
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>MR. AXWORTHY - ADDRESS TO THE SOCIÉTÉ DES RELATIONS INTERNATIONALES DE QUÉBEC 'HUMAN SECURITY AND CANADA'S SECURITY COUNCIL AGENDA' - QUEBEC CITY, QUEBEC</title> </head> <body text="#000000" link="#0000ff" vlink="#551a8b" alink="#ff0000" bgcolor="#c0c0c0"> 99/13 CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY NOTES FOR AN ADDRESS BY THE HONOURABLE LLOYD AXWORTHY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO THE SOCIÉTÉ DES RELATIONS INTERNATIONALES DE QUÉBEC "HUMAN SECURITY AND CANADA'S SECURITY COUNCIL AGENDA" QUEBEC CITY, Quebec February 25, 1999 (5:00 p.m. EST) Two months ago, Canada took its seat at the Security Council table. This week, we conclude our month-long tenure as Security Council President. While a brief period, the past eight weeks have been busy: the Council has been engaged in a number of difficult crises -- in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Angola and Iraq. We have dealt with a variety of ongoing challenges, from peacebuilding efforts in Haiti to the continuing turbulence in central Africa to the persistent civil conflicts in Tajikistan and Georgia. And at Canada's initiative, the Council held a special session two weeks ago focussed on the protection of civilians in armed conflict -- a subject we believe requires more and sustained Council attention. The demands of Council membership are proving fully as challenging -- and as unpredictable -- as we had expected. The future promises to be no less active. Still, I am very encouraged by the progress we have made so far in advancing Canada's agenda, especially integrating the human dimension -- human security -- into the Council's work. We invested heavily in preparing for our tenure. A key element was extensive consultation with our constituents -- the UN membership and the Canadian public -- about the direction we wanted the Council to take. As a result, I believe we have the mandate, the credibility and the responsibility to push our agenda forward. Now that we are on the Council, we will continue to reach out. To that end, we held a series of public consultations on our Council tenure, including one in Montreal last month. In January, we launched a Foreign Affairs Web site dealing with Canada at the UN. It provides the latest information about our Council activities while giving Canadians a place to make comments and suggestions. It is proving to be quite popular, receiving an average of 567 hits per day. The latest edition of Canada World View, our department's news periodical, focusses on Canada's involvement at the UN, including our Council tenure. I am very pleased therefore to have this opportunity to be with you today. I would like to describe briefly some of the ways I believe the world has changed since we last served on the Security Council, review how Canada has responded to these changes, and then outline how we propose to use our tenure to update the Council's operations while addressing Canadian priorities. A Changed International Context Canada last served on the Security Council 10 years ago. During our tenure, the Cold War was just beginning to give way to a new, uncharted path to the future. This evolution has continued. The global context in which the Council operates, the membership it represents and the challenges it faces are considerably different from a decade ago. Without doubt, global peace and security -- obtaining it and maintaining it -- remains the central concern of the international community and the main responsibility of the Council. Yet, as the world has changed -- and continues to change -- so too has our definition of peace and security. As a result, our game plan is in need of an update. To this end, a few certainties have emerged to guide us. As recent events in such different places as Kosovo and Sierra Leone have demonstrated, the "civilianization" of armed conflict has become the most common and lamentable feature of war in our time. More than ever, non-combatants, especially the most vulnerable, are the principal targets, the instruments and, overwhelmingly, the victims of conflict. Casualties from armed conflict have doubled in just the past 10 years to about one million annually. And whereas during the First World War only 5 percent of casualties were civilians, today that figure is closer to 80 percent. This is partly the result of a change in the complexion of war. Most conflicts now occur inside rather than between states. In the case of failed states, modern-day warlords and vigilantes have emerged -- aided and abetted by outside arms dealers and others who benefit from the marketplace of conflict. These individuals take advantage of, brutalize and terrorize civilians. The result has been human tragedies of devastating proportions: exploitation of civilians, massive refugee flows and the grossest violations of humanitarian law, including genocide. The nature of threats to our global security is also evolving. They are no longer strictly military in nature. Many are multi-faceted and have a transnational dimension: illicit drugs, terrorism, environmental degradation, human rights abuses and weapons proliferation pose challenges that respect no borders and cut across many disciplines. They cannot be solved unilaterally. They do, however, have a direct impact on our everyday lives. Globalization has irreversibly linked our destinies. The undeniable fact of our lives today is that they are more connected than ever. We live in the age of the World Wide Web, global markets, and real-time reporting of war and suffering; far-off concerns, isolated from our own lives, are a thing of the past. And under its shimmering surface, globalization also has a dark undertow that can expose all of us -- especially the less fortunate -- to economic and social insecurity. In this environment, engagement is the only option. The common denominator of these new realities is their human dimension. Our changing world has increasingly put the individual at the centre of global affairs. As a result, the safety and well-being of the individual -- that is, human security -- has become both a new measure of global security and a new impetus for global action. This is not to say that traditional state-based security concerns are obsolete. Indeed, human security and national security are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, they are opposite sides of the same global security coin. This changed global context has led to a recalibration of Canada's own foreign policy priorities, with a stronger focus on issues that strike directly home to the individual. Our human security approach adapts long-standing Canadian foreign policy goals -- advancing national interests while building a better world -- to new international circumstances. Promoting human security involves four elements: First is undertaking new initiatives to focus global attention and action on challenges directly threatening the security of individuals. Examples of such initiatives are the campaign to ban anti-personnel mines and our efforts to curtail the abuse and proliferation of military small arms and light weapons. Second is pursuing focussed projects and goals that directly benefit people. These include peacebuilding via the Canadian Peacebuilding Initiative; the advancement of humanitarian standards -- the driving force behind our efforts to create the International Criminal Court; and adapting international and regional institutions to integrate human security concerns in their work, such as at the UN Security Council, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe [OSCE], the Organization of American States [OAS]. In the context of la Francophonie and where we will seek to integrate human security concerns. This year Canada will host the Summit of la Francophonie. As you are aware, the Francophonie has also expanded its political role. Its goals with regard to democratic development, human rights and the prevention of conflicts correspond very closely with our human security agenda. We will use our role as host of the Summit to further develop this convergence of views and goals. Third is using innovative coalitions with other countries and civil society, plus employing new techniques such as soft power principles -- negotiation rather than coercion, powerful ideas rather than powerful weapons, public diplomacy rather than backroom bargaining. This is the idea behind our co-operation with Norway and with an expanding network of like-minded countries from the four corners of the globe interested in moving human security forward. We are also developing close co-operation with civil society, especially in our peacebuilding activities. Quebec NGOs [non-governmental organizations] play an important role to this end -- for example, the roles played by the Centre canadien d'étude et de coopération internationale in conflict resolution projects in Burundi, and in support of children traumatized by the civil conflict in Algeria, or by the Société Internationale Desjardins, which is supporting democratization in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The final element is using robust action when necessary. There should be no mistake: human security can involve using strong measures, including sanctions and military force. The human security agenda confirms a Canadian tradition of firmness in the face of threats to peace and security. We have shown our resolve in confronting the challenges of weapons of mass destruction -- from Saddam Hussein's defiance of the UN to nuclear testing in the Indian subcontinent. In Kosovo, it is the defence of humanitarian objectives -- the protection of civilian lives -- that brought Canada with its NATO allies to the brink of military force last year and may still do so. We stand ready to do what is necessary to ensure this human crisis is resolved. Our focus on human security should therefore not be misconstrued as softness. Indeed, it is difficult to understand how dealing with the devastating impact of landmines, the proliferation of small arms, the scourge of drugs, the exploitation of children, preventive measures against war crimes -- and organizing concrete global action to confront them -- could be interpreted by some as a sign of weakness. In fact, human security directly expresses the international usefulness of the Canadian experience of using talents of accommodation, negotiation and good will to overcome differences -- leading to a unified, tolerant Canada. We are called upon to give leadership, training and direction on peacekeeping, drug interdiction, policing and developing innovative approaches to overseas aid. Our resources are not unlimited but they are put to good use. And when conditions warrant, we are prepared to use vigorous action in defence of human security objectives. The Security Council and Human Security The UN Security Council remains the paramount global instrument to safeguard peace and security. A strong, effective and purposeful Security Council is therefore essential. However, as Canada takes its seat at the Council table, the Council faces challenges to its credibility. It is falling short of the responsibilities entrusted to it by the international community. The Council has limited its involvement in an increasing number of conflicts. It can be uneven in which conflicts it chooses to focus on: for example, there is a perception that resources are focussed on Europe at the expense of Africa. And it is entirely inactive in responding to some of the new challenges to human security. Setbacks in Somalia, Bosnia and Rwanda diminished the resolve of Council members to stay the course. Other factors affect the Council's capacity to act. Some are rooted in resurgent isolationist and unilateralist impulses, others in a renewed pursuit of narrow national self-interest and -- most disturbingly -- the shortage of funds caused by the arrears in payments of several states. Whatever the reasons, the resulting inertia has far-reaching implications for the Council. While obliged by the UN Charter to carry out Council decisions, some countries may begin to choose not to do so. In the absence of strong, coherent global action, would-be aggressors may be tempted to act -- whether their targets are other states or civilian populations within their own borders. Weakened collective security places undue burdens on individual countries, ad hoc coalitions and regional organizations that do not always possess the capacity to respond effectively. Without resolute Council leadership and action, civilians caught in situations of armed conflict are increasingly left in a security void. This vacuum will be and, in some cases, already is being filled by others -- combatants, including mercenaries, who act with little restraint and scant regard for even the most basic humanitarian standards. Our Security Council mandate therefore comes at a historic juncture. It is an opportune moment to renew the vigour with which the Security Council approached its tasks earlier in this decade. Canada is working to shape a more proactive Council, one that focusses more on the human dimension of security and the unprecedented civilian toll of modern conflict. We will endeavour to do so by working to broaden the Council's agenda and decisions to include human security themes, to reassert its leadership, and to make the Council's operations more transparent and responsive to the UN membership. After two months on the Council, I believe we have made a good start in all three areas. The Council has made progress toward broadening its mandate. The interpretation of what constitutes a threat to international peace and security -- the litmus test for Council action -- now includes intra-state issues. The need to act in support of purely humanitarian goals, to restore stability, and in defence of the security of the individual was behind the Council's operations in Cambodia, Somalia, Mozambique and Haiti. To address today's security agenda, the Council must embrace an even more comprehensive, updated view of its mandate. We are working to enhance the Council's capacity to address new, non-traditional threats to security, such as ethnic conflict, mass refugee flows, illicit small arms trafficking, gross human rights abuse, failures of governance and the rule of law, and abject human deprivation. There are positive trends to build on. The Council has held debates on emerging, cross-cutting security issues, such as child soldiers. Some members have made efforts to broaden the Council's purview to encompass other issues, such as terrorism and mass refugee flows. These debates help to put emerging human security issues on the Security Council's radar. This month, Canada used its presidency to press for greater Council focus and action in order to protect civilians in armed conflict -- including the safety of humanitarian workers, the displaced and refugees, and the special needs of war-affected children. Two weeks ago the Council met to consider the issue. For the first time in the Council's history, the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross [ICRC] was invited to the Council. He was joined by the head of UNICEF [United Nations Children's Fund] and the UN Special Representative for Children in Armed Conflict in addressing the Council. The response among Council members was encouraging. The meeting resulted in a unanimous decision requesting that the Secretary-General prepare a list of concrete, practical recommendations about how the Council can better defend civilians in armed conflict. The subject clearly has a wide resonance among the UN membership. As a result, earlier this week the Council opened its doors, giving non-Council members the opportunity to express their views in an open debate. Canada will also seek to ensure that human security concerns are incorporated into the Council's actions and decisions. In establishing new peace operations, the Council has begun to include, where appropriate, human rights, peacebuilding, rule of law, democratization and humanitarian components. The UN's current missions in Sierra Leone, the Central African Republic and Bosnia are examples. We will ensure that this practice is continued and strengthened. We also need to examine carefully the use of sanctions. They are a powerful tool and need to be used properly to be effective and credible. All aspects of sanctions -- the objectives, the type, the targets, implementation, conditions and timing for their suspension -- need to be considered closely and continually monitored by the Council in terms of their cost-effectiveness. That is why Canada made its proposal, accepted last month, concerning the Iraqi situation. To move forward, the Council needs clarity. To that end, the Council agreed that three separate assessments be prepared regarding disarmament, humanitarian issues, and prisoners of war and property recovery. This proposal helped break the impasse in the Council. We hope it will produce a way ahead, balancing the need for compliance by the Iraqi regime with its obligations and the humanitarian needs of the Iraqi people. Efforts to broaden the Council's horizons in its words and deeds need to be complemented by a re-assertion of the Council's leadership. This means that the Council's authority, especially concerning the possible use of military force, must be respected. We sideline the Council at our own risk. But it also means that the Council must assume its responsibilities -- and take hard decisions -- when the need arises, lest it risk being marginalized. The Council must also correct its tendency to focus selectively on certain conflicts while neglecting others. The Council represents the entire international community. Its credibility depends on a willingness to address threats to peace and security wherever they occur. To that end, Canada is making an effort to ensure greater focus on the security challenges that threaten Africa. When it decides to act, the Council needs to have the resources to do so effectively. The progressive starvation of peacekeeping resources is a matter of deep concern. When the Council takes action, its decisions must be adhered to. For example, in Angola the Council imposed an arms embargo on UNITA forces. This was a welcome, precedent-setting move. For the first time, UN sanctions were aimed at a non-state entity. However, evidence suggests that the embargo is not being respected. The result is a country awash with weapons, making the conflict harder to resolve and endangering the security of both Angolans and international personnel -- as we have tragically seen in the past weeks. Sanctions busters need to be identified and held accountable. As chair of the Angola sanctions committee, Canada will work to this end, in particular by ensuring full compliance with existing sanctions relating to oil, diamonds and arms. Our goal is to limit the ability to make war while encouraging progress toward peace. Last week, Canada presented a report to the Council suggesting further measures to tighten enforcement of the existing sanctions regime. It was welcomed by Council members, and we will work to ensure that it is followed up. Leadership also requires outreach. To this end, Canada has promoted and will continue to promote co-operation between the Council and other regional security organizations, as we have in Haiti between the UN and the OAS, or in Bosnia, where the UN, the OSCE and NATO all have their roles. Such arrangements must spring from willing and effective partnerships -- not from a void created by Security Council inaction. Pressures to contract out the Council's responsibility for peace and security to other bodies must be resisted. To be a leader, the Council must also be ready to act -- rapidly. For this reason, Canada continues to support the creation of the UN Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters. It will allow the Council to quickly establish a beachhead for a UN peace mission, increasing the chances for effective and timely Council action. Finally, to be more effective, the Council needs to be more inclusive. Canada will continue to promote participation by non-Council countries whose nationals are involved in the conflicts over which the Council is deliberating. This means formalized, timely consultations with troop-contributing countries so they can have their say. It means finding ways to allow non-members to contribute to Council meetings -- without diminishing Council members' prerogative to meet in camera. It means providing a greater information flow from the Council and the Secretary-General to the UN membership. Here, too, there has been progress we can build on. Conclusion Since we last served on the Council, the world has changed. Canada's foreign policy has also evolved. What remains constant is the need for a strong, effective Security Council. Admittedly, we have an ambitious agenda. There are certainly no guarantees that we can achieve everything we set out to attain. The Council is not an institution open to revolutionary change, and we have no illusions about the feasibility of introducing sweeping reforms. Clearly, the real-time demands of the world will also inevitably intrude on even the best-laid plans. However, we will apply ourselves to the substantive issues before the Council during our term, bringing our values and interests to bear on them. We will advance our human security agenda by working with other Council members to explore how and when it may be appropriate for the Council to take action in conflict situations in which it might not have become engaged in the past. Indeed, in recent years, the Security Council has moved in the direction that Canada is advocating. It is still early days, but I am encouraged by the contribution we have made; and in the remaining 22 months we will remain committed to building a Security Council capable of addressing the changing needs of our time. 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