Matters
of Concern at United Nations
General Assembly Debate Reveals Urgent Need to Uphold Principles of UN Charter to Solve Problems
The 76th
session of the United Nations General Assembly
opened on September 14,
with Abdulla Shahid of the Maldives sworn in as
the General Assembly
President. The high-level General Debate by
government leaders began on
September 21 and concluded September 27. Many of
the interventions were
pre-recorded due to pandemic restrictions but over
100 Heads of State
or Government attended in person.
Vaccine access
and equity of distribution, the disproportionate
burden of climate
change that falls upon the underdeveloped nations
of the world and the
sovereign right of nations to determine their own
course without
coercion, acts of violence and threats of war
dominated much of the
debate. It is an expression of two worlds in
collision: one headed by
U.S. imperialism striving to impose upon the world
the will and dictate
of the oligopolies it represents; the other
calling for new relations
based on cooperation, collaboration, mutual
respect and mutual benefit
for all the world's countries and peoples, large
or small; and for
their right to be and to chart their own course.
Biden's
Remarks
U.S. President Joe Biden was one of the
first heads of government to address the General
Assembly on September
21. He stood before the world assembly desperate
to hide the utter
failure of U.S. imperialism to control Afghanistan
after 20 years of
war by declaring the U.S. was opening a new
chapter of diplomacy to
impose its dictate upon the world.
"We've ended 20
years of conflict in Afghanistan. And as we close
this period of
relentless war, we're opening a new era of
relentless diplomacy; of
using the power of our development aid to invest
in new ways of lifting
people up around the world; of renewing and
defending democracy. And as
the United States seeks to rally the world to
action, we will lead not
just with the example of our power but, God
willing, with the power of
our example."
"Instead of continuing to fight the
wars of the past," Biden said, "we are fixing our
eyes on devoting our
resources to the challenges that hold the keys to
our collective
future: ending this pandemic; addressing the
climate crisis; managing
the shifts in global power dynamics; shaping the
rules of the world on
vital issues like trade, cyber, and emerging
technologies; and facing
the threat of terrorism as it stands today."
To
that end, Biden declared: "We're back at the table
in international
forums, especially the United Nations, to focus
attention and to spur
global action on shared challenges. We are
re-engaged at the World
Health Organization and working in close
partnership with COVAX to
deliver lifesaving vaccines around the world. We
rejoined the Paris
Climate Agreement, and we're running to retake a
seat on the Human
Rights Council next year at the UN." He said his
administration will
make the United States a leader in public climate
finance, mobilizing
$100 billion to support climate action in
developing nations.
At the same time he made it clear the U.S. is not
limited by
international law and the principles of the United
Nations. It sets its
own rules, such as the U.S. definition of "freedom
of navigation" that
includes U.S. naval forces engaging in
brinksmanship against friend and
foe alike.
"Make no mistake," Biden said, "The
United States will continue to defend ourselves,
our Allies, and our
interests against attack, including terrorist
threats, as we prepare to
use force if any is necessary, but -- to defend
our vital U.S. national
interests, including against ongoing and imminent
threats."
Biden's
arrogance is such that before the UN General
Assembly itself, the U.S.
President shows his utter contempt for the
principles of the UN and for
international law by declaring that the U.S. will
continue to use
military power as "our tool of last resort" to
enforce its interests.
Korean Peninsula
Clever crafting of
words and phrases does nothing to change the
reality of the kind of
world order the U.S., its allies and client states
seek to perpetuate.
For example, Moon Jae-in, President or the
Republic of Korea, in his
intervention, repeated a call to formally end the
1950-1953 Korean War.
In the present condition of ongoing U.S.
hostilities against the
Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) such
declarations have no
meaning, except to confuse the gullible as to what
is the trouble and
who is the troublemaker on the Korean peninsula.
Ri
Thae Song, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of the
DPRK, answered this
non-serious remark in a press statement issued on
September 23. He said
it would be truly remarkable "if peace comes to
the Korean Peninsula
just by relevant parties holding a ceremony while
having photos taken
with the declaration document on the termination
of war of no legal
binding force."
"The whole world knows," he said,
"that the Minuteman-3 ICBM test-launch in
Vandenberg air force base in
California in the U.S. mainland in February and
August this year, the
hasty declaration of the termination of the
U.S.-south Korea missile
guidelines in May this year and the U.S. approval
for the sale of
billions of dollars worth of military hardware to
Japan and south Korea
are all targeted against the DPRK. We are also
following with alarm the
U.S. recent decision to transfer a nuclear-powered
submarine building
technology to Australia."
Ri Thae Song continued:
"The U.S. forces and a huge number of its latest
war assets which have
already been deployed or are in the state of
movement on the Korean
Peninsula and in its vicinity, including the
ground, waters, air and
underwater, and war drills annually held with
various code names all
point to the U.S. hostile policy toward the DPRK
getting vicious day by
day."
"The DPRK's just measures to bolster up the
capability for defence to cope with the U.S.
military threat to bring
us down by force are described as 'provocations'
while the arms buildup
escalated by the U.S. and its vassal forces to
threaten the DPRK is
justified as 'deterrent.' Such American-style
double-dealing attitude
is also a product of the hostile policy toward the
DPRK."
The
DPRK Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs concluded:
"What's clear is that
as long as there remains the U.S. hostile policy
towards the DPRK, the
biggest stumbling block in ending the war, the
termination of the war
will merely be nominal even though it is declared.
It should be clearly
understood that the declaration of the termination
of the war is of no
help at all in stabilizing the situation of the
Korean Peninsula at the
moment but can rather be misused as a smokescreen
covering up the U.S.
hostile policy. The U.S. withdrawal of its
double-standards and hostile
policy is top priority in stabilizing the
situation of the Korean
Peninsula and ensuring peace on it."
Cuba: U.S.
Aggressiveness Exceeds All Limits
Cuban President
Miguel Díaz-Canel also addressed the high-level
debate in
the opening days of the 76th Session of the UN
General Assembly,
refuting the fairy tale spun by President Biden
that the U.S. has
turned the page on its history of war, aggression
and dictate against
humanity. Díaz-Canel pointed out that the Biden
administration has not lifted even one of the 243
coercive measures
adopted by the Trump administration, including
Cuba's inclusion in the
spurious and immoral list of countries allegedly
sponsoring terrorism.
"For more than 60 years," Díaz-Canel said, "the
U.S. government has not ceased for a single minute
in its attacks
against Cuba. However, at this crucial and
challenging moment for all
nations, its aggressiveness exceeds all limits.
"A
dangerous international schism, permanently headed
and instigated by
the United States, is being promoted.
"Through the
pernicious use and abuse of economic coercive
measures, which have
become the instrument defining the foreign policy
of the United States,
the government of that country threatens, extorts
and pressures
sovereign States so that they speak and act
against those it has
identified as adversaries.
"It forces its allies to
create coalitions to overthrow legitimate
governments; break trade
agreements; abandon and prohibit certain
technologies and adopt
unjustified judicial measures against citizens
from the countries that
refuse to submit.
"It often uses the term
'international community' to refer to the small
group of governments
that tend to irretrievably follow Washington's
dictates. The rest of
the countries, which account for the overwhelming
majority of this
Organization, seem to have no place in the
'international community'
definition advocated by the United States.
"It is a
kind of behavior associated to ideological and
cultural intolerance,
with a remarkable racist influence and hegemonic
ambition. It is
neither possible nor acceptable to identify the
right of a nation to
economic and technological development as a
threat; nor is it possible
to question the right of every State to develop
the political,
economic, social and cultural system that has been
sovereignly chosen
by its people.
"In short, today we are witnessing
the implementation of unacceptable political
practices in the
international context that go against the
universal commitment to
uphold the Charter of the United Nations,
including the sovereign right
to self-determination. Independent and sovereign
states are being
driven under multiple pressures to force them to
subordinate to the
will of Washington and to an order based on its
capricious rules."
Vaccine Equity, Climate Justice, Debt Relief
Issues
related to vaccine equity, climate justice and
debt relief were
addressed by scores of leaders in their remarks
during the debate.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said that
while most wealthier countries are vaccinated
against coronavirus, more
than 90 per cent of Africans are awaiting their
first dose. Things are
"moving in the wrong direction," he said.
Lazarus
McCarthy Chakwera, President of Malawi, cited
reports that developed
states now possess 500 million COVID-19 vaccines
set to expire in 90
days, while innoculation rates are less than two
per cent among least
developed countries and 16 member states of the
Southern African
Development Community. He also held the developed
nations who pollute
the planet to account that they must now pay the
$100 billion "cleaning
fees" they pledged in the Paris Agreement on
climate change.
Namibia's
President, Hage G. Geingob, said the state of
affairs is so severe it
amounts to "vaccine apartheid," with many
developing countries left out
of the equation. "It is a pity that we have a
situation where, in some
countries, citizens are at a stage of receiving
booster shots, while in
other countries, many are still waiting to receive
their first doses."
President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa said
that 82 per
cent of vaccine doses have been acquired by
wealthy countries, while
less than one per cent have been sent to
low-income ones. He urgently
called for a temporary waiver of some Agreement on
Trade-Related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
provisions, which would allow
low-income nations to produce vaccines.
Luis
Alberto Arce Catacora, President of Bolivia,
likewise condemned the
continued inequality in distribution between the
main capitalist
countries and those on the periphery. He said,
"Capitalism has
transformed all areas of social life into
merchandise, and health has
not escaped its tentacles." Stressing that no one
should seek to profit
from health during a pandemic, he called for
transnational companies to
lift their patents and the United Nations and
governments to work in
solidarity to avoid hoarding vaccines.
Mohamed
Irfaan Ali, President of Guyana, said the burden
of emission reduction
was not shared equitably. For example his country
was one of the lowest
emitters of greenhouse gas emissions yet it would
be among the first
countries to suffer from climate-change-related
disasters. He said
Guyana expects binding commitments and
contributions from the
wealthiest countries to the most vulnerable
economies to build up
resilience against climate events. He called for
debt rescheduling, a
moratorium on debt servicing and for the United
States to normalize
relations with Cuba for the benefit of the entire
Caribbean.
Vietnam's
President Nguyen Xuan Phuc also expressed deep
concern over the adverse
impacts of climate change. Speaking on September
23 at a UN Security
Council forum on climate change, he proposed that
the UN should
establish a comprehensive database system on
multi-dimensional impacts
of sea-level rise in support of global response
policy formulation. He
proposed three concrete measures to be taken:
First, the UN Security
Council must uphold its leading role in
establishing mechanisms for
assessment, forecast and warning of climate
security risks at the early
stage and while they are still distant; second,
that the people's
interest, especially that of vulnerable groups,
needs to take centre
stage in order to harmoniously address the
inseparable relationship
between security, development and humanitarian
activities; and third,
that it is necessary to continue to safeguard the
sovereignty, key role
and resilience of nations in climate change
mitigation and adaptation
efforts.
After the high-level General Debate
concluded on September 27, attention turned to
reports of the various
UN standing committees.
This article was published in
Volume 51 Number 22 - November 8, 2021
Article Link:
https://cpcml.ca/Tmlm2021/Articles/MS51223.HTM
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
