There is cautious optimism today that we are once again moving closer to the elusive goal of comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East. This is welcome news for all of us -- but mostly for the people of the Middle East.

From the outset, the prospects for peace are clearly linked to bilateral negotiations, and to the willingness of the region's leaders to make them successful. This remains the case today, and the signs are promising.

The determination and commitment of the peace process co-sponsors is no less indispensable. In that regard, I wish to acknowledge the tireless efforts of the "handmaiden of peace," Secretary Albright. Indeed, the advances made to date would have been impossible without her engagement and U.S. leadership, together with the active support and participation of our Russian hosts.

Canada joins others here in welcoming progress and encouraging the parties -- guided by the principles set out in United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 -- to maintain the current momentum for lasting peace.

However, the global community's encouragement alone is not enough. We also need to provide concrete support. That is why we are gathered here in Moscow.

Without doubt, the responsibility for sustainable peace lies with those directly concerned. As a result, the focus must remain primarily on direct negotiations. However, an effective multilateral track can contribute to these efforts by building confidence and trust among the parties. And sooner or later, the international community will be called on to help in the implementation of peace agreements.

The moment is right, therefore, for us to review the state of the multilateral track and to consider the role it might play in supporting the renewed drive for peace.

The objectives of multilateral efforts have been to address subjects that go beyond the province of any one set of bilateral negotiations and to serve as a means for co-operation on important issues that affect the daily lives of people. For Canada, as chair of the Refugee Working Group [RWG], this remains the essence of our work.

The situation of refugees, a key human security concern, is an important element of the multilateral process. The actions of the RWG, like those of the other groups, have been affected by the past ups and downs of the bilateral track. Nevertheless, with the support of the core parties, the work of the RWG has continued throughout the past eight years. I have tabled today a report on its activities.

The RWG has undertaken missions to refugee camps in the West Bank/Gaza Strip and in Jordan. Similar missions have been conducted to Lebanon and Syria. These have served as a way for refugees to speak directly to the international community about their concerns and needs. The result has been concrete projects, such as the program for university scholarships for Palestinian refugee women in Lebanon, supported by Qatar, Canada and other donors. Other donors are also welcomed.

The Group has also worked to assist the parties in speeding up and expanding the family reunification process. In addition, Canada and Kuwait have funded a project, to be completed by year's end, to relocate close to 500 Palestinian refugee families from the Sinai back to Gaza. Egypt, Israel and the Palestinian Authority should be commended for their co-operation in this area.

Support for UNRWA [United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East] is another concern. Canada uses every occasion to emphasize that UNRWA must have adequate resources to continue being a source of stability and of hope for refugees in the camps.

Allow me to take this occasion to underline the exemplary contribution of the RWG's "shepherds": France, Norway, Italy, the United States, Sweden, Switzerland and the European Union.

For our part, Canada understands that leadership of the RWG must be matched by tangible support for Palestinian refugees and the peace process. As a result, our contribution to UNRWA has increased more than 40 percent since 1997. Over the past five years, we have contributed $130 million to programs in the region, particularly in the camps themselves. This includes projects -- from meetings to virtual links via the Internet -- aimed at increasing direct contact and understanding between Israelis and Palestinians.

In the past, the greatest challenge the RWG faced was finding the right balance between those with different approaches to its work. It managed, nevertheless, to help reassure the refugees that their plight had not been forgotten -- primarily through activities to address their living conditions.

The beginning of permanent status negotiations has changed the political context in which the RWG operates. This suggests a new phase for the RWG. Without doubt, peace and stability cannot be achieved in the absence of a just solution to the refugee question. As we are all aware, the refugee issue has important regional and international dimensions, and in this regard I note the presence here of UN representatives.

We believe that the RWG can play a constructive role in the new circumstances. But what this role should be depends on clear direction, in particular from the core parties. I strongly encourage them to reflect on the support the Group can provide, both to their negotiations and to the implementation of an agreement.

To that end, I urge them to consider the contribution the RWG could make, not only in humanitarian terms, but also with regard to the international policy dimension of the issue.

It seems that a solution with a largely regional focus, respecting the rights of the refugees and offering them choices as to their future, is most likely to receive the support of the international community.

Finally, the provisions of an eventual agreement will involve considerable resources. In addition, expectations will be high that its terms will be implemented rapidly -- indeed, the success of peace agreements will doubtless depend on it.

This requires preparation. Yet we are far from ready. As a result, I would recommend that the Steering Group consider whether we should not begin this important work now. To this end, I suggest that we call on the World Bank to assist us in carrying out this analysis.

All of this requires further, careful reflection. As part of this process, I propose that the RWG meet at the plenary level in May of this year in Ottawa.

As for the future of the multilateral track as a whole, I am firmly convinced that it can make a greater contribution to the peace process. The emphasis on people, on issues that directly affect individual lives -- safety, well-being and human rights -- remains appropriate, and is perhaps even more relevant today than in 1992. And because the issues cut across boundaries and demand joint solutions -- far from being a zero-sum game -- it is a process that benefits all parties while advancing peace.

But to succeed, the multilateral track needs renewed energy. It is up to the regional parties -- and here we would encourage Syria and Lebanon to now become full multilateral partners -- to provide the impetus, to reiterate the commitment, and to articulate a clear direction for this process.

In contemplating the future, I would encourage them to make creative use of the Working Groups. Given the considerable expertise and resources that can be harnessed, these groups could be utilized not exclusively as vehicles for assistance projects, but for analysis and perhaps recommendations on shaping future relationships in the region.

As a practical matter, we also believe there is scope for collaboration and linkages between the Working Groups. The RWG, for example, might usefully collaborate with the Regional Economic Development and the Environment Working Groups. At the same time, we would encourage the co-gavels in the Arms Control and Regional Security Working Group to resume the activities of this important body.

Finally, the presence of landmines on disputed territories could have a direct negative impact on both the environment and the socio-economic development in the region in its post-conflict period. Canada strongly believes that mine action must be integrated into the multilateral track of the peace process in order to ensure that there is arable land with good agricultural potential safely offered to the people of the region.

To achieve this goal, Canada is prepared to co-ordinate efforts to integrate mine action into the Middle East peace process. We would like to explore possible mine action in Golan Heights, Southern Lebanon and West Bank/Gaza. Activities could include training, mine clearance, victim assistance and mine awareness. Together, Canada, Norway, Israel and Jordan are already working to make the Jordan Valley a mine-free zone by the end of this year.

Now that the Steering Group has met again at the ministerial level, I believe we should continue the practice, perhaps rotating between meetings involving senior officials and those involving ministers. Canada would be pleased to offer to host a future meeting of the Steering Group.

Peace begins and ends with people. The impetus for peace is, ultimately, the security and well-being of the individual. This is no more or less true in the Middle East than elsewhere. It is certainly a focus of the multilateral process we are here to advance. Canada looks forward to working with all of our partners to that end and we wish you all well in your own endeavours.

Thank you.

2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips



Last Updated: 2006-10-30	Top of Page	Important Notices