Statement by Evgeny Primakov to the UN General Assembly (1997)

(Текст читается с американским акцентом)

Mr. President,

Allow me to most sincerely congratulate you, a representative of Ukraine, with which we have friendly relations, on your election to this important and distinguished post. We are certain that under your presidency the General Assembly will be able to make significant progress.

In a little more than 800 days mankind will enter upon the 21st century. From the point of view of history this is really just a single sprinter's lap, and it is quite natural that there is a need to look at what lies ahead of us.

A year ago, speaking from this same rostrum, I referred to the beginning of the process of a transition to a multipolar world order. The events of the past year have reaffirmed this. There has been a growth of diversity in the political, economic and cultural development of countries. There is a search at the national and regional levels for new identities. There is a growth of new centers of economic and political influence in the world together with an increase in the reciprocal involvement of interests of various states and peoples.

The horizons opening up to the international community are posing new challenges. These are:

— assertion of the ideals of interdependence and partnership in
interstate relations;

— prevention of the emergence of new dividing lines and
exclusive blocs;

— strict compliance with all the principles and norms of
international law.

I would cite as a separate issue not only the creation of conditions for the economic and social progress of all countries, but also the maintenance of the environmental balance.

It should be made clear at the outset that the transition from a confrontational bipolar world to a multipolar system cannot by itself resolve these problems. Moreover, realists are well aware that although we are moving farther away from oversimplified stereotypes of the era of ideological confrontation, the number of risks and threats in today's world has not decreased.

There are quite a few multinational states in the world. We firmly support the initiatives intended to prevent their forced disintegration.

The formula for the resolution of such conflicts in our modern world, and, of course, in the twenty-first century, can and must be a combination of the need to preserve the territorial integrity of such states together with the granting of the broadest possible rights to national minorities. Abandonment of any of the principles of the "two-track formula" would risk both a continuation and a dangerous escalation of such conflict situations.

I also would like to call to your attention a dangerous characteristic of regional conflicts — their ability to unleash a wave of terrorism and to spread it far beyond the borders of the actual conflict zone. For example, many militants who launched bloody campaigns of terror in a great number of countries emerged from the continuing and still raging armed conflict in Afghanistan.

We strongly support the campaign against terrorism, in whatever form. Today success in this struggle can only be achieved by all states uniting their efforts to counteract this horrendous scourge. We are opposed to government backing of terrorism in any place and in any form. At the same time some UN member states should not be once and for all written off as rogue states within the international community regardless of changes in their policies or simply because of their suspected links to terrorists.

In today's world there can be no monopolies of any state on efforts at resolving any and all conflicts. This is certainly fully appli­cable to the oldest conflict in the Middle East, where the settlement process is deadlocked. As the saying goes, "it takes two hands to clap." Resolving the difficult Middle East conflict will require broad international efforts.

A pooling of efforts can provide the most effective way to resolve both long-standing and relatively new conflicts. Here I would like to draw to your attention the peacekeeping efforts of Russia in the CIS region. Nevertheless, we are not trying to take advantage of the situation.

Russia's peacekeeping role is not confined to conflict settlement efforts around its borders, but is broader in nature. Our country has sent its peacekeepers to various hot spots under the UN flag, and they are participating in 9 of 17 UN peacekeeping operations. Here I would like to comment on peace enforcement actions. In particular, in the decentralized conditions of some peacekeeping operations, great caution must be exercised. We firmly believe that actions of force can only be carried out upon authorization by the UN Security Council and under its direct supervision, as provided for in the UN Charter.

As we move towards a multipolar world in the twenty-first century it is of the greatest importance to create conditions conducive to stability of the new world order. To that end there is a need to overcome the obstacles of the past and above all the legacy of decades of the massive arms race.

We have been doing our part here and are determined to continue. Together with the US we have been steadily reducing strategic weapons. Presidents Yeltsin and Clinton have reached an understanding regarding the basic parameters for the agreements in this field.

However, today conventional weapons are causing casualties in local conflicts, and often in situations in which the hostilities have ceased. Here we are fully aware of the humanitarian aspect of the problem of mines. We believe that the elimination of the mine threat, above all to the civilian population, is long overdue. We advocate active and phased efforts to resolve this problem.

A positive impact on improving the European climate has already been exerted by something which was born of a painful quest for compromise, namely the Founding Act on relations between Russia and NATO. This is a document of great international importance, and it undoubtedly will play a pivotal role in European politics. The signing of this document, however, has not changed our negative attitude towards the expansion of NATO, which, on the one hand, totally ignores current realities, and, on the other, is likely to create new dividing lines.

It is my duty to mention yet another contribution to strengthening good-neighborly relations in Europe. I am referring to the recently signed agreements between Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, which have made it possible for our states to make real progress in developing mutually advantageous relations on an equal footing, which have strengthened stability in the region.

I began my statement with an appeal to encourage the international community to resolve today's problems and to look forward to the coming century. And I would like to conclude with the well-known saying, "Pessimists are only passive observers; it is optimists who change the world." We are optimists, and believe that the UN will be able to play a positive role in the evolution of the international community.

Текст 6

Выступление Э.А. Шеварднадзе в Гарвардском университете (1991 г.)

Чтобы чувствовать себя уверенно в мире, в котором будет падать роль ядерного оружия, нам нужно знать, как мы сможем защититься от ядерного терроризма. В настоящее время существуют весьма точные неядерные вооружения, способные хирургическими ударами сорвать планы возможных террористов. Разумеется, эта проблема заслуживает самого серьезного рассмотрения.

Мы не должны забывать и другой благоприятствующий фак­тор — нашу способность достаточно точно знать, что происхо­дит в мире с точки зрения военной активности. Эта прозрачность мира будет только нарастать, а с нею повышаться наша уверен­ность, что все меньше и меньше будет неожиданностей, что все больше мы будем знать о происходящем в самых далеких уголках земного шара.

Было бы неверным представлять дело так, будто все опасно­сти проистекают от ядерного, химического или бактериологиче­ского оружия. Просто этот ряд опасностей мы должны поста­раться свести к нулю, ибо они очень дорого могут стоить чело­вечеству.

Честно говоря, меня беспокоит то, что мы стали более тер­пеливыми к угрозе, скажем, ядерной катастрофы. Да, мир изме­нился. В нем нет более того острого военного противостояния, которое вызывало острый стресс буквально у каждого человека.

Сейчас положение иное — политически и психологически. Но при всем том десятки тысяч ядерных зарядов остаются в арсе­налах ядерных держав. К сожалению, замедлились темпы разо­руженческих процессов. После первоначальных ярких успехов топчутся на месте переговоры по стратегическим ядерным воору­жениям, по запрещению химического оружия, неоправданно за­держалась ратификация Договора по обычным силам в Европе.

Закончилось уничтожение всех ракет средней и меньшей дальности, подпадающих под действие договора. Но образовал­ся и разрыв в работе конвейера, работающего по уничтожению ракет. А военные заводы ведь продолжают работать, пусть даже не на прежнюю мощность.

Нельзя оставить недостроенным то здание нового мира, ко­торое мы совместно взялись создать. Если мы не будем каждый день что-то надстраивать, то это здание придет в упадок, начнет деградировать.

Этого нельзя допустить. Наши дети не простят нам упущен­ных шансов, ибо они получат в этом случае не такое хорошее об­разование, не лучшую медицинскую помощь и другие социаль­ные услуги.

Мы стоим еще в самом начале пути в наших поисках того, как можно упорядочить торговлю обычным оружием, создать регио­нальные структуры безопасности, учредить механизмы по пред­отвращению возникновения кризисных ситуаций. Всем надо приспособиться к новым реалиям, к новому облику мира.

Ведь сегодня он радикальным и даже неузнаваемым образом отличается от того, каким он был даже несколько лет тому на­зад. Позади остались не только «холодная война», длительные вооруженные конфликты в разных регионах мира. Сегодня мы го­ворим о единой Германии, как об элементарном факте жизни.

Но разве все это было возможным еще пару лет назад? Пред­ставить себе подобное было трудно.

Мир становится единым в своих действиях, в своих желани­ях избавиться от тяжкого наследия прошлого.

Среди этого наследия и ядерные испытания, ядерные арсе­налы. В новой обстановке, на новом витке сознания общности человечества от них пора, можно и надо избавиться.

Ученые во всех странах должны помочь людям осознать про­исшедшее, понять суть изменений и сказать, какую дорогу нам нужно избрать, чтобы не заблудиться в лесу жизни и политики.

Нам всем нужен прогноз на будущее. Надо объединить для этого силы, выступающие за мир, свободу и демократию.

Спасибо за внимание.

* * *

То feel confident/sure/to ensure a feeling of confidence in a world in which/the role of nuclear weapons will be diminished/will decline/nuclear weapons will play a less important role/will be less important/, we need to know how to defend/protect ourselves from nuclear terrorism. At the present time/now/currently there are/there exist highly accurate non-nuclear weapons, which through surgical strikes have the ability/capability/capacity to thwart/block/undermine the plans of possible/potential terrorists. Naturally/of course,/this problem merits/deserves the most serious consideration.

We must/should not forget still/yet another positive factor: our ability to know with reasonable accuracy/quite/rather accurately what is taking place/happening/occurring/in the world from the point of view of/as regards military activity/as far as military activity is concerned. This transparency of the world will clearly/certainly

continue to grow, along/together/with our enhanced/increased confidence that there will be less and less unexpected/surprise factors/ elements, and that we will know more and more/increasingly more about what is taking place/happening/occurring/in the most remote corners of the globe/everywhere/throughout the world.

It would be wrong to view the issue/to see things/as though all dangers are derived/stem from nuclear, chemical or bacteriological weapons. We must simply try to wipe out/eliminate/rid ourselves of this category of/set of/these kinds of dangers, which otherwise may make mankind pay a very high price/may prove very costly to mankind.

Frankly speaking, I am concerned by the fact that we have become more tolerant of such threats as that of nuclear disaster. Yes, the world has changed. It no longer is fraught with/contains/is characterized by that drastic/acute/military confrontation which imposed/caused terrible/enormous/drastic/acute stress on/for/each and every/literally each and every/individual/luiman being.

Today/Now the situation is different, politically and psychologically. Nevertheless, (dozens of) thousands of nuclear warheads remain in the arsenals of the nuclear powers. Unfortunately, the rate/pace of progress in disarmament/the disarmament process, has slowed (down). After the first/initial striking successes, we see stalling/there is now a process of marking time/in negotiations on strategic nuclear weapons, on the prohibition of chemical weapons, and there has been an unwarranted delay in the ratification of the treaty on conventional forces in Europe.

The destruction of all intermediate and shorter range missiles has been completed, missiles covered by the treaty. But a gap has now appeared/emerged in the work of the assembly line for destroying missiles. And military plants are continuing their operations, although not at/at less than/their former capacity.

We cannot leave unfinished that edifice/building/construction of a new world, which we have jointly undertaken to create. If we do not, every single day, add something to that structure/continue the building process,/the building will start to collapse and deteriorate/ decline and fall.