
Français		Home		Contact Us		Help		Search		canada.gc.ca		Canada International

Home > Media Room

Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada

Canadian Offices Abroad

Services for Canadian Travellers

Services for Business

Canada in the World

About the Department

SPEECHES

2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 - 2000 - 1999 - 1998 - 1997 - 1996

Print friendly version - Printing Tips

<html> <head> <meta name="Generator" content="Corel WordPerfect 8"> <title>NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS BY THE HONOURABLE LLOYD AXWORTHY, MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS, TO THE PAASIKIVI SOCIETY </title> </head> <body text="#000000" link="#0000ff" vlink="#551a8b" alink="#ff0000" bgcolor="#c0c0c0"> 99/47 CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS BY THE HONOURABLE LLOYD AXWORTHY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO THE PAASIKIVI SOCIETY HELSINKI, Finland September 1, 1999 Finland, like Canada, has a history of positive engagement in the world. I am therefore honoured to have been invited here by the Paasikivi Society, and pleased to have this opportunity to discuss with you my perception of the global challenges we face, to outline how we are adapting our foreign policy as a result, and to suggest how Canada and Finland might extend our co-operation -- in particular with regard to our shared northern frontiers. The efforts of President Ahtisaari during the Kosovo crisis are a remarkable example of Finland's tradition of service in the interest of peace and security. It is as a result of the agreement he helped to craft that Kosovo's refugees have been able to return home. We are all grateful for President Ahtisaari's contribution, which brings well-deserved credit to him personally and to the people of Finland. At the height of the conflict, I recall vividly President Ahtisaari's impressive presence at the meeting of G-8 foreign ministers. His unswerving commitment to resolving the crisis was clear, and both his words and deeds served as a powerful inspiration for all of us who believe in the pursuit of peace and justice in an unsettled world. His efforts were all the more exceptional in that the crisis in Kosovo reflects many of the new realities of conflict in a changing world, while our response marks a crossroads in the management of global affairs. Central to the new global circumstances is the individual. The security and safety of people -- what I call human security -- is emerging as a central concern of global affairs, an important motive for concerted global action, and an indispensable link in the continuum that includes national, regional and global security. There is no doubt that in conflict areas, people suffer most -- especially civilians. The rate of victimization is without precedent. Today, more people die in conflicts -- increasingly fought within rather than between states -- than ever before. More of these people are civilians. And, more and more, these civilians are the direct targets of violence. Consider the impact on children alone of the past decade's violent conflicts: 2 million killed, 4 million disabled, 1 million orphaned, 10 million psychologically scarred by the trauma of abduction, expulsion, rape, detention or dismemberment. The threats to human security are not limited to conflict areas. Canadians and Finns may be largely protected from the kind of physical violence prevalent in other parts of the world. Yet our citizens are affected by other transnational threats: the illicit drug trade is taking its toll, especially on our youth; environmental pollution threatens urban and rural populations alike. In the Arctic, for example, toxic waste originating from other parts of the globe is having a serious impact on the health and well-being of our northern population. At the same time, our security is indivisible from that of our neighbours across the street or across the globe. We share a common destiny. As travellers, donors, traders and investors, and as citizens of countries that are the destination for immigrants and refugees, what happens in other peoples' lives matters to Canadians and Finns. And in a wired world with real-time images, the face of human suffering is brought directly into our lives with increasing clarity. We share a common humanity. The distress of others is a matter of our own concern. As a result, we have both an interest in acting and a responsibility to act when human security is at risk. It is in this context that we have been adapting Canadian foreign policy in terms of the issues we address, the methods and institutions we use, and the partnerships we pursue. One area where the focus on human security is shaping Canada's approach is disarmament and arms control. The campaign to ban anti-personnel mines is perhaps the most well-known example. From the outset, the campaign was driven by the conviction that decisive action was needed to protect the lives and well-being of innocent individuals, ruthlessly swept up in the horrors of war. In that respect, the Ottawa Process is unique. Its momentum is derived from a commitment to eventually eliminate a weapon that threatens ordinary people in terms of development opportunities forgone, injuries sustained and lives lost. The measure of its success -- and since the signing of the Ottawa treaty there has been continued progress -- is likewise calculated in human terms. The number of mine victims is declining; more than 14 million mines have been destroyed, mines that will never take a life or limb; and mine victims are being helped to lead productive lives. To that end, I welcome Finland's significant contribution to these multilateral mine clearance and related humanitarian assistance efforts. This focus on the human dimension, the tangible human costs, of weapons is similarly at work in efforts to address the challenges posed by small arms and light military weapons. Inexpensive, portable and easy to obtain, these types of weapons abound in conflict zones. When these weapons fall into the wrong hands, their misuse compounds the misery of civilians, who are overwhelmingly their victims. Urgent attention must be given to the flow and misuse of weapons that terrorize, maim and kill. This has consequently been a focus of Canadian activity at the United Nations and through regional organizations such as the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, with affected countries and other like-minded countries. Canada and Finland are already partners in this area. In Northern Ireland, for example, retired Canadian General John de Chastelain and your former Prime Minister and current President of your society, Harri Holkeri, have been involved with the Decommissioning Commission of the Northern Ireland Peace Process -- a crucial element in establishing lasting peace. The way we dealt with the landmines issue, as well as the way we are dealing with small arms and light military weapons, reflects a shift in both thinking and action in traditional areas of global peace and security. The focus on human security entails efforts to widen the definition to include new challenges to the safety and security of people, such as the scourge of illicit drugs, people trafficking, and the growth in financial crime and corruption. It also entails efforts to address special challenges such as those relating to the world's children, whether as child soldiers, exploited labour or victims of the global and cyber sex trades. By taking action to deal with existing and emerging threats to people, initiatives in all of these areas attempt to advance human security. They need to be complemented by engagement to prevent abuses from occurring in the first place and to set new standards of global behaviour for the future. For that, full accountability is key. That is why Canada played an active role in establishing the International Criminal Court. Since a framework agreement to create the Court was reached in Rome last summer, progress has been made in making the Court a reality. Once in place, it will help deter some of the most serious breaches of humanitarian law, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. It will help give new meaning and global reach to efforts to protect the vulnerable and the innocent. The UN tribunals and now the International Criminal Court capture the mood of the global community. They send an unmistakable signal to would-be violators: those who commit the most serious breaches of humanitarian law cannot act with impunity. They must answer for their actions. These two sides of the human security concept -- global action to advance it and individual accountability for those who threaten it -- were evident in Kosovo. NATO's intervention was an important step in the emergence of human security as a norm for global action. The Alliance was galvanized to act not from a cold calculus of realpolitik but from a wish to defend the simple right of people to live in peace and security in the face of a vicious spiral of premeditated murder, terror and brutality. The military option for Kosovo was not chosen lightly. Still, the decision demonstrates that, sometimes, when other means have failed, when inaction is unacceptable and the humanitarian imperative to act is clearly evident, it may be the only option -- and it is a justifiable one. The war crimes indictments handed down by Justice Arbour helped to hasten the end of the Kosovo crisis, by isolating and stigmatizing the Serb leadership. The determined actions of Justice Arbour and the Tribunal demonstrate how concerted efforts can help end the culture of impunity and advance human security goals. However, as it gains new weight in international affairs, human security also raises contradictions with existing norms while posing questions about the institutions we have constructed to manage world affairs. Later this month, world leaders will gather to open the UN General Assembly, which will lead us into the new century, an opportune time to examine how the organization is responding to the very changed and very dangerous world in which we live. It is at the UN where the contradictions between new and old are perhaps most pointed. The Security Council, in particular, has not been as relevant as we need it to be. It is imperative that we consider how to adapt the Security Council to the new realities in order to protect people better. As the only global instrument for ensuring peace and security, it needs to be fully involved -- not absent -- in this process. Canada is strongly committed to ensuring that the Council plays a central leadership role. That is why Canada introduced the issue of civilians in armed conflict in February of this year, requesting that Secretary-General Annan study it and make recommendations about how the Council can better promote the security of people. The Secretary-General's report and his proposals will be circulated shortly. Among the most evident challenges for us, and for the Council in particular, is how the concept of human security relates to sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of states -- still basic tenets of global peace and security. The norm of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states remains basic to international peace and security. Kosovo must not be interpreted as a precedent to justify intervention anywhere, anytime, for any reason. At the same time, in cases of extreme abuse, as in Kosovo and Rwanda, the concept of national sovereignty cannot be absolute. Tests and standards need to be established by which the necessity and legitimacy of international enforcement on behalf of human security can be judged and undertaken. To that end, the Council needs to be actively engaged in setting out these parameters and in resolving differences among Council members on first principles, so that the institution can be more responsive and proactive when crises arise. Enforcement action is only one component of the Council's activities. In other areas, from peacemaking to peacekeeping to peacebuilding, the Council can and should be more active in integrating the human dimension into its work. The United Nations should be the hub around which global action in support of human security is undertaken. However, while it has a central role, it is but one instrument through which human security can be pursued. Innovative partnerships between like-minded countries can also make a difference. This is the impetus behind the initiative by Canada and your Nordic neighbour Norway to create a network of like-minded countries -- transcending the old boundaries of North and South and East and West -- to discuss and organize action on human security concerns. Moreover, the truth is that foreign policy can no longer be shaped and directed by nation states and diplomats alone. New players on the international scene, including non-governmental organizations [NGOs], business associations, trade unions and regional groups, have a growing influence. They can play a positive and powerful role. It was a unique coalition of like-minded countries, NGOs and ordinary citizens that came together to make the campaign to ban anti-personnel mines such a success and that served to move forward the creation of the International Criminal Court. For countries like Canada and Finland, advancing human security -- that of our own citizens and on the global stage -- depends on creating synergies with others on issues of common concern. I have mentioned areas where Canada and Finland are partners. Of course, what we most obviously have in common is our northern heritage. A year ago at Iqaluit, in the new Canadian territory of Nunavut, we held the first ministerial meeting of the Arctic Council. The Council was created in response to the unique challenges facing the arctic region and the belief that there needed to be a different, comprehensive way of dealing with them. The challenges derive from promoting development for the people of the region while ensuring the integrity of the arctic environment and protecting existing social and cultural values. These are issues that have a direct impact on the daily lives of arctic residents. However, because they do not respect borders, they need to be addressed through a new form of co-operation among the arctic states and their people. Canada and Finland have been especially strong allies in this venture. It was Finland, through its Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, that provided the basis for the co-operation that now extends to sustainable development, governance, education and health and welfare. To this end, I am particularly encouraged that contacts between northern indigenous peoples, the Canadian Inuit and the Saami of northern Finland, have intensified. Canada and Finland are also both leading-edge information societies. I am therefore pleased we are working to employ high-tech resources in the North through specific projects such as the Arctic University, which will use distance-learning technology to educate youth across the Arctic. The Arctic Council and its activities exemplify the novel types of arrangements we need to address transnational challenges that affect us all. As EU [European Union] President, Finland has made the advancement of the EU's northern dimension, with particular emphasis on Russia and the Baltic States, an important priority. Where this focusses on energy development, transportation links, environmental protection, and health and welfare, there is considerable overlap with the activities and discussions already under way in the circumpolar context and in our bilateral relations with these countries. Canada and Finland should intensify their co-operation. Your term at the helm of the EU is an ideal occasion to do so. Tomorrow, I will be meeting with the Finnish EU Presidency and representatives of the EU Commission, and I am certain we will discuss these issues as well as other aspects of Canada-EU relations. I also welcome the seminar to be co-hosted by Canada, Finland and the European Commission this October, which will explore concrete ways we can move forward. Without doubt, the changes we have experienced over the past decade have radically altered our world. Whether in business, the media, academia or government, the challenge lies in defining how these changes affect our lives and in crafting the right strategies in response. In the pursuit of global peace and security, the human security agenda is a Canadian approach. Recognizing that the security of Canadians is indivisible from the safety of others, it is an effort to construct a global society where the safety of the individual is at the centre of international priorities and a motivating force for international action; where international humanitarian standards and the rule of law are advanced and woven into a coherent web protecting the individual; where those who violate these standards are held fully accountable; and where our global, regional and bilateral institutions -- existing and future -- are built and equipped to enforce these standards and to advance human security. I have outlined some of the ways Canada is implementing this approach. Whether on the international stage or in our own neighbourhood, I believe our shared values and a similar tradition of multilateral co-operation make Canada and Finland well-suited partners in advancing human security objectives. Thank you. </body> </html>

2007 - 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