| |
New York, October 5, 1995 |
Mr. President,Ladies and Gentlemen,
1. It is an honour for me to have the opportunity to
addressthis international Assembly and to join the men and
women ofevery country, race, language and culture in
celebrating the fiftiethanniversary of the founding of the
United Nations Organization. Incoming before this
distinguished Assembly, I am vividly aware thatthrough you I
am in some way addressing the wholefamily ofpeoples living
on the face of the earth. My words are meant as a signof the
interest and esteem of the Apostolic See and of the
CatholicChurch for this Institution. They echo the voices of
all those whosee in the United Nations the hope of a better
future for humansociety.
I wish to express my heartfelt gratitude in the first place
to theSecretary General, Dr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for
having warmlyencouraged this visit. And I thank you Mr.
President for yourcordial welcome. I greet all of you, the
members of this GeneralAssembly: I am grateful for your
presence and for your kindattention.
I come before you today with the desire to be able to
contribute to that thoughtful meditation on the history and
role of thisOrganization which should accompany and give
substance to theanniversary celebrations. The Holy See, in
virtue of its specificallyspiritual mission, which makes it
concerned for the integral good ofevery human being, has
supported the ideals and goals of the United Nations
Organization from the very beginning. Although
theirrespective purposes and operative approaches are
obviously different,the Church and the United Nations
constantly find wide areasof cooperation on the basis of
their common concern for the humanfamily. It is this
awareness which inspires my thoughts today;they will not
dwell on any particular social, political, or
economicquestion; rather, I would like to reflect with you
on what theextraordinary changes of the last few years
imply, not simply forthe present, but for the future of the
whole human family.
A Common Human Patrimony
2. Ladies and Gentlemen! On the threshold of a new
millenniumwe are witnessing an extraordinary global
acceleration of that questfor freedom which is one of the
great dynamics of human history.This phenomenon is not
limited to any one part of the world; noris it the
expression of any single culture. Men and women through-out
the world, even when threatened by violence, have taken
therisk of freedom, asking to be given a place in social,
political, andeconomic life which is commensurate with their
dignity as freehuman beings. This universal longing for
freedom is truly one ofthe distinguishing marks of our time.
During my previous Visit to the United Nations on 2
October1979, I noted that the quest for freedom in our time
has its basisin those universal rights which human beings
enjoy by the very factof their humanity. It was precisely
outrages against human dignitywhich led the United Nations
organization to formulate, barelythree years after its
estahlishment, that Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights
which remains one of the highest expressions of thehuman
conscience of our time. In Asia and Africa, in the Americas,
in Oceania and Europe, men and women of conviction
andcourage have appealed to this Declaration in support of
theirclaims for a fuller share in the life of society.
3. It is important for us to grasp what might be called the
innerstructure of this worldwide movement. It is precisely
its global character which offers us its first and
fundamental "key" and confirmsthat there are indeed
universal human rights, rooted in the natureof the person,
rights which reflect the objective and inviolable demands of
a universal moral law. These are not abstract points;rather,
these rights tell us something important about the actual
lifeof every individual and of every social group. They also
remind usthat we do not live in an irrational or meaningless
world.On the contrary, there is a moral logic which is built
into human life and whichmakes possible dialogue between
individuals and peoples. If wewant a century of violent
coercion to be succeeded by a century ofpersuasion, we must
find a way to discuss the human future intelligibly.The
universal moral law written on the human heart is
preciselythat kind of "grammar" which is needed if the world
is toengage this discussion of its future.
In this sense, it is a matter for serious concern that some
peopletoday deny the universality of human rights, just as
they denythat there is a human nature shared by everyone. To
be sure, thereis no single model for organizing the politics
and economics of human freedom; different cultures and
different historical experiencesgive rise to different
institutional forms of public life in a free andresponsible
society. But it is one thing to affirm a legitimate
pluralismof "forms of freedom", and another to deny any
universality orintelligibility to the nature of man or to
the human experience. Thelatter makes the international
politics of persuasion extremelydifficult, if not
impossible.
Taking the Risk of Freedom
4. The moral dynamics of this universal quest for freedom
clearlyappeared in Central and Eastern Europe during the
non-violentrevolutions of 1989. Unfolding in specific times
and places, thosehistorical events nonetheless taught a
lesson which goes far beyonda specific geographical
location. For the non-violent revolutions of1989
demonstrated that the quest for freedom cannot be
suppressed. Itarises from a recognition of the inestimable
dignity and value of thehuman person, and it cannot fail to
be accompanied by a commitment onbehalf of the human person.
Modern totalitarianism has been, firstand foremost, an
assault on the dignity of the person, an assaultwhich has
gone even to the point of denying the inalienable valueof
the individual's life. The revolutions of 1989 were made
possibleby the commitment of brave men and women inspired by
a different,and ultimately more profound and powerful,
vision: the visionof man as a creature of intelligence and
free will, immersed in amystery which transcends his own
being and endowed with theability to reflect and the ability
to choose--and thus capable ofwisdom and virtue. A decisive
factor in the success of those non-violent revolutions was
the experience of social solidarity:in the face of regimes
backed by the power of propaganda and terror, thatsolidarity
was the moral core of the "power of the powerless", abeacon
of hope and an enduring reminder that it is possible
forman's historical journey to follow a path which is true
to the finestaspirations of the human spirit.
Viewing those events from this privileged international
forum,one cannot fail to grasp the connection between the
values whichinspired those people's liberation movements and
many of themoral commitments inscribed in the United Nations
Charter: I amthinking for example of the commitment to
"reaffirm faith infundamental human rights (and) in the
dignity and worth of thehuman person"; and also the
commitment "to promote social progressand better standards
of life in larger freedom" (Preamble). Thefifty-one States
which founded this Organization in 1945 truly lit alamp
whose light can scatter the darkness caused by
tyranny--alight which can show the way to freedom, peace,
and solidarity.
The Rights of Nations
5. The quest for freedom in the second half of the twentieth
centuryhas engaged not only individuals but nations as well.
Fiftyyears after the end of the Second World War, it is
important toremember that that war was fought because of
violations of the rightsof nations. Many of those nations
suffered grievously for no otherreason than that they were
deemed "other". Terrible crimes werecommitted in the name of
lethal doctrines which taught the "inferiority"of some
nations and cultures. In a certain sense, the UnitedNations
Organization was born from a conviction that such
doctrineswere antithetical to peace; and the Charter's
commitment to"save future generations from the scourge of
war" (Preamble) surelyimplied a moral commitment to defend
every nation and culturefrom unjust and violent aggression.
Unfortunately, even after the end of the Second World
War,the rights of nations continued to be violated. To take
but one setof examples, the Baltic States and extensive
territories in Ukraineand Belarus were absorbed into the
Soviet Union, as had alreadyhappened to Armenia, Azerbaijan,
and Georgia in the Caucasus. Atthe same time the so-called
"People's Democracies" of Central andEastern Europe
effectively lost their sovereignty and were requiredto
submit to the will dominating the entire bloc. The result of
thisartificial division of Europe was the "cold war", a
situation of international tension in which the threat of a
nuclear holocaust hungover humanity. It was only when
freedom was restored to the nations of Central and Eastern
Europe that the promise of the peacewhich should have come
with the end of the war began to be realizedfor many of the
victims of that conflict.
6. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in
1948,spoke eloquently of the rights of persons; but no
similar internationalagreement has yet adequately addressed
the rights of nations. Thissituation must be carefully
pondered, for it raises urgent questionsabout justice and
freedom in the world today.
In reality the problem of the full recognition of the rights
ofpeoples and nations has presented itself repeatedly to the
conscience of humanity, and has also given rise to
considerable ethicaland juridical reflection. I am reminded
of the debate which tookplace at the Council of Constance in
the fifteenth century, whenthe representatives of the
Academy of Krakow, headed by PawelWlodkowic, courageously
defended the right of certain Europeanpeoples to existence
and independence. Still better known is thediscussion which
went on in that same period at the University ofSalamanca
with regard to the peoples of the New World. And inour own
century, how can I fail to mention the prophetic words ofmy
predecessor, Pope Benedict XV, who in the midst of the
FirstWorld War reminded everyone that "nations do not die",
and invitedthem "to ponder with serene conscience the rights
and the justaspirations of peoples" (To the Peoples at War
and their Leaders, 28July 1915)?
7. Today the problem of nationalities forms part of a new
worldhorizon marked by a great "mobility" which has blurred
the ethnicand cultural frontiers of the different peoples,
as a result of a varietyof processes such as migrations,
mass-media and the globalizationof the economy. And yet,
precisely against this horizon of universality we see the
powerful re-emergence of certain ethnic andcultural
consciousness, as it were an explosive need for identity
andsurvival, a sort of counterweight to the tendency toward
uniformity.This is a phenomenon which must not be
underestimated and regarded as a simple left-over of the
past. It demands serious interpretation, and a closer
examination on the levels of anthropology,ethics and law.
This tension between the particular and the universal can
beconsidered immanent in human beings. By virtue of sharing
in thesame human nature, people automatically feel that they
are membersof one great family, as is in fact the case. But
as a result ofconcrete historical conditioning of this same
nature, they arenecessarily bound in a more intense way to
particular humangroups, beginning with the family and going
on to the variousgroups to which they belong and up to the
whole of their ethnicand cultural group, which is called,
not by accident, a "nation",from the Latin word "nasci": "to
be born". This term, enrichedwith another one, "patria"
(fatherland/motherland), evokes the reality of the family.
The human condition thus finds itself betweenthese two poles
-- universality and particularity -- with a vitaltension
between them; an inevitable tension, but singularly
fruitfulif they are lived in a calm and balanced way.
8. Upon this anthropological foundation there also rest the
"rightsof nations", which are nothing but "human rights"
fostered at thespecific level of community life. A study of
these rights is certainlynot easy, if we consider the
difficulty of defining the very conceptof "nation", which
cannot be identified a priori and necessarilywith the State.
Such a study must nonetheless be made, if we wishto avoid
the errors of the past and ensure a just world order.
A presupposition of a nation's rights is certainly its right
to exist: therefore no one -- neither a State nor another
nation, nor aninternational organization -- is ever
justified in asserting that an individual nation is not
worthy of existence. This fundamental right toexistence does
not necessarily call for sovereignty as a state,
sincevarious forms of juridical aggregation between
different nations arepossible, as for example occurs in
Federal States, in Confederationsor in States characterized
by broad regional autonomies. There canbe historical
circumstances in which aggregations different from
singlestate sovereignty can even prove advisable, but only
on conditionthat this takes place in a climate of true
freedom, guaranteedby the exercise of the self-determination
of the peoples concerned.Its right to exist naturally
implies that every nation also enjoys theright to its own
language and culture, through which a people expressesand
promotes that which I would call its fundamental
spiritual"sovereignty". History shows that in extreme
circumstances(such as those which occurred in the land where
I was born) it isprecisely its culture that enables a nation
to survive the loss ofpolitical and economic independence.
Every nation therefore has alsothe right to shape its life
according to its own traditions, excluding,of course, every
abuse of basic human rights and in particular theoppression
of minorities. Every nation has the right to build its
futureby providing an appropriate education for the younger
generation.
But while the "rights of the nation" express the vital
requirementsof "particularity", it is no less important to
emphasize therequirements of universality, expressed through
a clear awareness ofthe duties which nations have vis-a-vis
other nations and humanityas a whole. Foremost among these
duties is certainly that of livingin a spirit of peace,
respect and solidarity with other nations. Thusthe exercise
of the rights of nations, balanced by the acknowledgmentand
the practice of duties, promotes a fruitful "exchange
ofgifts", which strengthens the unity of all mankind.
Respect for Differences
9. During my pastoral pilgrimages to the communities of
theCatholic Church over the past seventeen years, I have
been able toenter into dialogue with the rich diversity of
nations and culturesin every part of the world. Unhappily,
the world has yet to learnhow to live with diversity, as
recent events in the Balkans and CentralAfrica have
painfully reminded us. The fact of "difference",and the
reality of "the other", can sometimes be felt as a burden,or
even as a threat. Amplified by historic grievances and
exacerbatedby the manipulations of the unscrupulous, the
fear of "difference"can lead to a denial of the very
humanity of "the other": withthe result that people fall
into a cycle of violence in which no oneis spared, not even
the children. We are all very familiar today withsuch
situations; at this moment my heart and my prayers turnin a
special way to the sufferings of the sorely tried peoples
ofBosnia-Hercegovina.
From bitter experience, then, we know that the fear of
"difference",especially when it expresses itself in a narrow
and exclusivenationalism which denies any rights to "the
other", can lead to atrue nightmare of violence and terror.
And yet if we make the effortto look at matters objectively,
we can see that, transcending allthe differences which
distinguish individuals and peoples, there is afundamental
commonality. For different cultures are but differentways of
facing the question of the meaning of personal existence.And
it is precisely here that we find one source of the
respectwhich is due to every culture and every nation: every
culture is aneffort to ponder the mystery of the world and
in particular of the hu-man person: it is a way of giving
expression to the transcendent dimen-sion of human life. The
heart of every culture is its approach to thegreatest of all
mysteries: the mystery of God.
10. Our respect for the culture of others is therefore
rooted inour respect for each community's attempt to answer
the questionof human life. And here we can see how important
it is to safe-guard the fundamental right to freedom of
religion and freedom of con-science, as the cornerstones of
the structure of human rights andthe foundation of every
truly free society. No one is permitted tosuppress those
rights by using coercive power to impose an answerto the
mystery of man.
To cut oneself off from the reality of difference--or,
worse,to attempt to stamp out that difference--is to cut
oneself offfrom the possibility of sounding the depths of
the mystery ofhuman life. The truth about man is the
unchangeable standard bywhich all cultures are judged; but
every culture has something toteach us about one or other
dimension of that complex truth. Thusthe "difference" which
some find so threatening can, throughrespectful dialogue,
become the source of a deeper understandingof the mystery of
human existence.
11. In this context, we need to clarify the essential
differencebetween an unhealthy form of nationalism, which
teaches contempt forother nations or cultures, and
patriotism, which is a proper love ofone's country. True
patriotism never seeks to advance the well-beingof one's own
nation at the expense of others. For in the endthis would
harm one's own nation as well: doing wrong damagesboth
aggressor and victim. Nationalism, particularly in its most
radicalforms, is thus the antithesis of true patriotism, and
today wemust ensure that extreme nationalism does not
continue to give riseto new forms of the aberrations of
totalitarianism. This is a com-mitment which also holds
true, obviously, in cases where religion it-self is made the
basis of nationalism, as unfortunately happens incertain
manifestations of so-called "fundamentalism".
Freedom and Moral Truth
12. Ladies and Gentlemen! Freedom is the measure of man's
dignityand greatness. Living the freedom sought by
individuals and peoplesis a great challenge to man's
spiritual growth and to the moralvitality of nations. The
basic question which we must all face todayis the
responsible use of freedom, in both its personal and
socialdimensions. Our reflection must turn then to the
question of themoral structure of freedom, which is the
inner architecture of theculture of freedom.
Freedom is not simply the absence of tyranny or
oppression.Nor is freedom a license to do whatever we like.
Freedom has aninner "logic" which distinguishes it and
ennobles it: freedom isordered to the truth, and is
fulfilled in man's quest for truth and inman's living in the
truth. Detached from the truth about the hu-man person,
freedom deteriorates into license in the lives of
indi-viduals and, in political life, it becomes the caprice
of the mostpowerful and the arrogance of power. Far from
being a limitationupon freedom or a threat to it, reference
to the truth about thehuman person--a truth universally
knowable through the morallaw written on the hearts of all--
is, in fact, the guarantor offreedom's future.
13. In the light of what has been said we understand how
utili-tarianism, the doctrine which defines morality not in
terms of whatis good but of what is advantageous, threatens
the freedom of indi-viduals and nations and obstructs the
building of a true culture offreedom. Utilitarianism often
has devastating political consequences,because it inspires
an aggressive nationalism on the basis of whichthe
subjugation, for example, of a smaller or weaker nation
isclaimed to be a good thing solely because it corresponds
to the na-tional interest. No less grave are the results of
economic utilitarian-ism, which drives more powerful
countries to manipulate and ex-ploit weaker ones.
Nationalistic and economic utilitarianism are sometimes
com-bined, a phenomenon which has too often characterized
relationsbetween the "North" and the "South". For the
emerging countries,the achievement of political independence
has too frequently beenaccompanied by a situation of de
facto economic dependence onother countries; indeed, in some
cases, the developing world hassuffered a regression, such
that some countries lack the means ofsatisfying the
essential needs of their people. Such situations offendthe
conscience of humanity and pose a formidable moral
challengeto the human family. Meeting this challenge will
obviously requirechanges in both developing and developed
countries. If developingcountries are able to offer sure
guarantees of the proper manage-ment of resources and of
assistance received, as well as respect forhuman rights, by
replacing where necessary unjust, corrupt, or au-thoritarian
forms of government with participatory and democraticones,
will they not in this way unleash the best civil and
economicenergies of their people? And must not the developed
countries,for their part, come to renounce strictly
utilitarian approaches anddevelop new approaches inspired by
greater justice and solidarity?
Yes, distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen! The
internationaleconomic scene needs an ethic of solidarity, if
participation, econom-ic growth, and a just distribution of
goods are to characterize thefuture of humanity. The
international cooperation called for by theCharter of the
United Nations for "solving international problemsof an
economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character" (
art.1.3) cannot be conceived exclusively in terms of help
and assis-tance, or even by considering the eventual returns
on the resourcesprovided. When millions of people are
suffering from a povertywhich means hunger, malnutrition,
sickness, illiteracy, and degrada-tion, we must not only
remind ourselves that no one has a right toexploit another
for his own advantage, but also and above all wemust
recommit ourselves to that solidarity which enables others
tolive out, in the actual circumstances of their economic
and politicallives, the creativity which is a distinguishing
mark of the humanperson and the true source of the wealth of
nations in today's world.
The United Nations and the Future of Freedom
14. As we face these enormous challenges, how can we fail to
ac-knowledge the role of the United Nations Organization?
Fifty yearsafter its founding, the need for such an
Organization is even moreobvious, but we also have a better
understanding, on the basis ofexperience, that the
effectiveness of this great instrument for har-monizing and
coordinating international life depends on the
inter-national culture and ethic which it supports and
expresses. TheUnited Nations Organization needs to rise more
and more abovethe cold status of an administrative
institution and to become amoral centre where all the
nations of the world feel at home anddevelop a shared
awareness of being, as it were, a "family of na-tions". The
idea of "family" immediately evokes something morethan
simple functional relations or a mere convergence of
interests.The family is by nature a community based on
mutual trust, mutu-al support and sincere respect. In an
authentic family the strong donot dominate; instead, the
weaker members, because of their veryweakness, are all the
more welcomed and served.
Raised to the level of the "family of nations", these
sentimentsought to be, even before law itself, the very
fabric of relations be-tween peoples. The United Nations has
the historic, even momen-tous, task of promoting this
qualitative leap in international life, notonly by serving
as a centre of effective mediation for the resolutionof
conflicts but also by fostering values, attitudes and
concrete ini-tiatives of solidarity which prove capable of
raising the level of rela-tions between nations from the
"organizational" to a more "organ-ic" level, from simple
"existence with" others to "existence for"others, in a
fruitful exchange of gifts, primarily for the good of
theweaker nations but even so, a clear harbinger of greater
good foreveryone.
15. Only on this condition shall we attain an end not only
to"wars of combat" but also to "cold wars". It will ensure
not onlythe legal equality of all peoples but also their
active participation inthe building of a better future, and
not only respect for individualcultural identities, but full
esteem for them as a common treasurebelonging to the
cultural patrimony of mankind. Is this not the idealheld up
by the Charter of the United Nations when it sets as
thebasis of the Organization "the principle of the sovereign
equality ofall its Members" (art. 2.1), or when it commits
it to "developfriendly relations between nations based on
respect for the principleof equal rights and of
self-determination" (art. 1.2)? This is thehigh road which
must be followed to the end, even if this involves,when
necessary, appropriate modifications in the operating
modelof the United Nations, so as to take into account
everything thathas happened in this half century, with so
many new peoples expe-riencing freedom and legitimately
aspiring to "be" and to "countfor" more.
None of this should appear an unattainable utopia. Now is
thetime for new hope, which calls us to expel the paralyzing
burden ofcynicism from the future of politics and of human
life. Theanniversary which we are celebrating invites us to
do this byreminding us of the idea of "united nations", an
idea whichbespeaks mutual trust, security and solidarity.
Inspired by theexample of all those who have taken the risk
of freedom, can wenot recommit ourselves also to taking the
risk of solidarity andthus the risk of peace?
Beyond Fear: the Civilization of Love
16. It is one of the great paradoxes of our time that man,
whobegan the period we call "modernity" with a
self-confident asser-tion of his "coming of age" and
"autonomy", approaches the endof the twentieth century
fearful of himself, fearful of what he mightbe capable of,
fearful for the future. Indeed, the second half of
thetwentieth century has seen the unprecedented phenomenon
of ahumanity uncertain about the very likelihood of a
future, given thethreat of nuclear war. That danger,
mercifully, appears to have re-ceded--and everything that
might make it return needs to be re-jected firmly and
universally; all the same, fear for the future and ofthe
future remains.
In order to ensure that the new millennium now
approachingwill witness a new flourishing of the human
spirit, mediatedthrough an authentic culture of freedom, men
and women mustlearn to conquer fear. We must learn not to be
afraid, we must re-discover a spirit of hope and a spirit of
trust. Hope is not emptyoptimism springing from a naive
confidence that the future willnecessarily be better than
the past. Hope and trust are the premiseof responsible
activity and are nurtured in that inner sanctuary
ofconscience where "man is alone with God" (Gaudium et Spes,
16)and thus perceives that he is not alone amid the enigmas
ofexistence, for he is surrounded by the love of the
Creator!
Hope and trust: these may seem matters beyond the purview
ofthe United Nations. But they are not. The politics of
nations, withwhich your Organization is principally
concerned, can never ignorethe transcendent, spiritual
dimension of the human experience, andcould never ignore it
without harming the cause of man and thecause of human
freedom. Whatever diminishes man--whatevershortens the
horizon of man's aspiration to goodness--harms thecause of
freedom. In order to recover our hope and our trust atthe
end of this century of sorrows, we must regain sight of
thattranscendent horizon of possibility to which the soul of
man aspires.
17. As a Christian, my hope and trust are centered on
JesusChrist, the two thousandth anniversary of whose birth
will be cele-brated at the coming of the new millennium. We
Christians believethat in his Death and Resurrection were
fully revealed God's loveand his care for all creation.
Jesus Christ is for us God made man,and made a part of the
history of humanity. Precisely for this reason,Christian
hope for the world and its future extends to every human
per-son. Because of the radiant humanity of Christ, nothing
genuinelyhuman fails to touch the hearts of Christians.
Faith in Christ doesnot impel us to intolerance. On the
contrary, it obliges us to en-gage others in a respectful
dialogue. Love of Christ does not dis-tract us from interest
in others, but rather invites us to respons-ibility for
them, to the exclusion of no one and indeed, if
anything,with a special concern for the weakest and the
suffering. Thus, aswe approach the two thousandth
anniversary of the birth of Christ,the Church asks only to
be able to propose respectfully this mes-sage of salvation,
and to be able to promote, in charity and service,the
solidarity of the entire human family.
Ladies and Gentlemen! I come before you, as did my
predeces-sor Pope Paul VI exactly thirty years ago, not as
one who exercisestemporal power--these are his words--nor as
a religious leaderseeking special privileges for his
community. I come before you asa witness: a witness to human
dignity, a witness to hope, a witnessto the conviction that
the destiny of all nations lies in the hands ofa merciful
Providence.
18. We must overcome our fear of the future. But we will not
beable to overcome it completely unless we do so together.
The "answer"to that fear is neither coercion nor repression,
nor the impositionof one social "model" on the entire world.
The answer to the fearwhich darkens human existence at the
end of the twentieth centuryis the common effort to build
the civilization of love, founded onthe universal values of
peace, solidarity, justice, and liberty. Andthe "soul" of
the civilization of love is the culture of freedom:
thefreedom of individuals and the freedom of nations, lived
in self-giv-ing solidarity and responsibility.
We must not be afraid of the future. We must not be afraid
ofman. It is no accident that we are here. Each and every
humanperson has been created in the "image and likeness" of
the Onewho is the origin of all that is. We have within us
the capacitiesfor wisdom and virtue. With these gifts, and
with the help of God's grace, we can build in the next
century and the next millen-nium a civilization worthy of
the human person, a true culture offreedom. We can and must
do so! And in doing so, we shall seethat the tears of this
century have prepared the ground for a newspringtime of the
human spirit.
Back
|
|
|