Remarks by Ambassador Väino Reinart to the Council of Europe

Ambassador Väino Reinart, Head of the Division for International Organisations and Security Policy, Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
The Council of Europe 506th Meeting of the Ministers' Deputies
Called for an Exchange of Views on the United Nations
20 January 1994 Strasbourg


Madame Chair,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is a great honour to address this distinguished audience today. It is difficult to overestimate the importance of the Council of Europe in safeguarding human rights and promoting co-operation among relevant organizations such as the United Nations and the CSCE. Because the purpose of our meeting today is to exchange views on the conclusions reached by the United Nations 48th General Assembly Third Committee, and because I represent the only Council of Europe member state to have gone before that committee recently, specifically with regard to human rights, I feel compelled to draw your attention to a few relevant points.

We consider the results of the 48th General Assembly to be of utmost importance both with regard to the human rights issue and for the further development of mechanisms intended to ensure compliance in this area. First, let me stress the importance of the newly-established office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights, who will enjoy the status of a UN Undersecretary General, a post whose creation was adopted by consensus of the 184 UN member states. However useful this post will be, recent developments regarding the use of human rights mechanisms have demonstrated to us that there can never be enough mechanisms to provide each country with the findings it may need to explain its policies to the satisfaction of others.

I would add one caveat here, and that is that we do, indeed, face challenges in integrating our alien population into Estonian society. For instance, we have a scarcity of language teachers and instructional materials. However, I would stress that these difficulties of integration are organizational matters that bear no relation to human rights. To confuse these practical matters with the very serious matter of human rights would be irresponsible.

My second point, regarding organizational politics, is no less significant. I have in mind a serious case of abuse of the existing UN human rights mechanisms which, unfortunately for all of us here, appears to have set a precedent. As we are all aware, despite a lack of findings by the Special Mission of the UN to Estonia and regardless of the positive report of the Secretary General in this matter, the UNGA recently adopted a resolution on the situation of human rights in my country. I was pleased to read the Secretariat Memorandum, prepared by the Directorate of Human Rights and submitted to the distinguished participants of this meeting, which deals with the UNGA resolution. To refresh your memory, the Secretariat Memorandum stated that, and I quote, "the brevity and wording of the text may indicate that this question will no longer appear on the Assembly's agenda," end of quote. I would be delighted to share the Secretariat's optimism in this matter. However, because the Memorandum only suggests that the resolution's wording "may indicate" a certain result, I am reluctant to do so. Our delegation to the 48th UNGA did its best to negotiate an acceptable wording, and we found it curious that we received no support in our efforts. This leads me to the conclusion that the Council of Europe member states represented here today harbor doubts as to whether the reports of the UN and the Council of Europe missions to investigate the human rights situation in Estonia are, in fact, credible and objective documents.

As you know, in the end we accepted the UNGA resolution proposed by the delegation from the Russian Federation and we conceded to the language because we understand that, for domestic political reasons, Russia requires any such UN document to establish the basis for possible future accusations. At the same time, we know better than most that Russia's internal political situation will not, in the foreseeable future, become so stable that these unfounded accusations will stop. This is especially clear after President Boris Yeltsin's New Year's greeting to the Russian people, in which Mr. Yeltsin described the defense of the rights of Russians living outside the Russian Federation as being among his state's highest foreign policy priorities.

In addition, Yeltsin's remarks last week at the US-Russian summit, and Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev's comments last Monday, strongly suggest that the tone of these accusations in the area of human rights is likely to become more, not less, strident, and that their frequency will increase. I am confident that you share our view that these accusations are purely political in nature. In light of these developments, I would ask you to consider whether we can allow for the usurpation of this vital tool, that is, human rights mechanisms, to indulge an individual state's political interests?

I would now turn to another problem, namely, the scarcity of financial and human resources in the human rights field. Estonia believes that the international community is in danger of squandering those possibilities open to us. For instance, a fact-finding mission of the UN that visited Estonia a year ago reported no evidence of discrimination on ethnic or religious grounds in Estonia. Unfortunately, however, the Resolution of the 48th Session of the UN General Assembly on the human rights situation in Latvia and Estonia did not address that report. Are we so wealthy that we can justify dispatching costly missions whose labours are not used? I think not.

My final point touches upon the reputation of the Council of Europe as a whole, about which my country is concerned. It seems to Estonia that the quiet acceptance by Council of Europe member states of these well-orchestrated and unfounded accusations against a fellow Council member-state by a non-Council member calls into question the credibility of the Council of Europe as a whole. I ask you, does this quiet acceptance not undermine the very authority of the Council of Europe to speak with one voice in matters of human rights?

I would remind you that in ten days' time, the UN Commission on Human Rights will meet in Geneva to discuss human rights issues. Because Estonia is not a member of that Commission, we are put in the difficult position of not being able to defend ourselves against the next round of accusations which are sure to be raised at the forum. Dear colleagues, if you share Estonia's concern about the reputation of the Council of Europe, I appeal to those of you represented on the UN Commission on Human Rights to stand up against any resolutions based on unfounded accusations that may be tabled against Estonia at the Geneva meeting.

I would conclude by saying that Estonia fondly cherishes the hope that the human rights area will not suffer from an illness that all too frequently afflicted the social sciences during the Soviet period, namely, that if the facts do not verify the theory, then it is too bad for the facts.

I thank you for your attention.