Remarks by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly, New York, September 27, 2013

Mr. President, Secretary-General, ladies and gentlemen, international relations are becoming increasingly complex and multidimensional while developments in the world are even more rapid and less predictable.
In these circumstances, as never before, there is an urgent need to agree upon collective responses to the key issues of today. It is solely within the power of such a truly universal organization as the United Nations to address this challenge.
Moreover, these solidarity efforts might be productive only if they reflect the entire spectrum of views of the international community on the global challenges and threats, all historical experience and all cultural and civilizational diversity of the modem world.
For most of the members of the U.N. family this approach is an axiom. However, there is also another tendency within which the collective actions are understood primarily as the agreement with the viewpoint of one group of countries. Such views manifest themselves in various areas -- on issues of international security, settlement of the conflict situations, functioning of the world economy, the choice of development models and core values.
Many problems of today's world have been reflected in the tragic situation in Syria and ambiguous development of events in the Middle East and North Africa on the overall. From the very beginning of the turmoil in this region, Russia has consistently called for the development of a common approach by the international community, which would combine support to the Arab peoples on their path to transformations and the understanding of the fact that objectively these processes would be lengthy and sometimes painful and that it would be quite important not to harm them by rude outside interference.
We have emphasized the need to act in a balanced way and take into account that complex developments are taking place which are associated, among other things, with a strenuous search for compromises among various ethnic and religious groups that make up the mosaic of the Arab societies. We have called consistently for the choice of the evolutional way of developments and peaceful settlement of crises through national dialogue and reconciliation.
Another point of view has manifested itself in the attempts to determine who is legitimate or is not among the leaders of the MENA region and impose an opinion regarding which side should be supported in the domestic national conflicts, and dictate from outside ready- made prescriptions for democratic transformation. The desire to portray in a simplified way the developments in the Arab worlds as the struggle of democracies against tyranny or the good against the evil has long obscured the problems associated with the rising wave of extremism which is spilling over to other regions today as well.
The terrorist attacks in Kenya have demonstrated the full gravity of this threat. It's common knowledge that the jihadist groups that contain quite a few radicals coming from all parts of the world are the most combat-capable units of the opposition. The goals they pursue have nothing to do with democracy and are based on intolerance and aimed at destruction of secular states and establishment of caliphates.
It's hard to call as farsighted a policy which on substance either amounts to military resistance, as in Mali, or provides support to the same groups, as in Syria. The use of chemical weapons is inadmissible. This does not mean, however, that one can usurp the right to accsuse and pass verdicts. All the incidents associated with the use of chemical weapons by whoever that might be in Syria must be investigated in a professional and unbiased manner and then examined by the UN Security Council exclusively on the basis of facts rather than allegations and assumptions.
In June this year, there was an agreement of the leaders of the eight leading states. Recently, a common argument has been increasingly used to prove that the threat or use of force directly prohibited by the U.N. Charter is virtually the most effective method to address international problems, including settlement of national domestic conflicts. There are attempts to extrapolate such an approach also to the situation in Syria. This happens despite the fact that all the experience of such interventions with the use of force in recent years has proven they're ineffective, meaningless and destructive.
This is an extremely dangerous path leading to the erosion of the foundations of today's world order and subversion of the WMD nonproliferation regimes. It is alarming to hear statements on the right to use military force to ensure one's own interests in the Middle East region under the pretext of the remaining demand for leadership in international affairs.
All of recent history testifies that no state, no matter how big or powerful, can cope alone with challenges of that scope as faced by mankind today. There is no doubt that leadership is required. However, today, it can be only collective leadership based on the agreed-upon actions of the leading members of the international community with strict respect for the principles and norms of international law. This is a growing understanding of this reality that has opened the way towards achieving Russia- U.S. understandings on putting under international control and subsequent elimination of Syrian chemical arsenals.
This became possible thanks to the decision by Damascus to join the Convention (sic: Organization) on the prohibition of Chemical Weapons and to fulfill relevant obligations following the expedited procedure. We expect that the decisions of the OPCW Executive Council and the U.N. Security Council will contribute to establishing a required framework fro elimination of chemical arsenals in Syria.
The progress in chemical disarmament in Syria should give an impetus to implementation of the existing arrangements to convene a conference on establishing a zone free of weapons of mass destruction and means of a delivery in the Middle East. There are a number of complicated issues related to ensuring full participation of the countries of the region in the conference, we know that, but they can not be referred to endlessly. This is exactly the case when true leadership and will must be demonstrated for the common benefit.
People continue to die and peaceful civilians suffer every day in Syria. Religious minorities including Christian communities and -- are becoming victims of this conflict, which is increasingly acquiring a sectarian character. Virtually the only possibility today to put an end to this turmoil is to move from deadlock, the process of political settlement of the Syrian crisis. We continue to work vigorously for the earliest convening of a peace conference to implement the Geneva Communique of July 30, 2012. We hope that following the government of Syria the opposition will also constructively respond to the Russia- U.S. initiative.
The Syrian crisis should not overshadow the task of addressing the Palestinian problem. We expect that Israeli and Palestinian leaders will stand up to the level of their responsibility for the future of their people at this current critical stage when the parties have resumed direct talks after a lengthy interruption. Duly recognizing the U.S. efforts in the Middle East settlement, we believe it is necessary to intensify the activity of the Quartet, which remains the internationally recognized mechanism of assistance to the peace process in the region on the basis of the relevant decisions of the U.N., the Madrid principles and the Arab Peace Initiative. It is also important to ensure to ensure close involvement of Arab countries in the activities of the Quartet.
Approaches based on negotiation are required as well, with respect to other situations, including the Iranian nuclear program and the nuclear program in the Korean peninsula. As President Vladimir Putin noted in his recent article published in the New York Times, we must stop using the language of force and return to the path of civilized, diplomatic and political settlement. This would help improve the international environment and contribute to increasing collective efforts to counter global challenges, including terrorism and drug trafficking.
Russia intends to pay priority attention to these challenges during its presidency of the G-8 in 2014. Today, when the solid frame of a bipolar system has long been relegated to the past, the strengthening of democratic foundations, both within the states and international relations is becoming a sign of a times. This means in particular that the recognition of a right of peoples to independently determine their destiny and to choose the optimal forums of social and political structure and social and economic systems should become an indisputable norm of conduct.
In the same way, the complex of exclusiveness and supremacy of one's own customs in the area of human rights should be abandoned, and instead, the universal criteria enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights should be used as a guideline. Moreover, it is important to respect the traditional values that are common for all religions.
It is obvious that a genuine partnership is hardly achievable, but aren't relying on the foundations of economic cooperation. The prevailing majority of states are interacting within the WCO and in this sense, they are operating already in the common economic space. This creates prerequisites for working towards harmonization of integration processes in various regions of the world instead of trying to artificially pit them against each other by creating new division lines.
Russia proceeds exactly from this understanding of this joint work with its partners towards the establishment of the Eurasian economic union.
Russia attaches great importance to achieving the Millennium Development Goals and drafting on their basis the global development agenda for the post-2015 period. Its main priorities are the eradication of poverty and support to economic growth through expanding investment opportunities and creating new jobs; enhancements of energy and transport infrastructure; the fight against infections disease; and road safety are among the most urgent issues. Cooperation between states should rely on efficient mechanisms and a sufficient resource basis. In this context, we support the further strengthening of the coordinating role and potential of the U.N. economic and social council.
During its presidency in the Group of 20, Russia is consistently conducting its policy with a view to developing the group's interaction with the United Nations. We consider the resolution of the General Assembly on relations between the U.N. and G-20 to be a realistic program of cooperation for the long term. I firmly believe that by joining our efforts on the basis of true respect and consideration of interests of one and all, we will be able to move forward towards achieving the high goals proclaimed in the U.N. charter.