Source: http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/gashc3868.doc.htm http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/gashc3868.doc.htm
Date: November 7, 2006

7 November 2006
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/unlogo_blue_sml_en.jpg \* MERGEFORMATINET
General Assembly
GA/SHC/3868 





Department of Public Information • News and Media Division • New York
Sixty-first General Assembly 
Third Committee 
40th & 41st Meetings (AM & PM)

MOVEMENT OF POPULATIONS DESTINED TO BE KEY QUESTION OF TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY,

UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES TELLS THIRD COMMITTEE

As Discussion On Refugee Issues Begins,
Committee Concludes Consideration of Racial Discrimination, Self-Determination

Refugees returning to their homelands could not be expected to live on hope alone, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, António Manuel de Oliveira Guterres, told the Third Committee (Social, Humanitarian and Cultural) today as he drew a link between returnees and the failures of the international community to make good on pledges of sustainable development.

Reporting on the past year’s work of his Geneva-based Office, Mr. Guterres said there had been fewer armed conflicts in the past year.  However, natural catastrophes, crushing poverty and other forms of insecurity had kept millions on the move.  The pattern and scale of changes had brought the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to a moment of truth, presenting two major challenges:  a reassessment of UNHCR’s mission, and the need for deep structural and management reform.

The movement of populations was destined to be one of the key questions of the twenty-first century, he said, and while illegal migration was not among UNHCR’s responsibilities –- “we know the difference between a migrant and a refugee” -- people in need of international protection were to be found among migrants.  UNHCR’s role was to help create an environment where such people could be identified and afforded protection, including fair treatment of their claims.

Mr. Guterres recalled a mission to the Great Lakes region of Africa in March, where he watched several hundred Congolese returnees -- “filled with anticipation and greeted with shouts and music from crowds of family and neighbours” -- disembark from a boat that had brought them from the United Republic of Tanzania.  Some 23,000 refugees from the Democratic Republic of the Congo had returned home with UNHCR assistance this year; elsewhere, 33,000 Burundians had returned, and in Afghanistan, returns -– through lower than in recent years -– remained the largest in the world for the fifth year running.

But he added:  “UNHCR only promotes return after minimum conditions are met and we are able to verify that people will be safe following their repatriation.  But in doing so, we -– and when I say we, I mean the international community, as a whole -– routinely ignore a simple fact:  that returnees cannot live on hope alone.”

“Addressing transition problems after wars or conflict end, and before sustainable development is in place, is not something at which the international community excels,” he said, adding that for that reason, UNHCR was pleased with the creation of the Peacebuilding Commission, and was eager to work with it.

In the discussion period that followed his statement, Mr. Guterres said the situation in Afghanistan had been typical of the international community’s failure to provide effective assistance during transitional periods.  The international community knew how to act in cases of emergency, but things tended to be slower on the development side, with effective aid only coming when it was too late.  Formulas of cooperation between international financial institutions, States, and United Nations agencies were needed to create quick improvements and allow people to return.  Once peace was established, spontaneous returns by huge numbers of people would happen regardless, so that flow should be managed and organized. 

In other business, the Third Committee concluded its discussion on the elimination of racism and racial discrimination, and the right of peoples to self-determination, during which the representatives of Pakistan, Venezuela, Algeria, Libya, India, Armenia, Israel, the Republic of Moldova, Syria, Indonesia, Azerbaijan and Iran spoke.  The observer of Palestine also made a statement.

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply were the representatives of China, Israel, Armenia, Azerbaijan and the observer of Palestine.

In the afternoon session, statements on the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees were made by the representatives of Finland, Japan, Switzerland, Egypt, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Norway, United States, China, Canada, Jordan, United Republic of Tanzania, Serbia and Côte d’Ivoire.

The representative of the Sudan spoke in exercise of the right of reply.

The Chairman of the Third Committee, Hamid Al Bayati ( Iraq), told representatives that, with 11 days left, action had only been taken on 7 out of 45 draft resolutions.  He called upon delegations to expedite their work, with a view to finishing on schedule by 21 November.

The Committee was expected to reconvene at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 8 November to conclude its general discussion on UNHCR, and to hear the introduction of draft resolutions on the promotion and protection of human rights, and on the enlargement of the executive committee of the programme of UNHCR.

Background

The Third Committee (Social, Cultural and Humanitarian) met today to continue its consideration of elimination of racism and racial discrimination and of the right of peoples to self-determination.  For more background, please see Press Release http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/gashc3867.doc.htm GA/SHC/3867 of 6 November.

The Committee also met to begin consideration of the report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, questions relating to refugees, returnees and displaced persons and humanitarian questions.  The Committee had before it the Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) (document A/61/12), which covers the UNHCR response during 2005 and the first half of 2006 to the needs of the 20.8 million refugees worldwide.  It describes major developments regarding international protection, assistance and the search for durable solutions for refugees and others concerned.  It also reviews partnerships and coordination outside the United Nations system and provides an update on current management and oversight issues.

The report concludes that UNHCR is committed to its core mandate and to rising to new challenges in a rapidly evolving operational environment as evidenced by, among other things, its strong support for the cluster leadership approach to internal displacement and the High Commissioner’s structural and management reform.  UNHCR aims to devote a larger share of its resources to field operations and to improve the quality of life-sustaining, protective and other services for refugees.  Beneficiaries must be involved in needs identification and programme design.  A human resources strategy that emphasizes quality management, individual performance and accountability is also essential.

Also before the Committee was the Report of the Executive Committee of the Programme of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (document A/61/12/Add.1), which gives an overview of the work of the Committee’s fifty-seventh session from 2 to 6 October 2006, including its conclusions and decisions on women and girls at risk; identification, prevention and reduction of statelessness and protection of stateless persons; administrative, financial and programme matters; the Standing Committee’s 2007 programme of work; the provisional agenda for the fifty-eighth session; and the participation of observers in the Standing Committee’s 2006-2007 meetings.

The Committee had before it the Secretary-General’s report on assistance to refugees, returnees and displaced persons in Africa (document A/61/301), which contains an overview of developments and information about specific areas of inter-agency cooperation as well as cooperation with regional organizations and efforts to coordinate resources and more detailed regional updates during 2005 and the first half of 2006.  The report concludes that despite stability and security in some places, in many situations, displaced persons were still unable to return home, and they were denied or had limited access to humanitarian assistance.  Governments, cooperating with the international community, must take firm action to ensure the civilian character of refugee camps and prevent the forced recruitment of refugee children.  Funding predictability is crucial to ensure assistance and protection for displaced persons.  Commitments to peace agreements as well as enhanced good governance and conflict prevention must be implemented to end and prevent displacement.

The report also concludes that promising inter-agency policies and funding initiatives must be evaluated soon to determine lessons learned.  The international community should focus more on the root causes of forced displacement in Africa, which extend beyond human rights violations, poverty and poor employment prospects.  That includes mixed flows of secondary migration movements within Africa and to other continents to help prevent thousands of individual tragedies.  More action is needed to sustain durable solutions with adequate socio-economic opportunities for displaced persons returning home, the report says, noting that, in the past year, hundreds of thousands of returnees had found little or no infrastructure, education or health-care facilities.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

ANTÓNIO MANUEL DE OLIVEIRA GUTERRES, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, said the past year had seen a number of far-reaching developments in the political and humanitarian context in which UNHCR functioned.  There had been fewer armed conflicts, but natural catastrophes, crushing poverty and other forms of insecurity had kept millions on the move.  The pattern and scale of changes had brought UNHCR to a moment of truth, presenting two major challenges:  a reassessment of the UNHCR mission and the need for deep structural and management reform.  In the past year, in situations of internal displacement, UNHCR had become an integral part of the collective response by the United Nations system and the broader international community.  For the UNHCR “cluster” approach in conflict-generated situations -– implemented in Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia and Somalia -- to be effective, it had to be flexible, light and non-bureaucratic, and undertaken on the understanding that all humanitarian actors had to be engaged together as full strategic partners.

The movement of populations was destined to be one of the key questions of the twenty-first century, he said.  Curbing illegal migration required a comprehensive response.  Such migration extended beyond direct responsibilities of UNHCR; it knew the difference between a migrant and a refugee and it did not want to become a migration management agency.  But, more and more movements had become mixed, with people in need of international protection to be found among migrants.  Protection capacity had to be built everywhere, not only in the North but also in the South.  The role of UNHCR and identity as a protection agency remained unchanged.  At a time of rising intolerance, protection also meant firmly opposing refoulement and guaranteeing respect for international refugee law.

Protection had been at the centre of the UNHCR concern to reduce statelessness, and it also extended to the sustainability of returns, he continued.  Voluntary repatriations had remained the preferred solution, but often, their sustainability had been of dramatic concern.  UNHCR only promoted returns once minimum conditions had been met, but in doing so, the international community had routinely ignored the fact that refugees could not live on hope alone.  Addressing post-conflict transition before sustained development had been put into place had not been something in which the international community had excelled.

In the past year, UNHCR emergency teams had been active in Lebanon, Timor-Leste, northern Pakistan and northern Kenya, he said.  UNHCR had set a target of being able to respond to an exodus of 500,000 people by 2007.  In other situations, however, its role had been severely constrained.  Faced with a crisis like Darfur, that reality might seem intolerable, although the UNHCR desperation could not compare to that of the millions who had been displaced.  No clear framework existed for the exercise of the right to protect.  In Iraq, there had been more and more displacement prompted by ongoing violence, with 1.6 million internally displaced and 1.8 million outside the country.

Earlier this year, UNHCR had embarked on a structural and management change process, essential to its long-term sustainability, he said.  The change process had been reviewing processes, structures and staffing, including an examination of what field support could be moved closer to the point of delivery.  UNHCR had to be sensitive to the concerns and interests of its staff beyond full respect for their rights; the moral obligation to those UNHCR cared for also could not be forgotten.  Nothing, however, would be possible without political and financial support.  Several donors had raised their contributions significantly; others that could afford to do likewise were urged to follow suit.  Protection had been at the heart of the UNHCR mandate, and had to remain at the soul of the organization.

Discussion

Responding to a question from the representative of Afghanistan, Mr. GUTERRES said that the Afghan situation was typical of one of the main failures of the international community, namely providing effective assistance during transitional periods.  The international community knew how to act in cases of emergency, but things tended to be slower on the development side, with effective aid only coming when it was too late.  Capacity-building was necessary, but something was needed in between.  Formulas of cooperation between international financial institutions, States, and United Nations agencies were needed to create quick improvements and allow people to return.  Once peace was established, spontaneous returns by huge numbers of people would happen regardless, so that flow should be managed and organized.

Responding to the representative of Uzbekistan on why it was possible to grant refugee status to persons held in prison for criminal offences and to those who had taken up arms in Andijan, he said that it was unfortunate that his agency’s cooperation with Uzbekistan had been unable to continue.  He said that the situation did not represent a contradiction at all.  UNHCR had worked with Kyrgyzstan and decided that for refugee status determination, it was better to determine a location far away from the events, which was normal procedure.  An emergency phase involved transferring a few hundred people from the border area and resettling them.  In full compliance with other conventions, resettlement countries accepted refugees, a normal and successful operation, and UNHCR had acted consistently with its interpretation of international law.

Statements on Racism, Self-Determination

MUNIR AKRAM ( Pakistan) said that the right to self-determination was the most fundamental collective human right of peoples.  Four principles regarding that right needed to be constantly reaffirmed.  The forcible occupation of the territory of a people whose right of self-determination had been recognized was a clear violation of international law and the United Nations Charter.  The right to self-determination could be exercised freely only if it was unfettered by overt and covert coercion and influence.  It could not be exercised freely under conditions of foreign occupation and repression.  It was immutable and could not be extinguished by the passage of time, and the legitimacy of the struggles of peoples for self-determination could not be compromised by tarnishing them with the “tarbrush of terrorism”.

He said that the free exercise of the right to self-determination had been denied in several parts of the world, such as Jammu and Kashmir, and Palestine.  Six decades had passed since the Kashmiri people had been promised the exercise of that right by the Security Council, which had pronounced that the area’s future would be decided through a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under United Nations auspices.  After decades of confrontation and conflict, largely over Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan and India had been engaged in dialogue for three years to resolve the issue.  Several confidence-building measures had been adopted.  The President of Pakistan had advanced several creative ideas, including demilitarization, self-rule and joint administration.  Any durable solution would require flexibility and boldness on both sides and be acceptable to Pakistan and India and, above all, to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

RAQUEL ESCOBAR-GÓMEZ ( Venezuela) said her country rejected any form of discrimination.  Any doctrine of superiority based on racial distinctions was scientifically false, morally condemnable and dangerous.  Venezuela was a multi-ethnic and multicultural society and had created a culture of respect for differences.  Nevertheless, prejudice, racism and inequality continued to affect its peoples.  It was important to be alert to new forms of discrimination.  While the vast majority of the world was fighting intolerance, empires were building walls of racism and humiliation based on the superiority of one race or nationality over another.

She said it was regrettable that in the United States, terrorists were treated like privileged immigrants while immigrants from the South were treated as terrorists.  Migrants were pursued, hunted down, and exploited.  She hoped that terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, protected by the United States Government, would be extradited immediately to stand trial, along with other individuals accused of carrying out attacks against diplomatic headquarters in Venezuela.

She said that Venezuela rejected any attempt to squelch the self-determination of peoples, national unity and territorial integrity of States and joined in the causes of Puerto Rico, Argentina and Palestine.  The international community must promote programmes to provide victims of intolerance with access to development.  If the major imbalances in the world today were not halted, there would not be sufficient walls to hold back the flows of poor people worldwide seeking what the most powerful had always denied them.

SALIMA ABDELHAQ ( Algeria ) said that setbacks in the fight against racism, characterised by the trivialization of racism, were a genuine threat to democratic progress and to a culture of tolerance indispensable for increasingly multicultural societies.  The time had come to reverse that trend.  One of the first actions would be for the General Assembly to adopt the Durban review process that had been proposed by the “Group of 77” developing countries and China.  Such a process would enable the international community to renew its commitment to fighting racism and to measure the progress that had been made.

Regarding Islamophobia, she said that the Muslim community had, in the past year, been offended and wounded by attacks in the media on its most sacred symbols which had, strangely, been defended on grounds of freedom of expression.  Such practices had to be halted.  The organization by the Human Rights Council of a conference on dialogue between civilizations would be a good opportunity to relaunch an alliance between cultures and civilizations.  The right to self-determination had enabled the majority of people represented at the United Nations, including the Algerian people, to free themselves from colonialism.  The people of Western Sahara had been waiting for three decades to exercise their right to self-determination; in occupied Palestine, meanwhile, the Palestinian people continued to be denied the right to self-determination and their legitimate aspirations for building an independent State.

MOHAMED REDA DUKALI ( Libya) said that, while the Durban Declaration was an important step forward, racism and discrimination, nonetheless, continued to grow.  He condemned the disfigurement of religion and the acts directed against Islam in recent years, as a result of the tragic events of 2001, which had left the stamp of terrorism on the Muslim religion in Western countries, giving rise to some extreme right-wing movements and expressions in the media, which stirred up hatred against Muslims and religious symbols.  Self-expression was being used to justify hatred and ethnic supremacy.

He said that his country was opposed to the racial discrimination and ill-treatment of migrants in developed countries and called on the international community to implement all relevant resolutions to end the suffering and violations of the legitimate rights of migrant workers.

He expressed outrage at the fate of Palestinians under occupation, who suffered from the worst forms of pillage of land and property, destruction of trees and fruits, all a result of the construction of a wall condemned by the international community.  The Palestinians had a right to create their own independent State and exercise their sovereign rights over territory, which was being pillaged at present.

NADYA RASHEED, Observer of Palestine, said that for 39 years, the right of self-determination had been forcefully withheld from the Palestinian people living in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, by Israel, the occupying Power, in the most brutal and inhuman manner.  The right to self-determination and foreign occupation stood in fundamental conflict to one another, and continued to be the root cause of the dangerous situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.  Such prolonged occupation inevitably posed a threat to most basic human rights, as Israel had perpetuated its occupation by violence and the threat of violence, resulting in the death of 4,300 Palestinians, including 850 children, and at least 50,000 injuries.

The construction of illegal settlements and the wall had seriously undermined the territorial integrity and contiguity of Palestinian territory, making the vision of a two-State solution –- and the Palestinian people’s true enjoyment of their right to self-determination -– nearly impossible, she said.  The vision of a Palestinian State would be unattainable without a viable Palestinian territory.  The Palestinian people had made historical compromises to achieve their aspirations, and they would never succumb or surrender to the will of the occupation.  The enjoyment of the Palestinian people of self-determination and independence was essential to achieve a comprehensive, permanent and lasting peace in the Middle East.  The continuation of the occupation, however, would not only affect peace and security in the region, but surely would affect many other countries worldwide.  The national rights of the Palestinian people, like those of any other people, had to be recognized.

SHATRUGHAN SINHA ( India) said that, as the world worked to free itself from the racial prejudices of the past, it must especially guard against new manifestations of racial intolerance.  There continued to be instances of destruction of constitutional order to promote policies based on racial or ethnic discrimination.  Today, Palestine remained the unfinished task in the realization of the right of peoples to self-determination.  There could be no military solution to the Palestinian issue.  The solution did not lie in more violence but in pursuing the path of political dialogue.  The international community needed to exercise due vigilance to ensure that the legitimate freedom struggle of the Palestinian people was not undermined by equating terrorist activities with the struggle of the people of Palestine.

He said that self-determination had long been recognized as the right of peoples of Non-Self-Governing colonies and trust territories to independence and self-government.  Attempts continued to be made at the United Nations and elsewhere to reinvent some of the basic principles of the Charter, such as self-determination, and to apply them selectively for narrow political ends.  No right, including the right to self-determination, could be used to promote subversion and erode the political cohesion or territorial integrity of Member States.  That right could not be abused to encourage secessionism and undermine pluralistic, democratic States, and there was no room for it to be distorted and misinterpreted as a right of a group, on the basis of ethnicity, religion or racial criteria and use it to undermine the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States.  Ethnic or religious segregation and chauvinism could not be legitimized on the ground that societies needed to be constituted on homogeneous lines before they could be tolerant towards diversity and accept multiculturalism.  Such a view only aided forces of narrow chauvinism and ethnic, religious and racial exclusivity.

He said that references made earlier in the day by the delegate of Pakistan to the Indian State of Jammu and Kashmir were irrelevant to the present deliberations, which were meant to focus on the right of peoples to self-determination.  The people of Jammu and Kashmir had exercised that right at the time of India’s independence and since then had repeatedly participated in free, fair and open elections.  In contrast, Pakistan continued to deny such opportunities to its own people and to those in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.

ARMEN MARTIROSYAN ( Armenia) said that new countries had emerged, new borders had been drawn and re-drawn, and divided countries had become reunified.  Those changes, in effect, superseded the rigid adherence to the principles of inviolability of borders and territorial integrity.  Claims for territorial integrity had become increasingly questionable and even invalid in the case of multi-ethnic States, which were built on the shaky basis of historical injustice and legal and political gerrymandering.  The very notion of sovereignty had historically emerged from the responsibilities of States towards their citizens.  Therefore, Governments that discriminated against, and persecuted certain groups of their population, could not claim the right to govern those people.

He said each claim for self-determination must be considered on its own merits and against its own historic, political and legal background.  The defining element in all those cases was the level of trust and confidence between various constituencies, between the title nation and ethnic groups.  The international community could not disregard those cases when, because of serious historic, cultural or ethnic problems, secession would provide longer and lasting solutions to the conflict.  It was impossible to trust a Government with a history of discriminating against, and persecuting its citizens, organizing pogroms and ethnic cleansing, and waging full-scale war against them.  Such Governments completely lost their credibility, and any moral right, to govern the people they claimed to represent.  The referendum was one of the most effective ways to define the level of trust between Government and governed, since it was the most democratic way of providing people an opportunity to express their will.

MEIRAV EILON SHAHAR ( Israel) said her country knew, by bitter experience, the deep trauma inflicted by racism, which had been the reality of the Jewish people for centuries.  Last year had seen a significant rise in anti-Semitic incidents worldwide; of the many thousands that had been reported, hundreds had been violent.  The latest ugly wave of anti-Semitism had swept Europe and the Middle East.  Iran, in particular, had been a source of the vilest anti-Semitic rhetoric heard anywhere, with its President denying the Holocaust and calling for Israel to be wiped off the map, while Iran acquired the capabilities to do so.  Such odious statements -- aimed at inciting violent attacks against Israel, and against Jewish people around the world -- were a wake-up call to the international community to stand with a resolute, unwavering voice against Iran’s dangerous regime and to condemn its racist ideology.

The last few months, she said, had seen a spike in the number of anti-Semitic incidents around the world, accompanied by a deliberate conflation of legitimate political discourse with anti-Semitism.  Israel, a democratic State with a pluralist and open society, supported meaningful political dialogue, but there was a delicate balance between legitimate freedom of expression and incitement.  Israel agreed with the Special Rapporteur on racism that there had been a growing tendency for cynical politicians to exploit people’s fears and insecurity.  There had been encouraging signs, however, that the fight against anti-Semitism had gained new momentum, and Israel had been encouraged by the General Assembly’s adoption last year of a resolution on Holocaust remembrance.

Israel was a land of immigrants, she added, and its diversity was a daily reminder that the line between “us” and “the other” was fluid, and often an artefact of history, or chance.  Everyone had to take a more active role in combating racism and the ignorance that fostered it.

ALEXEI TULBURE ( Republic of Moldova) said his country was a multicultural and multi-ethnic State.  Tolerance and respect for the ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identities of all ethnic communities were common.  Moldova’s national legislation on citizenship, and in the field of the functioning of languages, was one of the most liberal in Eastern Europe.  The law on approving the national policy conception of the Republic of Moldova, adopted three years ago, was the most comprehensive legal instrument in that regard.  By the law, the State committed itself to provide proper conditions for the preservation, development and free expression of the ethnic, cultural, religious and linguistic identity of all ethnic communities living in Moldova.

He said Moldova had also signed a number of bilateral treaties with States that were the ethno-historical motherlands of minorities living on its territory.  Those treaties contained special articles providing for the maintenance and protection of the rights of people belonging to national minorities.  Moldova also ensured the right to choose the language of education and training at all levels and stages of education.  Regarding the specific socio-cultural situation of the Gypsies/Roma, the Government had made necessary efforts to improve their situation.  According to the reports of national and international experts, the provisions of the International Convention were implemented efficiently in Moldova, and cases of discriminatory acts as defined in the Convention had not been registered there.

WARIF HALABI ( Syria) said that foreign occupation was still a form of domination, despite the belief that it needed to be eliminated.  The international community must solve that problem, which threatened peace and security and went against the United Nations Charter.  Racism and racial discrimination were still a risk to the future of mankind.  Recent examples of xenophobia, discrimination against foreigners, and religious slander had been seen in developed countries, which was a source of concern.

She said that foreign occupation and the repression of those under occupation could not be accepted or tolerated.  Self determination was a fundamental and sacred right.  Syria continued to support the right of peoples to regain their independence.  Despite numerous United Nations resolutions on Palestine, regretfully it had not been possible for Palestinians to exercise that right.  Refugees continued to wait to return, and to face massacres in violation of all humanitarian laws.  There had been a spread of racism in new forms, particularly against Arabs and Muslims on various pretexts, and an increase in intolerance.  One of the clearest examples of xenophobia against Arabs was the repeated printing by European newspapers of caricatures that had provoked reaction from Muslims worldwide.  That went beyond freedom of expression, and showed a lack of understanding of the religions of other peoples.

ADE PETRANTO ( Indonesia) expressed concern at the rise of racist violence, and at the resurgent activities of associations with racist and xenophobic platforms in some parts of the world.  Member States needed to pay close attention to the link between combating racism, racial discrimination and xenophobia, on the one hand, and the construction of a democratic, interactive and multicultural society, on the other.  There needed to be a strategy to combat racism through education, and the adoption of initiatives to encourage interaction and cross-fertilization between different national communities.  For the Government of Indonesia, promoting dialogue through education was the way to instill the principle of respect.  In recent times, some people, and critics, in Western circles had attributed to Islam a propensity to violence; extensive dialogue was the only way to liberate the human mind from such errors.

A balance between freedom of expression, and religious freedom, had to be established, he said.  Exercising the right to freedom of expression carried special duties and responsibilities, and could therefore be subject to certain restrictions:  respect of the rights or reputations of others, and protection of national security or public order, or public health and morals.  Concrete action should be taken to address poverty and underdevelopment, as racism thrived on the frustrations and disparities that they created.  Regarding the right to self-determination, Indonesia –- whose right of self-determination had, for more than 300 years, been in the hands of foreigners –- stressed the right of Palestinian people to self-determination, leading to the creation of an independent Palestinian State.

Ms. ADTALOVA ( Azerbaijan) said that the right of peoples to self-determination could not apply to the Armenian population of the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan, because they were a minority residing in the territory of a sovereign State.  Several reaffirmations by the Security Council of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan made all disputes over which State Nagorno-Karabakh was part of completely senseless.

She said that, in order to settle the conflict, it was essential to recognize that the State should be the common home for all its resident population under conditions of equality, with separate identities being preserved and developed.  Neither majorities nor minorities should be entitled to assert their identity in ways that denied the possibility for others to do the same, or which led to discrimination against others in the common domain.  The settlement of the conflict should therefore be based primarily on the restoration and strict maintenance of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and the preservation and encouragement of the identity of the Armenian minority living in its territory.

She said that international law did not include specific mandatory provisions recognizing the right of individuals belonging to minorities to self-determination, or autonomy.  Nevertheless, some forms of self-rule might in certain cases ensure the preservation of a national identity of an ethnic group.  On that basis, Azerbaijan had repeatedly expressed its willingness to confer on Nagorno-Karabakh the highest degree of self-rule within the country.  Settlement of the conflict would remain impossible to reach, so long as one party ignored relevant decisions by international organizations, and continued to try to impose its own interpretation of international law on the international community.

Mr. ZAMANI ( Iran) said the adoption of the Durban declaration had been a defining moment in the collective campaign against racism, xenophobia and discrimination.  Joint action against racism, at the international and national levels, was indispensable.  Iran was ready to cooperate closely with the international community to eradicate such an inhuman phenomenon.  Iran shared the Special Rapporteur’s concern about Islamophobia, which had been on the rise, most visibly in Europe.  Most worryingly, the culture of Islamophobia, or incitement against Islam, had been transformed into political ideologies.  Dividing the nature of unity among world religions was a real danger for peace and security.

To free the world from Islamophobia, a collective approach was required, he said.  Cultural diversity had to be respected, and public opinion protected from phoney mass media.  Global society needed a restructuring of the identity of multiculturalism, and the creation of an atmosphere for the coexistence of sundry religions in various societies.  Defamation –- in particular, blindly interpreting Islam and putting it in the same category as terrorism and violence –- would impact upon the tolerance of Muslim communities.  Iran would continue to pursue policies that provided for a society based on justice and equality; it called upon political leaders to pursue international efforts to eradicate racism in general, and different phobias, in particular.

Statements in Right of Reply

Exercising the right of reply, the representative of China endorsed the role of education in fighting racism, particularly among young people.  It was China’s view that a great nation could grasp its future only by reflecting on its history.

The representative of Israel said her country supported the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination; however, that right could not come at the expense of the security of Israel, and its people.  The Palestinian Authority was led by a terrorist organization, Hamas, which was uninterested in living side by side with Israel.  Israel had recognized the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people since the Camp David accords, but by electing Hamas, the Palestinian people had opted for terror over peace.  Regarding the security fence, it had no other purpose than to defend the security of the Israeli people.  The stationary of the Palestinian delegation featured a logo depicting a map of Israel; the underlying message was obvious to all.  The current Palestinian leadership would never recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist, and the Palestinian people –- who could have embraced the Quartet Road Map, but did not -– had opted for terror.

The representative of Armenia, referring to the Azerbaijani statement, said that upon the collapse of the Soviet Union, it had been Azerbaijan that had unleashed warfare to incorporate Nagorno-Karabakh into its territory.  Prior to Soviet rule, Nagorno-Karabakh had been a separate political unit.  Any claim of Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh was illegal, unjustified and unfounded.

The observer of Palestine, responding to the statement by her Israeli counterpart, said that the basic law of Israel had referred to Israel as a Jewish State, setting the basis for discrimination against Palestinian people living within Israel.  While lecturing others on human rights, Israel had negated the right of the Palestinian people to exist.  Racist remarks had been made by high-ranking Government officials, army generals and even religious leaders, with Palestinians being described as snakes, insects and cancerous.  Twenty-seven years had elapsed between the beginning of occupation and the start of attacks.  Israel could not be allowed to get away with citing self-defence to justify its policies.

The representative of Azerbaijan said that her country’s position regarding Nagorno-Karabakh had been based on norms and principles of international law.  Armenia should recall that Azerbaijan had been accepted into the United Nations, and other organizations, on the basis of its territory, including Nagorno-Karabakh.  The right to self-determination did not imply a unilateral right to secession, and the assertion that Nagorno-Karabakh had never been part of Azerbaijan was groundless.

The representative of Israel said his country was proud of the fact that it had Arab members of Parliament and an Arab Supreme Court judge.  Arabic was the second official language, and minorities enjoyed equal rights under the law, as enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.  Hamas had refused to accept the basic conditions set out by the Quartet:  recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence and accepting existing agreements.  Its real goal was to destroy Israel.

The observer of Palestine said that Israel defined itself not as a State of its citizens, but as a state of all Jews in the world.  Jews from anywhere could go there and claim citizenship.  Such rights had been denied to Palestinians who had lived in the area for thousands of years.  It was widely known that there were four levels of Israeli citizenship, the first three being various levels of Jewish participation in Israeli society.  Israel treated Palestinians as being less than human; this had been rooted in the basic law of the Israeli State.

Statement on Refugees

JARL-HAKAN ROSENGREN ( Finland), on behalf of the European Union, said that it was of great concern that, worldwide, some 23 million people remained internally displaced as a result of violence and armed conflicts.  The European Union was also concerned at the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Darfur.  In all crisis situations, all parties should grant free and secure access to affected populations by humanitarian personnel.  The principle of non-refoulement should be respected in all circumstances.  Refugees and asylum seekers should not be returned forcibly to their country of origin.  UNHCR should be able to monitor the voluntary return process.  It was regrettable that its office in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, had been closed last April.  UNHCR should have access to all Uzbek refugees who had returned to Uzbekistan.

He urged those not party to the 1951 Convention and its 1967 Protocol to ratify and implement them.  Next year there would be a wide debate on the future of the European Union’s asylum policy, the results of which would set the road map for achieving the Common European Asylum System.  While the number of asylum applicants had fallen sharply in the European Union, the number of irregular migrants had increased.  By the end of the year, the European Union would issue a paper on reinforcing the southern maritime border which would also address protection and asylum related issues.

TETSUJI MIYAMOTO ( Japan) said that while the overall number of refugees had decreased in recent years, there still remained some protracted refugee situations.  The role played by UNHCR had been crucial and its activities needed to be supported.  In addressing refugee issues, it was important to take an approach based on human security, which served as a durable solution by enabling each individual to contribute to society.  Japan had helped to set up the United Nations Trust Fund for Human Security, which assisted UNHCR and other United Nations agencies in translating the concept of human security into action.

Assistance to internally displaced people and organizational reform were serious challenges facing UNHCR, he said.  There were more than 25 million internally displaced people all over the world, including newly generated ones in Iraq and Somalia.  UNHCR’s role in assisting them was important; but avoiding an adverse affect on refugee operations, clarifying responsibilities among relevant organizations, and ensuring financial resources remained challenges that the Executive Committee of UNHCR should deliberate upon closely.  Japan supported UNHCR reform under the leadership of Mr. Guterres and looked forward to the fruits of his efforts.  Every reform brought pain, but Japan hoped that the High Commissioner’s initiative would be supported by UNHCR staff.

BARBARA FONTANA ( Switzerland) said that migration flows were often mixed, with refugees and migrants travelling together.  The phenomenon was becoming more widespread, and had now attained inter-continental dimensions, which called for a global response.  For Switzerland, the distinction between refugees and migrants was a fundamental one, and a means of ensuring that measures to control irregular migration did not in any way impede the rights and the granting of international protection to refugees.

She said that, a major challenge facing UNHCR was the protection of internally displaced persons.  The issue had been ignored for a long time, but was now being discussed in the international community.  It was important to be careful, in conflict situations, not to make systematic distinctions between the needs of internally displaced persons and those of host or resident populations.  The segmentation of the humanitarian response and the division of beneficiaries into different categories brought with it a considerable risk of leaving the civil populations that were directly, or indirectly, affected in a situation that was as precarious as, or more precarious than, that of internally displaced persons.

She said that it was the primary responsibility of States to provide protection and assistance to such persons, but Switzerland also supported a collaborative approach.  A clear, coherent and realistic vision capable of guiding UNHCR activity on behalf of internally displaced persons still needed to be defined.

HESHAM MOHAMED EMAN AFIFI ( Egypt) said that his country had undertaken to respect all norms and principles of international refugee law, and was working to strengthen them.  It had always worked to channel cooperation with UNHCR in the framework of humanitarian responsibility for refugees who took asylum in Egypt, particularly from brother African countries.  Despite significant achievements, the report still showed a financing crisis as one of the major problems.  That had been stressed in previous reports and was now a matter of concern because UNHCR was unable to carry out its mandate.  It had experienced reductions compared to last year, yet its expenses grew day by day.  He appealed to all parties to grant unconditional and stable financial support to the agency with as few restrictions as possible.

He said it was important to strengthen international action through a series of major measures regarding refugees.  The causes of the world’s conflicts needed to be dealt with since they were the main cause for the growing refugee problem.  The Security Council had an important role to play in that area.  International solidarity needed to be strengthened.  Most countries with refugees were developing countries, so the refugees must be dealt with in the framework of international humanitarian and human rights law.  The Peacebuilding Commission was an important tool for dealing with problems of asylum.  The problem of refugees was a humanitarian problem first and foremost, but it was also a political and economic one.  To protect refugees, countries of asylum must also be supported as a matter of priority on the international agenda.

ATOKI ILEKA ( Democratic Republic of the Congo), speaking on behalf of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), said that a lasting solution to the problem of refugees depended on peace, security and development.  The international community should continue to support regional initiatives such as those that had resulted in peace brokerage in conflict areas like Liberia, Burundi, and his country.  Progress achieved in some places should not detract from the ongoing plight of millions of others engulfed in violent internal conflicts, not to mention the flow of migration that was resulting in the loss of lives as people attempted to cross the seas in search of a better life for themselves and their families.

He expressed hope that UNHCR would take into account the difficulties of developing host countries and give equal importance to protection and development.  The international community should continue to address the root causes of refugee movements.  Support for peacebuilding, conflict resolution and prevention efforts was essential.  UNHCR should be actively involved in the work of the Peacebuilding Commission to ensure that the needs of refugees were also incorporated in the reconstruction process.  National Governments emerging from conflict situations should also ensure that the needs of returnees were incorporated into national development programmes, including poverty reduction strategies.

He said that it was of vital importance to keep in mind the humanitarian burden that host countries, in particular developing countries with meagre resources, were obliged to shoulder in receiving a large number of refugees and internally displaced persons.  The chronic financial shortfalls that had seriously affected the capacity of UNHCR to provide and support social services and basic education programmes was of deep concern.  The health issue was another area of concern.  He urged United Nations agencies to ensure that the human rights of refugees, returnees, and internally displaced persons living with HIV/AIDS were respected and that combating the spread of the virus among those populations remained a high priority.

UNNI RAMBOLL ( Norway) said UNHCR needed to channel a larger percentage of its resources into operations that directly benefited people in need.  UNHCR’s management reform was encouraging but great challenges still lay ahead.  She welcomed the adoption of the Conclusion on Women and Girls at Risk at last month’s Executive Committee meeting, and said Norway would closely follow its implementation.  The Conclusion should serve as a platform for stronger follow-up in UNHCR of Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on women, peace and security.  She expressed hope that the new senior gender advisor would strengthen the High Commissioner’s efforts to implement the Conclusion, and thus, improve the protection of women and girls at risk.

She supported UNHCR’s commitment to internally displaced persons.  That commitment was a step in the right direction.  The increasing importance of internally displaced persons’ protection in UNHCR’s work must be better reflected in the annual budget.  The lack of a common understanding about the cluster lead concept had delayed implementation of the cluster approach.  Non-governmental organizations and other partners must be actively involved in joint assessments and strategy formulation.  While better coordination was important, agencies should not be overloaded with administrative burdens that would hinder their ability to provide support and protection in the field.

CECIL EDWARD FLOYD ( United States) expressed appreciation for the work of the High Commissioner and his staff; the challenges and dangers of their work could not be underestimated.  Regarding critical field and headquarters reform, the long-term success of UNHCR depended on much-needed changes to how it did business.  The United States supported results-based management.  Difficult decisions would have to be made; UNHCR should consult with its staff and with Member States, as its effort was rolled out.  Success would depend on Governments, implementing partners and those who would be affected by the reforms.

Partnerships were key to durable solutions, he said.  The much-anticipated return of refugees in southern Sudan, Burundi and Democratic Republic of the Congo was promising.  Partnerships were needed between humanitarians and development agencies, not only through UNHCR and non-governmental organizations, but also with Governments and host populations.  Partnerships were also necessary to define the internally displaced and respond to their needs; key to this effort would be a sense of mutual accountability.  UNHCR had to be prepared for the scaling-up of staff and programmes for situations with many refugees and internally displaced persons, and it had to lead its partners to be prepared as well.  It must also lead its protection partners to be prepared.  The situation in Darfur and the surrounding region had been on the minds of many; the United States welcomed Security Council resolution 1706 (2006) to address the regional security issue.  His country remained a committed partner of UNHCR, contributing nearly $339 million this year.

GUO JIAKUN ( China) said that during the past year, refugees had continually returned home to Africa and Afghanistan, and the number of refugees worldwide had dropped to 8.3 million.  He praised the international community for making that happen through solidarity and burden sharing.  However, the global refugee situation was still grave.  Civil wars and conflicts in many parts of the world had created steady flows of new refugees and internally displaced persons.  Up to 20 million people were still under UNHCR’s care, and the influx of refugees had severely strained many developing and under-developed countries.  He called on States to continue to honour their commitment to the World Summit Outcome Document, and to intensify their efforts to address the problem holistically in order to find a durable solution.

In recent years, as the plight of internally displaced persons had received greater international attention, UNHCR had increased human and financial resources for their protection and assistance, he continued.  UNHCR’s internally displaced persons-related activities should be carried out in strict conformity with relevant General Assembly resolutions.  Irregular, mixed population movements had seriously challenged the current international refugee protection system.  The document, “Addressing Mixed Migratory Movement, a 10-Point Plan of Action”, put forward in June by UNHCR, had several valuable recommendations, but still had room for improvement.  Sovereign States should be consulted prior to its implementation since they were primarily responsible for managing the migratory movement.  He welcomed UNHCR’s continued participation in follow-up to the High-Level Dialogue on Migration and Development, which stressed the need to enhance cooperation and adopt a more integral approach to managing global migratory flows.

JESSICA BLITT ( Canada) said a flexible and results-oriented UNHCR was crucial to responding collaboratively to people most in need of protection and assistance.  Despite the news that, this year, there were the lowest number of refugees in more than 20 years, there were still significant numbers of internally displaced persons, more protracted refugee situations and people spending longer times on average in exile.  The General Assembly could be an effective advocate in promoting international peace and security and preventing situations that would otherwise lead to refugee movements and internal displacement.  Most refugees had been in exile for more than a decade and were at great risk of becoming victims of crime, sexual violence and militancy.  Comprehensive approaches drawing on a mix of diplomatic, humanitarian, development and migratory policy were necessary for lasting solutions to the refugee plight.

UNHCR voluntary repatriation efforts in Afghanistan and southern Sudan showed that physical security, buttressed by access to essential infrastructure, services and livelihoods, effectively functioning civil institutions and the rule of law were vital to sustaining refugee return, peace and stability.  The Peacebuilding Commission played a fundamental role in supporting comprehensive solutions, particularly post-conflict recovery, to protracted refugee situations.  United Nations development agency partners and international financial institutions must engage sooner, and include the plight of displaced populations in development strategies and country plans.  It was crucial that the Emergency Relief Coordinator maintain his pressure, and that UNHCR and other Inter-Agency Standing Committee members sustain the momentum created over the last year to better coordinate humanitarian response and protect internally displaced persons.  He supported the UNHCR’s guidelines on preserving the civilian and humanitarian character of asylum, which would provide concrete guidance on the separation of armed elements from refugees.

PRINCE ZEID RA’AD ZEID AL-HUSSEIN (Jordan) said it had been gratifying to note that, during the last 25 years, the General Assembly had adopted, by consensus, a series of resolutions on the subject of a new international humanitarian order, which Jordan had introduced in the Assembly in 1981.  This year, it was also gratifying to note a proposal regarding the development of an agenda for humanitarian action and the ideas that the Secretary-General had set out in his report on the New International Humanitarian Order (document A/61/224), in which he pointed out that the Independent Bureau for Humanitarian Issues would be involved in developing the proposed Agenda, and assist in its implementation.

It was worthwhile to recall that the Charter of the United Nations, in its preamble, reaffirmed the dignity and worth of the human person and the equal rights of men and women, and of nations big and small.  In preparing the related resolution this year, the wishes and suggestions of the Secretary-General had been taken into account, he said.  The operational paragraphs would recognize the need to strengthen efforts to resolve humanitarian problems, call upon the Independent Bureau for Humanitarian Issues to develop the Agenda for Humanitarian Action, and ask the Secretary-General to continue to strengthen efforts in the humanitarian field, and to report accordingly to the General Assembly at its sixty-third session.

JUDITH MTAWALI (United Republic of Tanzania) said she wished to register the continued generosity and humanitarian commitment to the humanitarian cause of Tanzania in providing asylum to refugees.  In the past, the Government had set aside a vast amount of land for settling them.  Due to the large numbers of refugees, it was unable to allocate additional land; therefore, voluntary repatriation remained the best option.

She said Tanzania was currently engaged in two major repatriation operations of refugees from Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.  A considerable number of Burundian refugees had returned home with the assistance of UNHCR, but the repatriation process was facing some serious obstacles.  Under-funding continued to derail what could have been one of the most successful voluntary repatriation operations south of the Sahara.  With Burundi’s signing of the Peace Agreement with the last rebel group, there was every indication of a massive repatriation in the near future.  That required a deeper review of priority issues to make the process sustainable, including strengthening the capacity of the reception centres in the home country, the allocation of land to returnees and the provision of assistance during the first few months of their returns.  Tanzania was also very much concerned about the dwindling financial situation of UNHCR, and urged donors to increase their support.

As for the institutions of protection and asylum in her country, she said that Tanzania, just like any sovereign State, had the right and obligation to protect itself from any unlawful entry by aliens.  It continued to crack down on illegal immigrants, regardless of where they came from.  In those operations, the Government was keen to ensure that bona fide refugees were not expelled.

SLAVKO KRULJEVIC ( Serbia) said that, the problem of refugees was, unfortunately, still very much present in his country.  Serbia presently provided shelter for a very large displaced population as a consequence of past conflicts in the region.  Although the number of refugees had significantly decreased over the past years, there were, de facto, more than 350,000 refugees in Serbia, both registered refugees, and refugees who had obtained citizenship as a first step toward integration.  Voluntary return was the best solution for the remaining displaced population in the region.  A key element was the restitution of property and full respect for occupancy/tenancy and property rights without any discrimination.  That would provide refugees with the resources to choose between repatriation and local integration.  The implementation of the Sarajevo Declaration would hopefully overcome existing problems in that field.

Regarding the 208,000 internally displaced persons from Kosovo and Metohija in Serbia, he said that the lack of progress in their return was due to the absence of security and a generally low level of human rights protection in the province.  The return of that population was a far more complex problem than just their physical return.  Necessary preconditions for sustainable return must be created, such as guarantees for their property, economic, social and cultural rights.  As for local integration of refugees within Serbia, sufficient resources for self-reliant projects and assistance for displaced persons and host communities were necessary.  Given the overall economic situation in Serbia, the assistance of the international community in that regard was indispensable.  Serbia appreciated UNHCR’s continuing efforts to oppose involuntary returns of minority populations originating from the province of Kosovo and Metohija.  In situations where basic conditions for sustainable returns to the province did not exist, involuntary returns of refugees to Serbia proper, outside of Kosovo and Metohija was not a viable solution.

JEAN-BAPTISTE AMANGOUA ( C ôte d’Ivoire) said that no region of the world had been spared the phenomenon of refugees and internally displaced persons.  In Africa, political, social and economic structures had faced tremendous tests.  Côte d’Ivoire wanted to thank UNHCR for the active role that it had played.  Despite the crisis in Côte d’Ivoire, the repatriation and reintegration of refugees had been proceeding with success.  With help from UNHCR, some 2,000 refugees from Liberia would be repatriated from Côte d’Ivoire by the end of the year.

The solution to the problem of refugees and internally displaced persons was to be found in the peaceful settlement of disputes, fostering a climate for voluntary returns, he said.  Africa needed democratic structures to promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in order to foster a culture of peace.  Generally speaking, within Africa, countries that had taken in refugees had been endangering their own social and economic situations, which were precarious to begin with.

Statement in Right of Reply

The representative of the Sudan said he wished to reply to the statements of the European Union ( Finland) and United States.  The European Union had mentioned the Darfur situation and security problems for humanitarian workers there -- it had referred to that problem so often, it had become a cliché.  The information in the European Union’s statement was not true.  There was a peace agreement between the Government and the largest rebel group, which had led to an improvement in the humanitarian situation, and the Government was making great efforts to include other parties.

Regarding efforts on the flow of humanitarian assistance, he said that many humanitarian organizations now worked through safe corridors.  Procedures had been set up by the Government for them to do their work.  Any obstacles were the fault of rebel groups.  The European Union just wanted to target the unity and safety of the Sudan.  Those negative references were aimed at destroying the Darfur Agreements.  The unity of the Sudanese people was behind that agreement, which the international community should support, and call on other groups to sign.  Talking about problems concerning humanitarian work did not serve the peace process; it only served a hidden agenda.

Regarding the statement by the United States on Security Council resolution 1706, he said the Third Committee was not the place for such discussions.  The United States’ hidden agenda was known.  Resolution 1706 was aimed at destroying the Sudan, which it would not allow to happen.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record