and from Iran

[Guest guest]

September 21, 2006

 

Address to the United Nations

No Nation Should Have Superiority Over Others

By MAHMOUD AHMADI-NEJAD

 

Washington, DC.

 

What afflicts humanity today is certainly not compatible with human

dignity; the Almighty has not created human beings so that they could

transgress against others and oppress them.

 

By causing war and conflict, some are fast expanding their domination,

accumulating greater wealth and usurping all the resources, while

others endure the resulting poverty, suffering and misery. Some seek to

rule the world relying on weapons and threats, while others live in

perpetual insecurity and danger.

 

Some occupy the homeland of others, thousands of kilometers away from

their borders, interfere in their affairs and control their oil and

other resources and strategic routes, while others are bombarded daily

in their own homes; their children murdered in the streets and alleys

of their own country and their homes reduced to rubble.

 

Such behavior is not worthy of human beings and runs counter to the

Truth, to justice and to human dignity. The fundamental question is

that under such conditions, where should the oppressed seek justice?

Who, or what organization defends the rights of the oppressed, and

suppresses acts of aggression and oppression? Where is the seat of

global justice?

 

A brief glance at a few examples of the most pressing global issues can

further illustrate the problem.

 

A. The unbridled expansion of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons

 

Some powers proudly announce their production of second and third

generations of nuclear weapons. What do they need these weapons for? Is

the development and stockpiling of these deadly weapons designed to

promote peace and democracy? Or, are these weapons, in fact,

instruments of coercion and threat against other peoples and

governments? How long should the people of the world live with the

nightmare of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons?

 

What bounds the powers producing and possessing these weapons? How can

they be held accountable before the international community? And, are

the inhabitants of these countries content with the waste of their

wealth and resources for the production of such destructive arsenals?

Is it not possible to rely on justice, ethics and wisdom instead of

these instruments of death? Aren't wisdom and justice more compatible

with peace and tranquility than nuclear, chemical and biological

weapons? If wisdom, ethics and justice prevail, then oppression and

aggression will be uprooted, threats will wither away and no reason

will remain for conflict. This is a solid proposition because most

global conflicts emanate from injustice, and from the powerful, not

being contented with their own rights, striving to devour the rights of

others.

 

People across the globe embrace justice and are willing to sacrifice

for its sake.

 

Would it not be easier for global powers to ensure their longevity and

win hearts and minds through the championing of real promotion of

justice, compassion and peace, than through continuing the

proliferation of nuclear and chemical weapons and the threat of their

use?

 

The experience of the threat and the use of nuclear weapons is before

us. Has it achieved anything for the perpetrators other than

exacerbation of tension, hatred and animosity among nations?

 

B. Occupation of countries and exacerbation of hostilities

 

Occupation of countries, including Iraq, has continued for the last

three years.

 

Not a day goes by without hundreds of people getting killed in cold

blood. The occupiers are incapable of establishing security in Iraq.

Despite the establishment of the lawful Government and National

Assembly of Iraq, there are covert and overt efforts to heighten

insecurity, magnify and aggravate differences within Iraqi society, and

instigate civil strife.

 

There is no indication that the occupiers have the necessary political

will to eliminate the sources of instability. Numerous terrorists were

apprehended by the Government of Iraq, only to be let loose under

various pretexts by the occupiers.

 

It seems that intensification of hostilities and terrorism serves as a

pretext for the continued presence of foreign forces in Iraq.

 

Where can the people of Iraq seek refuge, and from whom should the

Government of Iraq seek justice?

 

Who can ensure Iraq's security? Insecurity in Iraq affects the entire

region.

 

Can the Security Council play a role in restoring peace and security in

Iraq, while the occupiers are themselves permanent members of the

Council?

 

Can the Security Council adopt a fair decision in this regard?

 

Consider the situation in Palestine:

 

The roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War.

Under the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that War, the

land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression and the

displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed under the

control of some of the War survivors, bringing even larger population

groups from elsewhere in the world, who had not been even affected by

the Second World War; and a government was established in the territory

of others with a population collected from across the world at the

expense of driving millions of the rightful inhabitants of the land

into a diaspora and homelessness. This is a great tragedy with hardly a

precedent in history. Refugees continue to live in temporary refugee

camps, and many have died still hoping to one day return to their land.

Can any logic, law or legal reasoning justify this tragedy? Can any

member of the United Nations accept such a tragedy occurring in their

own homeland?

 

The pretexts for the creation of the regime occupying Al-Qods Al-Sharif

are so weak that its proponents want to silence any voice trying to

merely speak about them, as they are concerned that shedding light on

the facts would undermine the raison d'etre of this regime, as it has.

The tragedy does not end with the establishment of a regime in the

territory of others. Regrettably, from its inception, that regime has

been a constant source of threat and insecurity in the Middle East

region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding the progress of

regional countries, and has also been used by some powers as an

instrument of division, coercion, and pressure on the people of the

region. Reference to these historical realities may cause some disquiet

among supporters of this regime. But these are sheer facts and not

myth. History has unfolded before our eyes.

 

Worst yet, is the blanket and unwarranted support provided to this

regime. Just watch what is happening in the Palestinian land. People

are being bombarded in their own homes and their children murdered in

their own streets and alleys. But no authority, not even the Security

Council, can afford them any support or protection. Why?

 

At the same time, a Government is formed democratically and through the

free choice of the electorate in a part of the Palestinian territory.

But instead of receiving the support of the so-called champions of

democracy, its Ministers and Members of Parliament are illegally

abducted and incarcerated in full view of the international community.

 

Which council or international organization stands up to protect this

brutally besieged Government? And why can't the Security Council take

any steps?

 

Let me here address Lebanon:

 

For thirty-three long days, the Lebanese lived under the barrage of

fire and bombs and close to 1.5 million of them were displaced;

meanwhile some members of the Security Council practically chose a path

that provided ample opportunity for the aggressor to achieve its

objectives militarily. We witnessed that the Security Council of the

United Nations was practically incapacitated by certain powers to even

call for a ceasefire. The Security Council sat idly by for so many

days, witnessing the cruel scenes of atrocities against the Lebanese

while tragedies such as Qana were persistently repeated. Why?

 

In all these cases, the answer is self-evident. When the power behind

the hostilities is itself a permanent member of the Security Council,

how then can this Council fulfill its responsibilities?

 

C. Lack of respect for the rights of members of the international

community

 

I now wish to refer to some of the grievances of the Iranian people and

speak to the injustices against them.

 

The Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed

to the NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and

under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there

objections to our legally recognized rights? Which governments object

to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from nuclear

energy and the fuel cycle. Some of them have abused nuclear technology

for non-peaceful ends including the production of nuclear bombs, and

some even have a bleak record of using them against humanity.

 

Which organization or Council should address these injustices? Is the

Security Council in a position to address them? Can it stop violations

of the inalienable rights of countries? Can it prevent certain powers

from impeding scientific progress of other countries?

 

The abuse of the Security Council, as an instrument of threat and

coercion, is indeed a source of grave concern.

 

Some permanent members of the Security Council, even when they are

themselves parties to international disputes, conveniently threaten

others with the Security Council and declare, even before any decision

by the Council, the condemnation of their opponents by the Council. The

question is: what can justify such exploitation of the Security

Council, and doesn't it erode the credibility and effectiveness of the

Council? Can such behavior contribute to the ability of the Council to

maintain security?

 

A review of the preceding historical realities would lead to the

conclusion that regrettably, justice has become a victim of force and

aggression.

 

Many global arrangements have become unjust, discriminatory and

irresponsible as a result of undue pressure from some of the powerful.

 

Threats with nuclear weapons and other instruments of war by some

powers have taken the place of respect for the rights of nations and

the maintenance and promotion of peace and tranquility;

 

For some powers, claims of promotion of human rights and democracy can

only last as long as they can be used as instruments of pressure and

intimidation against other nations. But when it comes to the interests

of the claimants, concepts such as democracy, the right of

self-determination of nations, respect for the rights and intelligence

of peoples, international law and justice have no place or value. This

is blatantly manifested in the way the elected Government of the

Palestinian people is treated as well as in the support extended to the

Zionist regime. It does not matter if people are murdered in Palestine,

turned into refugees, captured, imprisoned or besieged; that must not

violate human rights.

 

* Nations are not equal in exercising their rights recognized by

international law. Enjoying these rights is dependent on the whim of

certain major powers.

 

* Apparently the Security Council can only be used to ensure the

security and the rights of some big powers. But when the oppressed are

decimated under bombardment, the Security Council must remain aloof and

not even call for a ceasefire. Is this not a tragedy of historic

proportions for the Security Council, which is charged with maintaining

the security of countries?

 

* The prevailing order of contemporary global interactions is such that

certain powers equate themselves with the international community, and

consider their decisions superseding that of over 180 countries. They

consider themselves the masters and rulers of the entire world and

other nations as only second class in the world order.

 

The question needs to be asked: if the Governments of the United States

or the United Kingdom who are permanent members of the Security

Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international

law, which of the organs of the UN can take them to account? Can a

Council in which they are privileged members address their violations?

Has this ever happened? In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse.

If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it to the

Security Council and as claimants, arrogate to themselves

simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner. Is this

a just order? Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination and more

clear evidence of injustice?

 

Regrettably, the persistence of some hegemonic powers in imposing their

exclusionist policies on international decision making mechanisms,

including the Security Council, has resulted in a growing mistrust in

global public opinion, undermining the credibility and effectiveness of

this most universal system of collective security.

 

How long can such a situation last in the world? It is evident that the

behavior of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge before the

Security Council, the entire organization and its affiliated agencies.

 

The present structure and working methods of the Security Council,

which are legacies of the Second World War, are not responsive to the

expectations of the current generation and the contemporary needs of

humanity.

 

Today, it is undeniable that the Security Council, most critically and

urgently, needs legitimacy and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged

that as long as the Council is unable to act on behalf of the entire

international community in a transparent, just and democratic manner,

it will neither be legitimate nor effective.

 

Furthermore, the direct relation between the abuse of veto and the

erosion of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Council has now been

clearly and undeniably established. We cannot, and should not, expect

the eradication, or even containment, of injustice, imposition and

oppression without reforming the structure and working methods of the

Council.

 

Is it appropriate to expect this generation to submit to the decisions

and arrangements established over half a century ago? Doesn't this

generation or future generations have the right to decide themselves

about the world in which they want to live?

 

Today, serious reform in the structure and working methods of the

Security Council is, more than ever before, necessary. Justice and

democracy dictate that the role of the General Assembly, as the highest

organ of the United Nations, must be respected. The General Assembly

can then, through appropriate mechanisms, take on the task of reforming

the Organization and particularly rescue the Security Council from its

current state. In the interim, the Non-Aligned Movement, the

Organization of the Islamic Conference and the African continent should

each have a representative as a permanent member of the Security

Council, with veto privilege. The resulting balance would hopefully

prevent further trampling of the rights of nations.

 

It is essential that spirituality and ethics find their rightful place

in international relations. Without ethics and spirituality, attained

in light of the teachings of Divine prophets, justice, freedom and

human rights cannot be guaranteed. Resolution of contemporary human

crises lies in observing ethics and spirituality and the governance of

righteous people of high competence and piety.

 

Should respect for the rights of human beings become the predominant

objective, then injustice, ill-temperament, aggression and war will

fade away. Human beings are all God's creatures and are all endowed

with dignity and respect.

 

No one has superiority over others. No individual or states can

arrogate to themselves special privileges, nor can they disregard the

rights of others and, through influence and pressure, position

themselves as the " international community " .

 

Citizens of Asia, Africa, Europe and America are all equal. Over six

billion inhabitants of the earth are all equal and worthy of respect.

Justice and protection of human dignity are the two pillars in

maintaining sustainable peace, security and tranquility in the world.

It is for this reason that we state: Sustainable peace and tranquility

in the world can only be attained through justice, spirituality,

ethics, compassion and respect for human dignity. All nations and

states are entitled to peace, progress and security. We are all members

of the international community and we are all entitled to insist on the

creation of a climate of compassion, love and justice.

 

All members of the United Nations are affected by both the bitter and

the sweet events and developments in today's world.

 

We can adopt firm and logical decisions, thereby improving the

prospects of a better life for current and future generations.

 

Together, we can eradicate the roots of bitter maladies and

afflictions, and instead, through the promotion of universal and

lasting values such as ethics, spirituality and justice, allow our

nations to taste the sweetness of a better future.

 

Peoples, driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek Good,

Virtue, Perfection and Beauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take

giant steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection.

Whether we like it or not, justice, peace and virtue will sooner or

later prevail in the world with the will of Almighty God. It is

imperative, and also desirable, that we too contribute to the promotion

of justice and virtue.

 

The Almighty and Merciful God, who is the Creator of the Universe, is

also its Lord and Ruler. Justice is His command. He commands His

creatures to support one another in Good, virtue and piety, and not in

decadence and corruption.

 

He commands His creatures to enjoin one another to righteousness and

virtue and not to sin and transgression. All Divine prophets from the

Prophet Adam (peace be upon him) to the Prophet Moses (peace be upon

him), to the Prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), to the Prophet

Mohammad (peace be upon him), have all called humanity to monotheism,

justice, brotherhood, love and compassion. Is it not possible to build

a better world based on monotheism, justice, love and respect for the

rights of human beings, and thereby transform animosities into

friendship?

 

I emphatically declare that today's world, more than ever before, longs

for just and righteous people with love for all humanity; and above all

longs for the perfect righteous human being and the real savior who has

been promised to all peoples and who will establish justice, peace and

brotherhood on the planet.

 

0, Almighty God, all men and women are Your creatures and You have

ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that

thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by You,

and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his

return and his cause.

 

 

As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances,

there's a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in

such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest

we become unwitting victims of the darkness.

William O. Douglas