Ministeri Tuomiojan puhe International Peace Bureaun konferenssissa

Check againts delivery

Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Friends,

It is a great pleasure for me, on behalf of the Finnish Government, to wish the Triennial gathering of the International Peace Bureau welcome to Helsinki. Many of us remember the successful 100th Anniversary of the IPB here in Helsinki back in 1992. It is encouraging to notice that the IPB is still going strong and dealing with the most crucial challenges for peace and security in today's world.

International efforts in the field of disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation have suffered severe setbacks in the last few years. Political will to change the tide is badly needed. Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery, together with global terrorism remain the pre-eminent threat to international peace and security. Effective multilateralism and greater efforts to bring about a rules-based international order are necessary to achieve progress in countering global threats.

Peace and stability are essential requisites for sustainable development. At the same time disarmament is the requisite for peace and stability. Sustainable disarmament can effectively succeed only when it takes place in multilateral setting where everyone equally participates. This is the reasoning behind the need for an international arms trade treaty to cover trade in all conventional arms (ATT).

We have already many politically and legally binding norms and standards, in particular at regional and sub-regional levels but not yet an international agreement. There are aspects related to export controls in some existing globally binding instruments. In addition, we believe that there is a certain humanitarian urgency with regard to an arms trade treaty, too many people are killed every year with arms which originally have been sold and transferred legally.

Our support for an ATT also stems from the conviction that an arms trade treaty could have positive impacts regarding human rights, sustainable development, combating poverty and the fight against terrorism.

What we are looking for is one framework agreement, which would cover transfers of all conventional weapons. This standard would contain criteria or principles for international arms trade, which could be either absolute criteria or factors to be taken into account. For the moment, we believe that the form of the ATT should be a convention negotiated at the United Nations, which would be open for all states for ratification. A resolution calling for the establishment of a group of governmental experts to examine the feasibility, scope and draft parameters of an international arms trade treaty to cover trade in all conventional arms (ATT) will be tabled in the forthcoming session of the First Committee by a group of countries including Finland.

The European Union and its individual member states have for a long time been among the supporters of a binding international standard to control the transfer of conventional arms. The EU position is defined in the Council Conclusion of October 3, 2005. In this document, the EU clearly expresses it support for an international treaty to establish common standards for the trade in conventional arms. The Council further agreed that the United Nations was the only forum that could deliver a truly universal instrument. We hope that the draft resolution currently under preparation will enjoy the support of so many States as possible in the General Assembly this autumn.

During the EU Presidency Finland is committed to addressing key issues related to disarmament and non-proliferation, such as the 2010 NPT Review Conference, early entry into force of the CTBT, regional issues including those of Iran and DPRK, as well as other disarmament and non-proliferation measures. We also attach great importance to the 6th Review Conference of the Biological and Toxic Weapons Convention. The EU has and will actively participate in its preparations and there are positive expectations of a successful outcome.

Dear Friends,

The latest Middle East crisis in the summer is the first Middle East crisis where the European Union became the international actor on which the greatest hopes and expectations were placed, in particular by the Lebanese people and the Government, but also more widely in the region.

I am content to be able to say that the EU has managed to live up to the expectations and play an important and even leading role in putting an end to hostilities, in keeping the cease-fire and in the efforts to push forward the political process needed to consolidate the peace.

It was not the EU's fault that it took too long before the resolution was passed, as every day the conflict brought more civilian casualties, suffering and devastation without anyone any nearer to fulfilling their political or military goals of their fighting. Indeed the central lesson to be learnt from this conflict was that there are neither military nor unilateral solutions to any of the outstanding conflicts in the Middle East.

The ceasefire has, notwithstanding some deplorable incidents, been respected. The Lebanese Government remains united and all the political parties, including Hezbollah, have pledged their support for the resolution 1701 and the political agreement it incorporates.

It is clear that there cannot be any sustainable stability and peace in Lebanon or elsewhere in the region, without a return to the peace process between Israel and Palestine based on the Roadmap and its goal of the two-state solution with Israel living in peace and security with an independent and viable Palestinian state as its neighbour.

Unfortunately many aspects of the Roadmap have been and continue to be under bombardment. A deadlock has existed since the Palestinian election in January, which unequivocally have been assessed as free and fair.

For the Peace Process to continue it is vital that the Palestinians and their parties remain committed to non-violence, the recognition of Israel and to stopping all terrorist attacks. We have had an unsure situation where the international community has had to suspend its direct assistance to the Palestinians while trying to ensure that the humanitarian needs of the Palestinians are met and their access to education and medical services are maintained.

This has been the difficult task of the Temporary International Mechanism set up by the EU and it has not been made easier by the refusal of Israel to release the tax and customs receipts which have now accumulated to over 500 million US dollars. But as its name says the TIM is only an interim device. We need to break the deadlock, have all abducted Israeli soldiers, arrested Palestinian legislators and members of the Government released and a broad-based Palestinian Government, fully committed to respect all the commitments of the Palestinian Authority, which can act as credible partner with which none can refuse to negotiate.

We do not need to reinvent the wheel for the Peace Process. All the elements needed are well known and can be found in the Road Map and other documents. But putting these in the right sequence and order remains challenging.

In our discussions at the Gymnich meeting in Lappeenranta last week we were in full agreement that the EU now has to take an active role to initiate a return to the peace process.

No matter how unitedly, cohesively and effectively the EU acts, it is obvious that we cannot achieve peace through our efforts alone. We need to work closely together with all our partners in the Quartet in particular the US, as well with the Arab League whose renewed intention to engage in the process is to be welcomed. Above all we need, of course, the parties themselves to come to the table and seriously engage in the peace process. For a long time people have wanted nothing more than peace and security and they have become increasingly frustrated by their leaders' inability or even unwillingness to the deliver this, fostering a climate which has allowed extremism to thrive. This is where the EU and others need to entice, cajole, push and pressure the parties and to be ready, where and when necessary to engage on the ground as well. The EU in fact is already doing this with the approval of the parties, in the Rafah EUBAM mission and the EUCOPPS mission in the territories. Unfortunately the Rafah and Karni border crossing points has been effectively closed for the past months while Israel has not responded to our repeated demarches to have them opened.

Dear Friends,

Finland has, together with Tanzania, initiated the Helsinki Process on Globalisation and Democracy in order to bring together different stakeholders - such as governments, international organisations, civil society organisations, business and faith-based communities - to search for innovative solutions to global problems. One of the key issues raised during the first phase and at the Helsinki Conference of September 2005 - the culmination of the first phase - was the urgent need for an early conclusion of an international legally binding treaty on arms transfers, such as the Arms Trade Treaty. The Conference also suggested, however, that multistakeholder cooperation would be important for implementing such a treaty and called for continued discussion of the role of regional cooperation and religious organisations in developing sustainable peace.

On the basis of the recommendations of the Helsinki Conference, the current second phase of the Helsinki Process has sought to address both the role of regional cooperation and the involvement of religious organisations in developing sustainable peace. On 11-12 July, 2006, the Amman roundtable meeting was organised, together with Prince Hassan bin Talal of Jordan, to discuss the possibilities for creating a process for cooperation and security in the West Asia - North Africa region. This meeting made several concrete recommendations which are currently being implemented, such as studying the experiences of other regions in developing a framework for regional cooperation and promoting the cross-border cooperation of civil society organisations in the region. The conflicts which broke out in the region since that meeting have certainly made the task of developing regional cooperation more difficult in the short term, but at the same time have highlighted the need for making every effort to do so.

Another roundtable meeting, focusing on the role religious organisations could play in promoting peace, was held in Kyoto on the 30th of August, 2006. This meeting stressed the potential of religious organisations to promote disarmament and peace, especially in societies where an effective civil society is lacking and where religious organisation often are the only actors who can reach even small and remote areas. The meeting also suggested that the UN Peace Building Commission could be a suitable forum for further discussing how religious organisations could contribute to building sustainable peace.

Dear Friends,

Our commitment to peace – or the work for peace – cannot only be about tackling the conflicts and wars at hand. It is more profoundly a question about how we see and build our societies, how we foster peace in the long term.

The current IPB program on Disarmament for Development is important in its way of trying to interconnect two key parts of the international agenda, which is of great concern to both civil society and governments. Namely development on one hand, including the fight against poverty, humanitarian aid, refugees, strengthening democracy etc., and disarmament on the other, including small arms , landmines, spread of cluster munitions, nuclear weapons and others weapons of mass destruction. Swords to Ploughshares is an old slogan of the peace movement, and however old-fashioned it may sound, it carries within itself a very simple and undisputable fact. The resources spent today on arms and the military is to a great degree away from what is badly needed in our efforts to reduce poverty and for enhancing development. Thus, I wish you all success in your actions to keep this issue high on the global agenda.

Thank you.