B E L A R U S
S T A T E M E N T
by
MR. YURY AMBRAZEVICH
DIRECTOR-GENERAL, DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR MULTILATERAL
DIPLOMACY OF MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OF THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS
New York, 17 April 2013
Distinguished Co-Chairs,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have the honour to speak on behalf of constituency that includes the Republic of
Belarus and the Republic of Serbia.
Our delegations continue to consider Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as
one of the most important conceptual instruments of the international community for
implementation of the concept of sustainable development.
We believe that all UN Member States must continue implementation of MDGs
with undiminishing energy in parallel with the process of shaping the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs).
Belarus and Serbia are convinced that SDGs must ensue from, supplement and
further develop the MDGs.
In order to assure the SDGs’s achievement, the process of elaboration of
SDGs must be fully transparent with involvement of all interested states.
It is extremely important to ensure from the beginning that SDGs are universal
benchmarks which are addressed to and accepted by all Member States.
At the same time realization of the sustainable development concept and, first of
all, SDGs must not deepen the existing gap in development, must not preserve
technological gap between the countries and must not limit national policies in the field
of sustainable development, in no way lead to establishing new dividing lines and
barriers.
Moreover, while ensuring the universal nature of SDGs we have to find a formula
for implementation of the principle of differentiated responsibility. The formula must
be carefully balanced and acceptable for all. In other terms we have to find the way how
to differentiate the national contribution of each state to the global sustainable
development. Practical solution of this dilemma can be found through introduction of
differentiated approach to the needs of groups of countries facing specific
developmental problems: least developed countries, small island states, land-locked
developing countries, middle-income countries and countries with economies in
transition.
Besides, it is important right now to reach consensus on the idea that SDGs should
have a mechanism of measuring the progress made both at global and national levels. In
this regard we believe a relevant UN index might be useful as an instrument for
measuring correlative progress of states. This index might also be useful for the
purposes of fair distribution of the international technical assistance. We propose as well
to introduce periodic national reviews of the progress made in the achievement of
SDGs without prejudice to the choice and implementation of national development
strategies.
SDGs must be supported by adequate and effective technical assistance,
including general consensus on the necessity to provide an access for developing states,
middle-income countries and countries with economies in transition to modern
technologies.
Global partnership for sustainable development must receive a new inspiration
and unite at its platform the Member States, international organizations, private sector
and civil society.
To coordinate the efforts of Global partnership for Sustainable Development and
control SDGs implementation, the international community and in particular the UN
system would need a strong and effective body. It is not necessary to create a new
institution. These functions in our view could be effectively fulfilled by ECOSOC.
SDGs must be concise and clear with precise targets and indicators.
Each goal should have if possible an integrated clear connection to all three
dimensions of sustainable development: economic, social and environmental.
SDGs should, first of all, address the most urgent problems that mankind’s
survival depends on:
o poverty eradication;
o food security;
o sustainable energy for all;
o efficient management of natural resources;
o water and sanitation;
o climate change and habitat degradation, including sustainable waste
management;
o fighting diseases (healthcare);
o education.
In conclusion, Belarus and Serbia believe that the open working group’s
discussion must result in a clear formulation of the possible SDGs while at the same time
creating an open space for dialogue on concrete targets. This dialogue should be further
elaborated with support and guidance of the Secretariat. The Open working group on the
other hand, should provide general political guidance in setting up the targets and provide
options for collection of aggregated data to monitor the progress made in completion of
SDGs.
Thank you.
