thank Mr. Simmons for his contribution with regard to the threat of weapons of mass destruction and small arms and light weapons. Indeed, those are challenges we must face together. In addition, I thank him for his contribution concerning the Secretary-General.

We are very happy to see you, Sir, chairing this very important meeting. It follows a very useful initiative taken on this issue by the Mexican presidency of the Security Council in April last year. We welcome the participation of the Secretary-General and of the representatives of regional and subregional organizations. The Charter of the United Nations identifies the role that regional organizations can play in the preservation of international peace and security. The Charter recognizes their role in the pacific settlement of local disputes and sets out the parameters for the involvement of regional arrangements in enforcement action, solely under the authority of the Security Council. Indeed, regional organizations have played an important part in promoting regional peace and stability. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has promoted confidence-building in Europe, and NATO — from whose representative we just heard — has been a major force for stability. Similarly, the African Union has been making significant contributions in the promotion of regional peace, particularly in Burundi and, most recently, in Darfur, in Sudan. Likewise, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has played an important security and stabilization role in the West African subregion. The Organization of American States has a similar role in the Americas. Regional arrangements can have various configurations and variable geometry. In the Asian region, a number of subregional arrangements are working for the promotion of peace and stability in their respective subregions. The Association of South- East Asian Nations (ASEAN) does not have a security structure, but it has a regional forum to discuss security issues. Similar arrangements, like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, are making valuable contributions in promoting stability in their respective subregions. On our subcontinent, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), which is currently meeting at the level of the Council of Ministers in Islamabad, is at present an economic forum and is playing an important role in promoting economic and social development. Along with economic development, SAARC could contribute to peace and stability. The Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), with 57 member States, spans four continents and represents one fourth of the membership of the United Nations. The OIC has played an important role in dealing with several conflicts and crises — for instance, in facilitating the end of the foreign occupation of Afghanistan; in mediating the Iran-Iraq conflict; in ending the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina; and in supporting peace efforts in various other parts of the world, including those aimed at achieving a just and peaceful solution to the Jammu and Kashmir dispute. The OIC can play a vital role in promoting solutions to some of the principal items on the Council’s agenda, including Palestine and the Middle East, Afghanistan, Iraq, terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. At its recent Kuala Lumpur summit, the OIC initiated a process of internal reform and revitalization to enhance its effectiveness and efficiency. Regional arrangements have been involved in stabilization operations under the mandate of the Security Council. These have included the Stabilization Force (SFOR) and KFOR in the Balkans, and, more recently, regional multinational forces in West Africa and Haiti. While regional arrangements can take enforcement action, it is clear from the provisions of Article 54 of the Charter that no enforcement action shall be taken through regional agencies without the authorization of the Security Council. The Charter does not permit national or regional unilateralism — only collective action with the express sanction of the Security Council or, if it cannot act, with the authorization of the General Assembly. The participation of regional arrangements in the maintenance of local peace and security in their respective regions must also be impartial. The purpose must be to facilitate peace, not to promote the agenda of any regional Power. If such a regional arrangement had existed in South-West Asia, it could have played a salutary role in stabilizing both Afghanistan and Iraq and could have obviated reliance on the intervention of forces from faraway nations. Experience of various conflict situations has taught us that stabilization does not simply imply the cessation of hostilities or the consolidation of peace. It also includes preventing conflict, addressing root causes and building sustainable peace in conflict situations. Stabilization is a complex task which combines the two main priorities of the United Nations: peace and development. It involves activities ranging from disarmament, demobilization and reconstruction to institutional development and economic reconstruction and rehabilitation. Regional organizations can assist the United Nations in a complementary and mutually supportive role in promoting post-conflict peace-building, not only politically but also economically. The European Union is playing an important role in that regard in the Balkans and elsewhere. The South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation can play a considerable, though indirect, role by promoting trade and economic cooperation in South Asia. There is a requirement for the United Nations to devote greater attention and resources to promoting cooperation with regional arrangements in the political and economic areas so as to advance their common and mutual goals of consolidating peace, stability, progress and prosperity.

I thank the representative of Pakistan for his suggestions and for his very interesting overview of what major regional organizations are contributing to our common goals. It is, indeed, our common responsibility to make full use of the existing mechanisms and to really look towards greater synergy between their actions.

We are honoured, Mr. Prime Minister by your presence here today presiding over this meeting. This underscores the importance of the theme of our debate. As a member of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Philippines aligns itself with the statement made by Laos on behalf of the ASEAN member countries outlining regional efforts towards the creation of an ASEAN Security Community in 2020, and the activities of the ASEAN Regional Forum in enhancing political and security dialogue and cooperation, as well as confidence- building, in the Asia-Pacific region. ASEAN’s own indigenous actions in maintaining regional peace are well known. They are exemplified by its management of disputes in the South China Sea and the regional actions that it undertook in cooperation with the United Nations with regard to Cambodia and East Timor. This morning the representative of China also mentioned the ASEAN+3 process and the ASEAN cooperation dialogue. Cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in the maintenance of international peace and security requires a framework within which it can be carried out. Some issues have to be clarified in developing this framework for cooperation. The questions relating to subsidiarity and comparative advantages raised in the non-paper should relate to the stages of a conflict. In conflict prevention, the regional approach should first be exhausted, because of important geopolitical considerations. However, the United Nations should monitor developments even during that stage and should ascertain if there are impediments to the regional approach, especially if a conflict is country-specific and has grave humanitarian implications. In conflict resolution, the United Nations should be ready to extend its cooperation in resolving disputes through peaceful means, in addition to the use of existing regional dispute-settlement mechanisms, when required by the concerned regional organization. The Security Council assumes exclusive authority when all peaceful means to conflict resolution fail. Post-conflict measures should be open and participatory, with the United Nations serving as the coordinator of all the activities of Member States, regional organizations, United Nations agencies and civil society. Regional organizations embody regional norms. The simplest way to understand the linkage between a regional organization’s economic interests and its security interests is to study its charter or — in the absence of such a document — the instruments establishing the regional grouping. Regional organizations have emerged from particular regional developments, as reflected in the preambles of regional charters or instruments. The exchange of information relating to the maintenance of peace and security at the regional level is not only required under Article 54 of the Charter, but should serve as the backbone of a framework for cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. In that regard, the Secretary-General deserves our compliments for having organized five high-level meetings with heads of regional organizations and for reporting the outcomes of the meetings to the Council. Those biennial meetings should be regularized, with provision being made for inter-sessional modalities for information exchange so as to keep the United Nations abreast of developments in the regions. Cooperation among regional organizations themselves should be encouraged. There are two options to that end. The first is the high-level meetings with regional organizations organized by the Secretary- General, at which an agenda item on that topic should be included. The second is the organization of bilateral meetings between two interested regional organizations on the fringes either of those high-level meetings or of the high-level debate segment of each General Assembly session. ASEAN has developed a tradition of meeting at the ministerial level with counterpart regional organizations on the sidelines of the high-level debate in the General Assembly. Understanding the root causes of conflict is crucial in the formulation of appropriate strategies for stabilization. In that connection, consultations should not be limited to the United Nations and the regional organization concerned. As borne out by ASEAN’s experience, a parallel track undertaken by the academic sector of civil society or by regional think tanks has proved itself useful. Its value-added is confidence- building, as parties intimately involved in conflict — potential or actual — participate in the process. With regard to the issue of transition from regional to multilateral peacekeeping missions under United Nations auspices, regional ownership dissolves when the Council issues its imprimatur for the deployment of regional peacekeepers. Although the United Nations exercises overall command and control of regional peacekeepers, the transition to an expanded international mission should be planned not only with the regional military commands, but also with the political organs of the regional organizations concerned. The monitoring of cooperation between the United Nations and a concerned regional organization is an essential element of the planning process and should be designed so as to determine whether or not pre-set goals are achieved. From the monitored results, every effort should be made to highlight best practices and lessons learned for future reference and guidance. Monitoring should also include an oversight function so that a new oversight mechanism with possible budgetary implications need not be developed. The presidential statement that will be issued at the end of the debate will serve as a springboard for the early adoption of a framework of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, taking into account the recommendations of Council members and the representatives of regional organizations participating in today’s debate.

Cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations, as well as among regional and subregional organizations, should be further encouraged. Romania takes seriously the commitment to continue this important debate, which began in the past with our Mexican friends and will continue with other members of the Council in future years. I am very encouraged by the statement by the representative of the Philippines. I now invite the Deputy Executive Secretary of the Commonwealth of Independent States, His Excellency Mr. Dimitry Boulakhov, to take the floor.

First, allow me to thank the organizers of today’s debate. We believe that this discussion is of the greatest importance and significance because it aims, above all, at strengthening the coordinating role of the United Nations in stabilization processes and in the organization of interaction with regional organizations. There are several points I cannot fail to mention. As a regional organization, the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is undertaking concrete steps for the settlement of conflicts existing in the territory of its member States. Those activities are founded on a clear and comprehensive basis of law, in accordance with Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter. For us, that chapter is the foundation for interaction and for the division of labour between the United Nations and our regional organization. The legal basis of conflict settlement within the framework of the CIS also includes the Charter of our organization. The CIS possesses another document of relevance, the Concept for prevention and settlement of conflicts in the territory of States members of the CIS, which was adopted by our countries’ leadership in 1996. The framework of the Concept relates to the generalized, unfortunate experience we in the CIS have had in conflict prevention and settlement — as is well known to the participants in this debate — following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the formation in its political space of newly independent States. During the process of the formation and development of those States, long-latent conflicts became armed confrontations. That was especially dramatic in the Republics of Tajikistan, Georgia and Moldova, as well as in the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in Nagorny Karabakh. The CIS is still establishing a system for the prevention and settlement of conflicts, post-conflict peace-building and the strengthening of stabilization processes. Nevertheless, through the efforts of the CIS countries — first and foremost those of the Russian Federation — and in interaction with, and with the assistance of, the relevant bodies of the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, all armed conflicts existing in the territory of the CIS have entered the stage of political dialogue and the search for compromise and solutions. We must note in particular the outstanding example — unfortunately not very characteristic of the situation at the end of the twentieth century — of United Nations interaction with interested States and the CIS in the settlement of the bloody conflict in Tajikistan. I would recall that a full settlement of the conflict in Tajikistan was reached in 2000; the CIS peacekeeping forces were disbanded, and the United Nations Mission of Observers in Tajikistan ceased its activities, having played a significant role in the inter- Tajik settlement. At the present time, the next stage of post-conflict peace-building is under way, and the CIS is in working contact with the United Nations and its representatives in Tajikistan. Many participants in today’s debate have rightly noted that stabilization is not limited to the post- conflict situation. Stabilization processes include a considerably broader area of activity, including combating terrorism, crime, the drug trade and drug production, illegal financial flows and many other elements. In many of those areas, the States of the CIS are successfully developing their cooperation. In particular, we have undertaken specific steps for the development of interaction with the United Nations system. In 2002, at a meeting of the Council of the Heads of the State of the CIS, a report was presented by the Executive Director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Mr. Antonio Maria Costa. The Presidents of the CIS countries acknowledged the positive experience of interaction between the CIS and the Office on Drugs and Crime and suggested that it continue. Allow me next to put forward a few proposals for the strengthening of interaction, conflict prevention and post-conflict peace-building. As I have already noted, the CIS has drawn up a Concept for settling conflicts on the territory of, and between members of, the CIS. We understand that other international organizations have prepared and are implementing such documents as well. I believe it would be useful to undertake, under United Nations auspices, a comparative analysis of such documents so that regional organizations can exchange experiences and perhaps improve their legal basis for such activities. With respect to interaction between the CIS and the United Nations, I would like to make a proposal regarding peacekeeping efforts conducted in the territory of the CIS. While retaining, of course, the international elements of United Nations missions in conflict zones within the CIS, in our view, those missions should offer a significant role to, and be composed in large part by, personnel from the CIS States that are not participants in the conflict or neighbours of parties to the conflict. In this, we can make use of the mechanisms and experience of the CIS to avoid creating parallel missions or duplicating efforts. To do so would be an excellent thing. We believe that it is very important for the United Nations, at least partially, to provide material and financial support for peacekeeping operations in those regions where operations are being carried out under the United Nations Charter by forces of regional organizations. That particularly affects the CIS, where financial and material resources for peacekeeping operations have been virtually shouldered by one country, the Russian Federation, since the other States of the CIS are not in a position to provide financing for peacekeeping activities. It is not coincidence that I raised the issue of drugs, as the drug trade and drug addiction pose a threat to all humankind. As well, they have a great impact on the creation and continuation of conflict situations in various regions and hinder stabilization efforts. There is a need to take joint action to locate hotbeds of drug production and to close the channels of drug processing and circulation. In that, the United Nations could provide effective financial assistance and support to regional organizations to coordinate their efforts in that campaign. Also of great use would be seminars and conferences held under United Nations auspices, not only for high-level officials but also for specialists directly involved in peacekeeping and peace-building issues. I have listened carefully and with great interest to the statements of colleagues from other regional organizations. I can say that for me this was a unique exchange of experiences. That in itself constitutes a genuinely positive outcome of today’s debate.

I thank the representative of Commonwealth of Independent States for referring to the very critical dimension of regional conflicts and the connection between those conflicts and the new threats and risks to regional peace, including drugs, organized crime and human trafficking. We too share those concerns.

I would like to thank the Romanian presidency of the Security Council for having organized this public debate. I especially want to thank the Prime Minister and you, Mr. Minister, for being with us today. We believe the holding of this debate to be particularly timely, as a year has passed since a similar meeting was held during the presidency of Mexico, in April 2003. Spain aligns itself with the statement made by Mr. Peter Feith on behalf of Mr. Javier Solana, High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union. That statement clearly expressed the European vision regarding the role played by the Union in today’s debate. There is consensus among the international community about the need to encourage cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations in the stabilization processes. That has once again been borne out in today’s debate. The presence here today of important senior representatives of a great many of those organizations is testimony of that. It is obvious that the security framework planned when the Charter of the United Nations was drafted was new and different, but we should adapt the Organization and its work to the new challenges. The main threats to international peace and security today no longer emanate solely from conflicts between States; they are also the result of the proliferation of internal conflicts, the existence of so- called failed States, terrorism, international networks of organized crime and environmental degradation. Many of those are new challenges for the international community, whose response must therefore be innovative while being in compliance with international law. It is in such a context of innovation that we believe this debate on the role of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations is taking place. We believe that cooperation under Chapter VIII of the Charter holds out enormous possibilities. While some of those possibilities have already been explored and have produced practical results, we nevertheless believe that they should continue to be expanded. We believe that the recommendations made jointly thus far to continue down that road include the following general proposals. The first proposal is to strengthen the relationship between the Security Council and regional organizations, as well as the relationships between the organizations themselves. The second proposal is to establish a systematic substantive dialogue between the Security Council and regional organizations, with a view to ensuring the complementarity of actions taken at various levels while at the same time preserving the primacy of the Security Council. Thirdly, there is a need to increase and improve the exchange of information between the Security Council and regional organizations in order to make it more regular and dynamic, as well as to consider other possible modalities for such exchanges. The fourth proposal is to think about the contributions that the United Nations and the Member States can make to the development of the capacities of regional organizations to address threats in their respective regions. As has been said, the European Union is making a special effort in that regard, and we would urge other Member States to do likewise. The fifth recommendation concerns the possibility of developing, with regional organizations, general criteria with regard to the best way in which they could contribute to the work of the Security Council. We should recognize that more detailed work still needs to be done in this area. Finally, it has been argued that the Department of Peacekeeping Operations should engage in a structured dialogue with regional organizations in order to examine ways in which the Security Council’s traditional capacities may be complemented by the resources of those organizations. We fully agree on the merit of those recommendations. However, we would in particular like to stress that cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations should be governed by at least three basic considerations. The first consideration is to reaffirm that the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security remains in the hands of this Council. Cooperation with regional organizations can therefore facilitate the objectives of the United Nations. The second premise has to do with applying the principle of complementarity. The United Nations should benefit from the comparative advantages that regional organizations can no doubt provide — for example, as regards faster intervention and better knowledge on the ground. One could even say that regional organizations can often act as the eyes of the United Nations in the field, as well as having closer proximity to affected populations, which can foster a heightened feeling of ownership among those populations. However, this is not about the United Nations losing interest in a given conflict. With a view to optimizing resources and increasing the flexibility of the international community’s response, that involvement should instead be channelled through a given regional organization and with the support of any actors capable of making a contribution to the work of stabilization. We believe more in complementarity than in subsidiarity. The idea is not that the United Nations cannot or should not intervene in a given situation and that, therefore, a regional organization should step in. Rather, it may well come to pass that an analysis of the circumstances surrounding any given conflict or threat may make it desirable for a specific regional organization to intervene in place, or in support, of the United Nations. There are recent examples to support this. Those include the already mentioned European Union-led Operation ARTEMIS in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which made it possible for the United Nations to take advantage of the rapid-reaction and deployment capacity of a regional organization. There is also the case of Kosovo, where security is guaranteed by NATO while other peace-building tasks are in the hands of the European Union, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the United Nations — a unique example of division of labour. There is the case of Afghanistan, where NATO’s responsibility for the maintenance of security also complements the activities of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan in peace- building efforts. In several African conflicts the presence of the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States in particular has brought into play the experience and knowledge on the ground of those who know the field and understand better than anyone else the demands of the local population, thus complementing the work of the United Nations both in exercising the necessary political leadership to keep the negotiations process on track and as regards the deployment of peacekeeping missions. Lastly, we should also mention the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, where NATO — followed shortly afterwards, as has been pointed out today, by the European Union — has been implementing the mandate adopted by the Council, in a show of effective multilateralism with optimal cooperation between the Security Council and regional organizations. The third, and final, premise we would like to emphasize is that cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations should be adapted to the specific circumstances of each situation. No two regional organizations and no two regional conflicts are the same. There is therefore little point in adopting a rigid model of cooperation between the United Nations and regional organizations. Instead, it should be established in terms of the particular needs of the case and taking advantage of the added value of each organization. Sometimes, the best approach will be through informal consultations and exchange of information and opinions on matters of common interest; in other cases, through diplomatic support from the regional organizations for United Nations peacekeeping and peace-building activities, as we have seen again recently in the African context. On other occasions, it will be through operational support or joint deployment and, finally, through the establishment of joint operations. The models for cooperation should take into account the fact that stabilization processes must be broadly conceived and not target the post-conflict situation exclusively. Stabilization should also include conflict prevention work. Guaranteeing peace in a given region may not only involve actions related to security or the cessation of hostilities, but may also call for a definite effort in terms of development policy to address the deep-rooted causes of a given conflict. I would mention only the most recurrent of those factors: economic inequality, widespread poverty, and a lack of hygiene and decent educational conditions. In that context, given the proliferation of regional organizations of an economic nature, their cooperation with the United Nations could be fundamental, increasing coordination in development and humanitarian assistance activities to prevent extensive overlapping and to optimize resources. In any event, we should deepen the channels of communication between the United Nations and the regional organizations by establishing coordination units or focal points to enable the daily follow-up of matters of common interest. The joint consultative mechanism established by the European Union and the United Nations on 24 September 2003 is an example of such a unit. It allows the crisis management activities of both organizations to be coordinated. Through such units, we would facilitate not only greater exchange of useful information, but also the possibility of sharing experiences and lessons learned from the past. In conclusion, I would stress the utility of facilitating the coordination of activities in the field and of taking advantage of the regional organizations’ greater rapid deployment capacities in the field and better knowledge of local realities. To that end, it would be helpful if such contacts were to be expanded to include training activities so that, over time, we can move towards uniformity in training personnel participating in various capacities on the ground and the advantages of action coordinated between the United Nations and regional organizations can be made effective. In that respect, greater effort should be made in particular cases to promote the capacity of regional organizations that need it. Otherwise, the lack of resources of some organizations will make it difficult for the United Nations to rely on them in pursuit of the primary objective of the maintenance of international peace and security.

I thank the representative of Spain for his contribution, which was rich and dense. I welcome his suggestions on a structured and substantive dialogue and exchange of privileged information between relevant players, complementarity, subsidiarity and lack of rigidity. I think he is very right to stress the need to seek a flexible and tailor-made solution to each conflict. It is now my great pleasure to call on our good friend, the Chairman-in-Office of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, Mr. Solomon Passy, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria, a friendly neighbour of Romania. I am very happy that he could make it and I am personally grateful to him for taking the time to be with us. Mr. Passy: The pleasure is all ours. At the outset, let me say how pleased I am to see Prime Minister Nastase and Foreign Minister Geoana presiding over the deliberations of the Security Council and express to them the deep appreciation of the Romanian presidency for convening this important meeting. I also thank Secretary-General Kofi Annan for his remarks. Allow me to pay tribute to the delegation of Mexico, which, in 2003, organized the Security Council meeting on the role of the Council and the regional organizations with respect to the new challenges to international peace and security. I am glad to be representing the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) before the Security Council for a second time in less than three months. With its 55 States members, extensive commitments on the spot, field activities, unique institutions and specialized units, the OSCE is a pan- European organization that is geared towards building peace and security on three continents. As a member of the Security Council in 2003 and 2002, Bulgaria consistently supported the enhancement of cooperation between the United Nations and the regional organizations, upon which we have built as Chairman of the OSCE. For the past decade, we have witnessed geopolitical changes at an unprecedented pace. That is especially true for the OSCE area. The European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) have enlarged and welcomed new members. Both organizations are developing ever closer relations with Russia. The zone of stability has expanded considerably, but challenges remain. The OSCE area is still a theatre of local tensions and conflicts, some unresolved for over 10 years. To respond to the new realities, the organization is in the process of transformation and adaptation. The OSCE can give substantive support to the United Nations, take the lead role in conflict prevention and post-conflict rehabilitation in its region, assist in crisis management and stabilization processes, and promote the implementation of United Nations principles, conventions and other instruments. Furthermore, agreements reached at the regional level may sometimes contain additional and complementary commitments to those undertaken at the global level. Countering the threat of terrorism is our top priority. The OSCE is working closely with the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Committee, the International Atomic Energy Agency and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime in the fight against terrorism. The OSCE participating States are focused on elaborating measures to counter the threat of shoulder- fired anti-aircraft missiles to civilian aircraft; on travel documents, security, container security, the illicit traffic in small arms and light weapons, the destruction of excess stockpiles, and the prevention of access for terrorists to chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear materials; and to establish a counter-terrorism network. As we become an actual border of the European Union, precisely as Romania will be, we very well recognize the significance of the enhancement of border management and security. In our bitter experience, we have seen in recent years how taking hostages has become the weapon of preference of terrorists. Using such human drama, they blackmail Governments, pressure societies, manipulate public opinion and devastate innocent families. Such deplorable gambling with human life demands a coherent and unified response. I am convinced that the international community can go further than the condemnation and criminalization of hostage-taking. A discussion by the international community on a code of conduct, setting the standards that Governments should follow when they become victims of terrorist threats and attacks, is overdue. Concerted actions, with an active role for the United Nations, will send a clear warning and decisively discourage terrorists from using human lives as weapons of horror and devastation. The OSCE has a long record of working in close cooperation with the United Nations. The OSCE field mission in Kosovo is an integral part of the structure of the United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. The OSCE-trained Kosovo Police Service has close interaction with the United Nations and its agencies. The established modus operandi between the United Nations, NATO, the European Union, the OSCE and other regional organizations can serve as a model for interaction between the United Nations and the relevant organizations in other regions. It is my view that cooperation between the United Nations and the OSCE in the South Caucasus could and should be further enhanced. Both the United Nations and the OSCE have broad field experience. They are taking similar approaches to the resolution of the South Ossetian and Abkhazian conflicts. The OSCE actively supports the United Nations-led peace process in Abkhazia. In that regard, it might be useful to explore options for OSCE participation in the Group of Friends of the Secretary-General on Georgia. The Helsinki process, based on the principles of cooperative and comprehensive security, was instrumental in bridging differences in a period of confrontation. It worked in Europe, and I am confident that its lessons and practices can be applied elsewhere. More can be done on joint crisis management. In order better to analyse and cope with threats, the OSCE has proposed the creation of an ad hoc mechanism to consult with other international organizations and institutions. We will continue to organize information- sharing and coordination meetings of country-specific, regional and thematic issues. We might consider how regional arrangements could issue early warnings to the United Nations if efforts peacefully to settle local disputes start to break down. The proven track record of the OSCE in organizing and overseeing democratic elections and training efficient and democratically accountable police forces could be put to good use in Afghanistan, an OSCE partner for cooperation. I hope that the OSCE will be in a position to respond positively, if it is so decided by the 55 OSCE member Governments, to the request of Mr. Abdul Abdullâh, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, to observe the upcoming elections. In conclusion, I cannot fail to mention the usefulness of the established practice of high-level meetings between the Secretary-General and the heads of regional organizations. Such meetings are an essential mechanism in terms of synchronizing agendas and rationalizing the use of resources. I would argue that the operational relationship encouraged by the United Nations could successfully include interaction with and among regional organizations. I should like once again to wish all the best to the Romanian chairmanship of the Security Council, and I should like to say how much we benefited from the Romanian chairmanship of the OSCE a few years ago. The OSCE really gained a lot from our Romanian neighbours, and I would like to thank them very much.

It is a great pleasure to welcome Mr. Passy and his contribution to our debate. Indeed, the OSCE has tremendous competence. Its field missions are uniquely equipped to give the early- warning messages that he has been speaking about, and I also welcome the contribution of the OSCE in addressing regional conflicts in the Caucasus and in the Eurasian space. I wish also once again to join our voice to those that have condemned the atrocious killing of a Bulgarian citizen. I think that the idea of a code of conduct in such situations is a valuable idea that we should support politically. There are a number of speakers remaining on my list for this meeting. For very practical biological reasons, I intend, with the concurrence of the members of the Council, to suspend the meeting until 3 p.m.