German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen:
I would like to congratulate you, Mr. President, on your election as President of this, the 58th session of the General Assembly, and wish you every success with your work. May I also thank your predecessor, President Kavan, for the dedication with which he chaired the 57th General Assembly. I endorse the statements made by the Italian Council Presidency on behalf of the European Union.

Mr. President,
This year is a special one for Germany's work in the United Nations. History is both a reminder and guide to us all. Thirty years ago, on September 18, 1973, the United Nations welcomed Germany back into the fold of the family of nations. My predecessor, Federal Chancellor Willy Brandt, paved the way for this move. His standing as an antifascist inspired confidence. His passionate commitment to internationalism went far beyond the policy of detente in the East-West conflict.

In 1980 he made an urgent appeal to the community of states with a report entitled "North-South: A Program for Survival." He wrote: "The globalization of dangers and challenges -- war chaos, self-destruction -- calls for a domestic policy which goes much beyond (...) national items."

We are committed to this task, for, as I said, history is our guide. It guides us towards intensive international cooperation under the aegis of the United Nations, which we must further strengthen -- not least through courageous reforms. It guides us towards a universal order based on law and human dignity, good governance and prosperity shared by all. And it guides us towards security and peace through comprehensive prevention:

• We must act resolutely by pursuing an effective multilateral strategy, wherever peace is threatened and human rights are violated.
• But we must act just as resolutely to prevent conflicts and create stable structures, so that people can lead their lives in freedom and tolerance.

Mr President,
Thirty years ago, Germany was a country with limited sovereignty, divided by the Iron Curtain. Today, Germany is a sovereign nation, a civil power in the heart of a united Europe. We live in a common area of freedom, justice, prosperity and social responsibility. This shows that justice and peace can be won. And we will not fail to support endeavors to that end, be it in the Middle East, in Africa or other crisis areas.

Mr President,
Bearing in mind our own history, we are assuming responsibility for a cooperative policy of peace. This we do using economic, political and humanitarian means. But we are also, shoulder to shoulder with our partners in NATO and the EU, assuming military responsibility where there is no other way to secure peace and protect human beings.

More than 9,000 members of the German armed forces and police are currently deployed on international peace missions. Our top priority is our commitment to peace in Afghanistan. Germany is willing to maintain its commitment there in the long term and to increase it.

The basis for such commitments is the Charter of the United Nations. In the [German] Unification Treaty, Germany vowed that it would only deploy its armed forces within the framework of this Charter. The Charter provides us with "the necessary building blocks to ensure that our common humanity is an inclusive one, built on values such as tolerance and dignity".

Thus spoke Sergio Vieira de Mello, who on August 19, 2003, fell victim to an underhand criminal attack in Baghdad. He was killed along with 22 others, including many members of the United Nations staff. They were working for the people of Iraq and their hopes of a better future. We must honor their death by taking on their legacy and discharging the duty arising there from.

Our response must be to strengthen the role and commitment of the United Nations in Iraq. Only the United Nations can guarantee the legitimacy required to enable the people of Iraq to speedily rebuild their country under an independent, representative government.

Germany stands ready to support such a process: by providing humanitarian, technical and economic assistance or also training Iraqi security personnel.

Mr. President,
International terrorism, failing states and the danger posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction threaten the security of us all. So what must we do to enhance security?

• We must put an end to the terrorists and their masters and destroy their infrastructure.
• We must prevent any further proliferation of nuclear weapons, strengthen the inspections regimes and pursue a policy of verified disarmament.

But as we know from history as well as from our own experience, to follow any strategy focused narrowly on military and police aspects would be a recipe for failure. What is needed is to address the root causes of terrorism and insecurity. To combat fanaticism, we must ensure social and material but also cultural security.

That we can do only on the basis of a broad concept of security. To outlaw infamy we must put an end to lawlessness. That is the core task of the international courts of justice and especially the International Criminal Court.

And to win hearts and minds for freedom, peace and the open society, we must help people, in a secure environment, to acquire a greater stake in society and build a better life for themselves.

What this means we can see, for example, in Afghanistan. There the international community succeeded in liberating the Afghan people from the Taliban and aI Qaeda yoke. At the same time the Petersberg Conference in Bonn -- held under the aegis of the United Nations -- created a political framework for rebuilding the country.

This process needs our continued support, there must be sustained international commitment to the task of building security. In the long run, the fight against terrorism can only be won if people see that it produces benefits which are tangible in their own lives. They need to experience first hand that being once again part of the international community means not only more freedom and more security, but also better development opportunities and a greater stake in society.

Mr President,
There is no doubt that we have already made major strides towards realizing our common goals enshrined in the Charter. More countries than ever before now have democratic governments. Our concerted efforts have enabled more people than ever before to put poverty behind them.

But the gap between the world's rich and poor has still not been closed, the fight against hunger, injustice and oppression is still far from won. Eradicating poverty remains an imperative of our policy for peace and stability.

There has been a drastic fall in the number of wars fought between states. In the Balkans, for example, resolute action by NATO and the United Nations enabled us to put an end to the wars there and prevent others from breaking out.

Nevertheless, our world has become -- and not just since the barbaric terrorist attacks in New York and Washington or indeed Bali, Casablanca, Moscow or Djerba -- a dramatically more insecure place.

The new threats, which no country in the world can tackle effectively on its own, make international cooperation more vital than ever. They also mean new strategies are required. That is why we need to review whether the instruments available to the United Nations are appropriate to these new challenges.

We all have a responsibility to ensure that people and their rights are protected in situations other than just inter-state wars. They must be protected from genocide and the consequences of asymmetrical, privatized violence as well. A political commitment to comprehensive prevention must further strengthen the United Nations' monopoly of the use of force as well as the institutions of international law.
Within the United Nations we need to muster the strength to launch overdue institutional reforms. My Government fully supports the proposals made by the Secretary General. We must agree how to ensure in future an even better allocation of competencies, capacities and scarce resources.

I also share the view of the Secretary General that the legitimacy of the Security Council depends on how far it is representative of all nations and regions. The Council must be reformed and enlarged to also include representatives of the developing countries.

For Germany, let me reiterate that in the context of such a reform we are ready to assume greater responsibility.

Mr President,
The world of the 21st century offers us, its inhabitants, ample scope to change it either for better or for worse. Given the immense opportunities and the formidable dangers ahead, we have no choice but to strive for international partnership and to expand and strengthen multi-lateralism.

We will be able to make our world more secure only if we also make it more equitable. It was for that purpose, after all, that the international community created the United Nations: that is its mandate.

Let us join together to make the United Nations stronger still, so that it can fulfil its mandate to maintain international peace and security and build a more equitable world.

Thank you.

Next page -- Secretary General Kofi Annan: "Whatever view each of us may take of the events of recent months, it is vital to all of us that the outcome is a stable and democratic Iraq"

United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan:

Thank you Mr. President, Your Majesty, Distinguished Heads of State and Government. Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen:

The last twelve months have been very painful for those of us who believe in collective answers to our common problems and challenges.

In many countries, terrorism has once again brought death and suffering to innocent people.

In the Middle East, and in certain parts of Africa, violence has continued to escalate. In the Korean peninsula, and elsewhere, the threat of nuclear proliferation casts an ominous shadow across the landscape.

And barely one month ago, in Baghdad, the United Nations itself suffered a brutal and deliberate assault, in which the international community lost some of its most talented servants. Yesterday it was attacked again. Another major disaster was averted only by the prompt action of the Iraqi police, one of whom paid with his life.

I extend my most sincere condolences to the family of that brave policeman. And my thoughts go also to the nineteen injured, including two Iraqi UN staff members. I wish them all a rapid recovery. Indeed, we should pray for all those who have lost their lives or been injured in this war – innocent civilians and soldiers alike. In that context I deplore – as I am sure you all do – the brutal attempt on the life of Dr. Akila al-Hashemi, a member of the Governing Council, and I pray for her full recovery, too.

Excellencies, you are the United Nations. The staff who were killed and injured in the attack on our Baghdad headquarters were your staff. You had given them a mandate to assist the suffering Iraqi people, and to help Iraq recover their sovereignty.

In future, not only in Iraq but wherever the United Nations is engaged, we must take more effective measures to protect the security of our staff. I count on your full support – legal, political and financial.

Meanwhile, let me reaffirm the great importance I attach to a successful outcome in Iraq. Whatever view each of us may take of the events of recent months, it is vital to all of us that the outcome is a stable and democratic Iraq – at peace with itself and with its neighbours, and contributing to stability in the region.

Subject to security considerations, the United Nations system is prepared to play its full role in working for a satisfactory outcome in Iraq, and to do so as part of an international effort, an effort by the whole international community, pulling together on the basis of a sound and viable policy. If it takes extra time and patience to forge that policy, a policy that is collective, coherent and workable, then I for one would regard that time as well spent. Indeed, this is how we must approach all the many pressing crises that confront us today.

Excellencies,
Three years ago, when you came here for the Millennium Summit, we shared a vision, a vision of global solidarity and collective security, expressed in the Millennium Declaration.

But recent events have called that consensus in question.

All of us know there are new threats that must be faced – or, perhaps, old threats in new and dangerous combinations: new forms of terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

But, while some consider these threats as self-evidently the main challenge to world peace and security, others feel more immediately menaced by small arms employed in civil conflict, or by so-called “soft threats” such as the persistence of extreme poverty, the disparity of income between and within societies, and the spread of infectious diseases, or climate change and environmental degradation.

In truth, we do not have to choose. The United Nations must confront all these threats and challenges – new and old, “hard” and “soft”. It must be fully engaged in the struggle for development and poverty eradication, starting with the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals; in the common struggle to protect our common environment; and in the struggle for human rights, democracy and good governance.

In fact, all these struggles are linked. We now see, with chilling clarity, that a world where many millions of people endure brutal oppression and extreme misery will never be fully secure, even for its most privileged inhabitants.

Yet the “hard” threats, such as terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, are real, and cannot be ignored.

Terrorism is not a problem only for rich countries. Ask the people of Bali, or Bombay, Nairobi, or Casablanca.

Weapons of mass destruction do not threaten only the western or northern world. Ask the people of Iran, or of Halabja in Iraq.

Where we disagree, it seems, is on how to respond to these threats.

Since this Organisation was founded, States have generally sought to deal with threats to the peace through containment and deterrence, by a system based on collective security and the United Nations Charter.

Article 51 of the Charter prescribes that all States, if attacked, retain the inherent right of self-defence. But until now it has been understood that when States go beyond that, and decide to use force to deal with broader threats to international peace and security, they need the unique legitimacy provided by the United Nations.

Now, some say this understanding is no longer tenable, since an “armed attack” with weapons of mass destruction could be launched at any time, without warning, or by a clandestine group.

Rather than wait for that to happen, they argue, States have the right and obligation to use force pre-emptively, even on the territory of other States, and even while weapons systems that might be used to attack them are still being developed.

According to this argument, States are not obliged to wait until there is agreement in the Security Council. Instead, they reserve the right to act unilaterally, or in ad hoc coalitions.
This logic represents a fundamental challenge to the principles on which, however imperfectly, world peace and stability have rested for the last fifty-eight years.

My concern is that, if it were to be adopted, it could set precedents that resulted in a proliferation of the unilateral and lawless use of force, with or without justification.
But it is not enough to denounce unilateralism, unless we also face up squarely to the concerns that make some States feel uniquely vulnerable, since it is those concerns that drive them to take unilateral action. We must show that those concerns can, and will, be addressed effectively through collective action.

Excellencies, we have come to a fork in the road. This may be a moment no less decisive than 1945 itself, when the United Nations was founded.

At that time, a group of far-sighted leaders, led and inspired by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, were determined to make the second half of the twentieth century different from the first half. They saw that the human race had only one world to live in, and that unless it managed its affairs prudently, all human beings may perish.

So they drew up rules to govern international behaviour, and founded a network of institutions, with the United Nations at its centre, in which the peoples of the world could work together for the common good.

Now we must decide whether it is possible to continue on the basis agreed then, or whether radical changes are needed.

And we must not shy away from questions about the adequacy, and effectiveness, of the rules and instruments at our disposal.

Among those instruments, none is more important than the Security Council itself.
In my recent report on the implementation of the Millennium Declaration, I drew attention to the urgent need for the Council to regain the confidence of States, and of world public opinion – both by demonstrating its ability to deal effectively with the most difficult issues, and by becoming more broadly representative of the international community as a whole, as well as the geopolitical realities of today.

The Council needs to consider how it will deal with the possibility that individual States may use force “pre-emptively” against perceived threats.

Its members may need to begin a discussion on the criteria for an early authorisation of coercive measures to address certain types of threats – for instance, terrorist groups armed with weapons of mass destruction.

And they still need to engage in serious discussions of the best way to respond to threats of genocide or other comparable massive violations of human rights – an issue which I raised myself from this podium in 1999. Once again this year, our collective response to events of this type – in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and in Liberia – has been hesitant and tardy.

As for the composition of the Council, that has been on the agenda of this Assembly for over a decade. Virtually all Member States agree that the Council should be enlarged, but there is no agreement on the details.

I respectfully suggest to you, Excellencies, that in the eyes of your peoples the difficulty of reaching agreement does not excuse your failure to do so. If you want the Council’s decisions to command greater respect, particularly in the developing world, you need to address the issue of its composition with greater urgency.

But the Security Council is not the only institution that needs strengthening. As you know, I am doing my best to make the Secretariat more effective – and I look to this Assembly to support my efforts.

Indeed, in my report I also suggested that this Assembly itself needs to be strengthened, and that the role of the Economic and Social Council – and the role of the United Nations as a whole in economic and social affairs, including its relationship to the Bretton Woods institutions –needs to be re-thought and reinvigorated.

I even suggested that the role of the Trusteeship Council could be reviewed, in light of new kinds of responsibility that you have given to the United Nations in recent years.
In short, Excellencies, I believe the time is ripe for a hard look at fundamental policy issues, and at the structural changes that may be needed in order to strengthen them.
History is a harsh judge: it will not forgive us if we let this moment pass.

For my part, I intend to establish a High-Level Panel of eminent personalities, to which I will assign four tasks:

First, to examine the current challenges to peace and security;

Second, to consider the contribution which collective action can make in addressing these challenges;

Third, to review the functioning of the major organs of the United Nations and the relationship between them; and

Fourth, to recommend ways of strengthening the United Nations, through reform of its institutions and processes.

The Panel will focus primarily on threats to peace and security. But it will also need to examine other global challenges, in so far as these may influence or connect with those threats.

I will ask the Panel to report back to me before the beginning of the next session of this General Assembly, so that I can make recommendations to you at that session. But only you can take the firm and clear decisions that will be needed.

Those decisions might include far-reaching institutional reforms. Indeed, I hope they will.

But institutional reforms alone will not suffice. Even the most perfect instrument will fail, unless people put it to good use.

The United Nations is by no means a perfect instrument, but it is a precious one. I urge you to seek agreement on ways of improving it, but above all of using it as its founders intended – to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, to reestablish the basic conditions for justice and the rule of law, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.
The world may have changed, Excellencies, but those aims are as valid and urgent as ever. We must keep them firmly in our sights.

Thank you very much.

NEXT PAGE -- George W. Bush: "Every young democracy needs the help of friends"

United States President George W. Bush:

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Secretary General; Mr. President; distinguished delegates; ladies and gentlemen: Twenty-four months ago -- and yesterday in the memory of America -- the center of New York City became a battlefield, and a graveyard, and the symbol of an unfinished war. Since that day, terrorists have struck in Bali, Mombassa, in Casablanca, in Riyadh, in Jakarta, in Jerusalem -- measuring the advance of their cause in the chaos and innocent suffering they leave behind.

Last month, terrorists brought their war to the United Nations itself. The U.N. headquarters in Baghdad stood for order and compassion -- and for that reason, the terrorists decided it must be destroyed. Among the 22 people who were murdered was Sergio Vieira de Mello. Over the decades, this good and brave man from Brazil gave help to the afflicted in Bangladesh, Cypress, Mozambique, Lebanon, Cambodia, Central Africa, Kosovo, and East Timor, and was aiding the people of Iraq in their time of need. America joins you, his colleagues, in honoring the memory of Senor Vieira de Mello, and the memory of all who died with him in the service to the United Nations.

By the victims they choose, and by the means they use, the terrorists have clarified the struggle we are in. Those who target relief workers for death have set themselves against all humanity. Those who incite murder and celebrate suicide reveal their contempt for life, itself. They have no place in any religious faith; they have no claim on the world's sympathy; and they should have no friend in this chamber.

Events during the past two years have set before us the clearest of divides: between those who seek order, and those who spread chaos; between those who work for peaceful change, and those who adopt the methods of gangsters; between those who honor the rights of man, and those who deliberately take the lives of men and women and children without mercy or shame.

Between these alternatives there is no neutral ground. All governments that support terror are complicit in a war against civilization. No government should ignore the threat of terror, because to look the other way gives terrorists the chance to regroup and recruit and prepare. And all nations that fight terror, as if the lives of thheir own people depend on it, will earn the favorable judgment of history.

The former regimes of Afghanistan and Iraq knew these alternatives, and made their choices. The Taliban was a sponsor and servant of terrorism. When confronted, that regime chose defiance, and that regime is no more. Afghanistan's President, who is here today, now represents a free people who are building a decent and just society; they're building a nation fully joined in the war against terror.

The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror while it built weapons of mass destruction. It used those weapons in acts of mass murder, and refused to account for them when confronted by the world. The Security Council was right to be alarmed. The Security Council was right to demand that Iraq destroy its illegal weapons and prove that it had done so. The Security Council was right to vow serious consequences if Iraq refused to comply. And because there were consequences, because a coalition of nations acted to defend the peace, and the credibility of the United Nations, Iraq is free, and today we are joined by representatives of a liberated country.

Saddam Hussein's monuments have been removed and not only his statues. The true monuments of his rule and his character -- the torture chambers, and the rape rooms, and the prison cells for innocent children -- are closed. And as we discover the killing fields and mass graves of Iraq, the true scale of Saddam's cruelty is being revealed.

The Iraqi people are meeting hardships and challenges, like every nation that has set out on the path of democracy. Yet their future promises lives of dignity and freedom, and that is a world away from the squalid, vicious tyranny they have known. Across Iraq, life is being improved by liberty. Across the Middle East, people are safer because an unstable aggressor has been removed from power. Across the world, nations are more secure because an ally of terror has fallen.

Our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq were supported by many governments, and America is grateful to each one. I also recognize that some of the sovereign nations of this assembly disagreed with our actions. Yet there was, and there remains, unity among us on the fundamental principles and objectives of the United Nations. We are dedicated to the defense of our collective security, and to the advance of human rights. These permanent commitments call us to great work in the world, work we must do together. So let us move forward.

First, we must stand with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq as they build free and stable countries. The terrorists and their allies fear and fight this progress above all, because free people embrace hope over resentment, and choose peace over violence.

The United Nations has been a friend of the Afghan people, distributing food and medicine, helping refugees return home, advising on a new constitution, and helping to prepare the way for nationwide elections. NATO has taken over the U.N.-mandated security force in Kabul. American and coalition forces continue to track and defeat al Qaeda terrorists and remnants of the Taliban. Our efforts to rebuild that country go on. I have recently proposed to spend an additional $1.2 billion for the Afghan reconstruction effort, and I urge other nations to continue contributing to this important cause.

In the nation of Iraq, the United Nations is carrying out vital and effective work every day. By the end of 2004, more than 90 percent of Iraqi children under age five will have been immunized against preventable diseases such as polio, tuberculosis and measles, thanks to the hard work and high ideals of UNICEF. Iraq's food distribution system is operational, delivering nearly a half-million tons of food per month, thanks to the skill and expertise of the World Food Program.

Our international coalition in Iraq is meeting it responsibilities. We are conducting precision raids against terrorists and holdouts of the former regime. These killers are at war with the Iraqi people. They have made Iraq the central front in the war on terror, and they will be defeated. Our coalition has made sure that Iraq's former dictator will never again use weapons of mass destruction. We are interviewing Iraqi citizens and analyzing records of the old regime to reveal the full extent of its weapons programs and its long campaign of deception. We're training Iraqi police and border guards and a new army, so the Iraqi people can assume full responsibility for their own security.

And at the same time, our coalition is helping to improve the daily lives of the Iraqi people. The old regime built palaces while letting schools decay, so we are rebuilding more than a thousand schools. The old regime starved hospitals of resources, so we have helped to supply and reopen hospitals across Iraq. The old regime built up armies and weapons, while allowing the nation's infrastructure to crumble, so we are rehabilitating power plants, water and sanitation facilities, bridges and airports. I proposed to Congress that the United States provide additional funding for our work in Iraq, the greatest financial commitment of its kind since the Marshall Plan. Having helped to liberate Iraq, we will honor our pledges to Iraq, and by helping the Iraqi people build a stable and peaceful country, we will make our own countries more secure.

The primary goal of our coalition in Iraq is self-government for the people of Iraq, reached by orderly and democratic process. This process must unfold according to the needs of Iraqis, neither hurried, nor delayed by the wishes of other parties. And the United Nations can contribute greatly to the cause of Iraq self-government. America is working with friends and allies on a new Security Council resolution, which will expand the U.N.'s role in Iraq. As in the aftermath of other conflicts, the United Nations should assist in developing a constitution, in training civil servants, and conducting free and fair elections.

Iraq now has a Governing Council, the first truly representative institution in that country. Iraq's new leaders are showing the openness and tolerance that democracy requires, and they're also showing courage. Yet every young democracy needs the help of friends. Now the nation of Iraq needs and deserves our aid, and all nations of goodwill should step forward and provide that support.

The success of a free Iraq will be watched and noted throughout the region. Millions will see that freedom, equality, and material progress are possible at the heart of the Middle East. Leaders in the region will face the clearest evidence that free institutions and open societies are the only path to long-term national success and dignity. And a transformed Middle East would benefit the entire world, by undermining the ideologies that export violence to other lands.

Iraq as a dictatorship had great power to destabilize the Middle East; Iraq as a democracy will have great power to inspire the Middle East. The advance of democratic institutions in Iraq is setting an example that others, including the Palestinian people, would be wise to follow. The Palestinian cause is betrayed by leaders who cling to power by feeding old hatreds and destroying the good work of others. The Palestinian people deserve their own state, and they will gain that state by embracing new leaders committed to reform, to fighting terror, and to building peace. All parties in the Middle East must meet their responsibilities and carry out the commitments they made at Aqaba. Israel must work to create the conditions that will allow a peaceful Palestinian state to emerge. And Arab nations must cut off funding and other support for terrorist organizations. America will work with every nation in the region that acts boldly for the sake of peace.

A second challenge we must confront together is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Outlaw regimes that possess nuclear, chemical and biological weapons -- and the means to deliver them -- would be able to use blackmail and create chaos in entire regions. These weapons could be used by terrorists to bring sudden disaster and suffering on a scale we can scarcely imagine. The deadly combination of outlaw regimes and terror networks and weapons of mass murder is a peril that cannot be ignored or wished away. If such a danger is allowed to fully materialize, all words, all protests, will come too late. Nations of the world must have the wisdom and the will to stop grave threats before they arrive.

One crucial step is to secure the most dangerous materials at their source. For more than a decade, the United States has worked with Russia and other states of the former Soviet Union to dismantle, destroy, or secure weapons and dangerous materials left over from another era. Last year in Canada, the G8 nations agreed to provide up to $20 billion -- half of it from the United States -- to fight this proliferation risk over the next 10 years. Since then, six additional countries have joined the effort. More are needed, and I urge other nations to help us meet this danger.

We're also improving our capability to interdict lethal materials in transit. Through our Proliferation Security Initiative, 11 nations are preparing to search planes and ships, trains and trucks carrying suspect cargo, and to seize weapons or missile shipments that raise proliferation concerns. These nations have agreed on a set of interdiction principles, consistent with legal -- current legal authorities. And we're working to expand the Proliferation Security Initiative to other countries. We're determined to keep the world's most destttructive weapons away from all our shores, and out of the hands of our common enemies.

Because proliferators will use any route or channel that is open to them, we need the broadest possible cooperation to stop them. Today, I ask the U.N. Security Council to adopt a new anti-proliferation resolution. This resolution should call on all members of the U.N. to criminalize the proliferation of weapons -- weapons of mass destruction, to enact strict export controls consistent with international standards, and to secure any and all sensitive materials within their own borders. The United States stands ready to help any nation draft these new laws, and to assist in their enforcement.

A third challenge we share is a challenge to our conscience. We must act decisively to meet the humanitarian crises of our time. The United States has begun to carry out the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, aimed at preventing AIDS on a massive scale, and treating millions who have the disease already. We have pledged $15 billion over five years to fight AIDS around the world.

My country is acting to save lives from famine, as well. We're providing more than $1.4 billion in global emergency food aid, and I've asked our United States Congress for $200 million for a new famine fund, so we can act quickly when the first signs of famine appear. Every nation on every continent should generously add their resources to the fight against disease and desperate hunger.

There's another humanitarian crisis spreading, yet hidden from view. Each year, an estimated 800,000 to 900,000 human beings are bought, sold or forced across the world's borders. Among them are hundreds of thousands of teenage girls, and others as young as five, who fall victim to the sex trade. This commerce in human life generates billions of dollars each year -- much of which is used to finance organized crime.

There's a special evil in the abuse and exploitation of the most innocent and vulnerable. The victims of sex trade see little of life before they see the very worst of life -- an underground of brutality and lonely fear. Those who create these victims and profit from their suffering must be severely punished. Those who patronize this industry debase themselves and deepen the misery of others. And governments that tolerate this trade are tolerating a form of slavery.

This problem has appeared in my own country, and we are working to stop it. The PROTECT Act, which I signed into law this year, makes it a crime for any person to enter the United States, or for any citizen to travel abroad, for the purpose of sex tourism involving children. The Department of Justice is actively investigating sex tour operators and patrons, who can face up to 30 years in prison. Under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, the United States is using sanctions against governments to discourage human trafficking.

The victims of this industry also need help from members of the United Nations. And this begins with clear standards and the certainty of punishment under laws of every country. Today, some nations make it a crime to sexually abuse children abroad. Such conduct should be a crime in all nations. Governments should inform travelers of the harm this industry does, and the severe punishments that will fall on its patrons. The American government is committing $50 million to support the good work of organizations that are rescuing women and children from exploitation, and giving them shelter and medical treatment and the hope of a new life. I urge other governments to do their part.

We must show new energy in fighting back an old evil. Nearly two centuries after the abolition of the transatlantic slave trade, and more than a century after slavery was officially ended in its last strongholds, the trade in human beings for any purpose must not be allowed to thrive in our time.

All the challenges I have spoken of this morning require urgent attention and moral clarity. Helping Afghanistan and Iraq to succeed as free nations in a transformed region, cutting off the avenues of proliferation, abolishing modern forms of slavery -- these are the kinds of great tasks for which the United Nations was founded. In each case, careful discussion is needed, and also decisive action. Our good intentions will be credited only if we achieve good outcomes.

As an original signer of the U.N. Charter, the United States of America is committed to the United Nations. And we show that commitment by working to fulfill the U.N.'s stated purposes, and give meaning to its ideals. The founding documents of the United Nations and the founding documents of America stand in the same tradition. Both assert that human beings should never be reduced to objects of power or commerce, because their dignity is inherent. Both require -- both recognize a moral law that stands above men and nations, which must be defended and enforced by men and nations. And both point the way to peace, the peace that comes when all are free. We secure that peace with our courage, and we must show that courage together.

May God bless you all.

Next Page -- Jacques Chirac: "The war, launched without the authorization of the Security Council, shook the multilateral system"

French President Jacques Chirac

Heads of State and Government,

General Assembly President,

Secretary-General of the United Nations,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Sergio Vieira de Mello personified the honor of the United Nations. Murdered on August 19 along with members of his staff, we shall long remember him. Let us dedicate this session to this great servant of peace.

The United Nations has just weathered one of the gravest trials in its history. The debate turned on respect for the Charter and the use of force. The war, embarked on without Security Council approval, has undermined the multilateral system.

Having taken stock of this crisis, our Organization can now resume its onward march. For it is above all in this forum, which is the crucible of the international order, that it behooves us to exercise our responsibilities to the world of today and to future generations.

In an open world, no one can live in isolation, no one can act alone in the name of all, and no one can accept the anarchy of a society without rules. There is no alternative to the United Nations. But in the face of today's challenges, this fundamental choice, as expressed in the Charter, calls for a far-reaching reform of our Organization.

Multilateralism is the key, for it ensures the participation of all in the management of world affairs. It is a guarantee of legitimacy and democracy, especially in matters regarding the use of force or laying down universal norms.

Multilateralism works: in Monterrey and Johannesburg it has allowed us to overcome the clash of North and South and to set the scene for partnerships-with Africa notably­bearing promise for the future.

Multilateralism is a concept for our time: for it alone allows us to apprehend contemporary problems globally and in all their complexity.

First of all, as a means to settle the conflicts that threaten international peace and security.

Multilateralism is the modern approach for this alone allows contemporary problems to be addressed as a whole in their complexity.

First, the settlement of conflicts that threaten international peace and security.

In Iraq, the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqis, who must have sole responsability for their future, is essential for stability and reconstruction.

It is up to the United Nations to give legitimacy to this process. It is also up to the United Nations to assist with the gradual transfer of administrative and economic responsibilities to the present Iraqi institutions according to a realistic timetable and to help the Iraqis draft a constitution and hold elections.

Lastly it is up to the United Nations to give a mandate to a multinational force, commanded naturally by the main troop contributor, in order to ensure the security of Iraq and all those helping with the country's reconstruction.

In this way the international community and the Iraqi people, united around a common project, will together end the tragic decades of this great country's history.

In the Middle East, undermined by despair and hate, only firm political resolve to apply, on both sides, the law as formulated by the United Nations will pave the way to a just and lasting solution.

The international community must restore a dynamic for peace. It must be resolutely involved in the implementation of the road map. This must be the ambition of the next ministerial meeting of the Quartet. France believes the idea of a monitoring mechanism still holds and that an international conference is an objective to be achieved as quickly as possible.

Given the present tension, France calls on the parties to resist the temptation to engage in a trial of force and never-ending radicalization.

The fight against international terrorism is another key challenge. This is well in hand, under Security Council auspices and within the framework of our various treaties. Our determination is rooted in the horror of September 11. The threat goes to the very heart of our democracies and societies. We are using force to combat terrorism, but that is not enough. It will return over and over if we allow extremism and fanaticism to flourish, if we fail to realize that it uses the world's unresolved conflicts and imbalances as its justification.

In the face of proliferating weapons of mass destruction, we reject all "faits accomplis".

We must stand united in ensuring the universality of treaties and the effectiveness of non-proliferation regimes. We must strengthen our means of action in order to ensure compliance. France has proposed the creation of a permanent corps of inspectors under the authority of the Security Council. We need to give fresh impetus to this policy. Let us call a summit meeting of the Security Council to frame a genuine United Nations action plan against proliferation.

For the present, we must demand that North Korea dismantle its military program completely, verifiably, and irreversibly. We must demand that Iran sign and implement, unconditionally and without delay, a strengthened nuclear safeguards agreement with the IAEA.

Sustainable development poses yet another challenge, for half of humanity lives in conditions of precarity or extreme poverty. Are we capable of nurturing a form of globalization founded in solidarity, as our peoples demand, in response to the globalization of the economy?

We agree on the goals. And we are bound by our Millennium Goals. But we still need a strong political impetus in order to achieve them. I propose that Heads of State and Government meet in New York in 2005 for a preliminary review of progress. And I hope that this General Assembly will confirm our governments' resolve to overcome the failure at Cancun in order to complete the "Doha development round" successfully.

In order to fulfil the missions entrusted to it and remedy some of its blatant shortcomings, the United Nations must change. Democracy, authority, and efficacy must be our watchwords. Progress has been made, thanks to the Secretary-General, and new avenues are opening up. It is now up to the Member States to take matters forward without delay, and to put an end to the damage caused by the stalemate over reforms.

The United Nations suffers from the current weakness of the General Assembly. Yet that is where debate on solutions to the world's great problems should take place and consensus be forged. A culture of confrontation must give way to a culture of action, aimed at achieving our common goals.

Chief responsibility for the maintenance of peace and security lies with the Security Council. It is therefore essential to its legitimacy that its membership reflect the state of the world. It must be enlarged to include new permanent members, for it needs the presence of major countries. France is thinking, naturally, of Germany and Japan, but also of some leading countries from Asia, Africa and Latin America. It needs additional elected countries as well, in order to make the Council more representative still. Under the resolute impetus of the five permanent members, each of us must take up this discussion with the general interest in mind.

This reform should be accompanied by a strengthening of the Council's authority. It is the role of the Council to set the bounds to the use of force. No one is entitled to arrogate to himself the right to utilize it unilaterally and preventively. Conversely, in the face of mounting threats, States must have an assurance that the Council has appropriate means of evaluation and collective action at its disposal, and that it has the will to act.

We all place a high premium on national sovereignty. But its scope can and must be limited in cases of gross violations of human rights and humanitarian law. The Security Council is taking steps in that direction, and France supports this development.

Meanwhile, crimes against humanity are being punished more effectively, with the establishment of the International Criminal Court, whose jurisdiction is universal. This historic step forward must be accompanied by a strengthening of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, under a Commission equipped to discharge its duties and mission in full.

We now realize that globalization demands stronger economic, social and environmental governance. To that end, France proposes the creation of a new political forum representative of the present state of the world economy in all its diversity. This council would be entrusted with the responsibility for providing the necessary impetus to the international institutions, for improving their coordination, and for anticipating and tackling global problems more effectively.

Effectiveness also depends on increased financial resources. France calls for two changes.

First, a reversal of the trend toward raising voluntary contributions at the expense of mandatory contributions. Failing that, we will end up with a pick-and-choose United Nations, an outdated vision, and a harmful one.

Second, we need to make progress in harnessing funds for development. France wants to meet the official development assistance target of 0.7% of gross national income by the year 2012. But this effort, together with that of the European Union, will not suffice to generate the necessary funds needed to finance the Millennium Goals each year. France therefore supports the innovative concept of an International Financial Facility. I would also like us to give pragmatic consideration to the idea of international solidarity levies, a kind of tax on the wealth generated by globalization.

To advance on these issues, I approve the Secretary-General's intention to gather around him a committee of independent wise men and women entrusted with making proposals.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Against the risk of a world without order delivered up to violence, let us work to establish one governed by the rule of law.

Against the injustice and suffering of a world of ever-widening inequalities-even though it has never been as rich as it is today-let us choose solidarity.

Against the chaos of a world shaken by ecological disaster, let us call for a sharing of responsibility, around a United Nations Environmental Organization.

Against the barbarity of a world in which fundamental rights are trampled on, where the integrity of mankind is under threat, where native peoples-the heirs to an irreplaceable heritage-vanish amid silence and indifference, let us uphold the demands of ethics.

Against the perils of a clash of civilizations, finally, let us insist on the equal dignity of all cultures, respect for diversity, and the importance of dialogue.

With the Charter adopted in the name of the Peoples of the United Nations, our founders proclaimed their faith in these ideals. Let us seek to be worthy of them. Let us strive to place the United Nations at the heart of this planetary democracy so vital in our day and age.

Thank you

Check this page again later for transcripts of speeches given by key leaders at the UN General Assembly.