Mr. Chairman,
Excellencies,
Dear Colleagues,

We are gathered again, this year in Maastricht, to fulfill the responsibilities of the OSCE Ministerial. For Armenia, the OSCE is not one organization-among- many. It is the singular institution whose geopolitical realm and membership of 55 encompasses a more inclusive definition of Europe than anyone else's - the OSCE's understanding of security is more comprehensive more multidimensional, more indivisible than that of any comparable multilateral organization. By putting on equal footing the politico-military, the economic and the human dimensions, it assumes and presumes that norms, commitments and codes are fundamental elements in maintaining security. Dialogue, co-operation and search for compromise are its daily, common practices and instruments.

The list of decisions and common statements we have gathered to adopt or to endorse speaks for itself. Of particular significance is our Economic Strategy. It achieves balance between the economic and the environmental, it relates gaps in economic performance between states and within states to emerging security risks and recognizes the role of governance, public and corporate, in consolidating reforms, particularly in the context of global and regional trends and challenges

More important still is that other strategy document we are adopting here: the OSCE Strategy to Address Threats to Stability and Security in the Twenty-first Century.

Of course, looking a whole century ahead, today in 2003, is a rather difficult undertaking. Imagine if a similar exercise had been undertaken, a century ago, in the year 1903. Surely such a probe would not have seen the horrors and challenges of modern totalitarianism, genocide, total war Փ twice, nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, technology-driven globalization, and the attempts at international law and order.

We must accept the limits to our ambition, and admit that an assessment of future threats remains very much rooted in our present concern, and reflect our most recent fears, traumas and threats.

Mr. Chairman,

My delegation would have wished a somewhat bolder attitude in this respect. Given our most recent experiences, where the unthinkable has become commonplace, we would have wished to explore our ability to look and see beyond the immediate horizon. We should not accept with complacency the notion that the invisible is unknown and that the unknown is unknowable.

As we will, by necessity update this strategy document, let us if possible remain sensitive to the uncertainties and surprises of our future security environment.

Mr. Chairman,

Let me now turn to that other very important item on our agenda: Human Trafficking. Recently in Kishinev, at the Ministerial of the Council of Europe, I had the privilege to be the Rapporteur on this issue. I have become convinced that no other issue poses a greater challenge to us all. It confronts us with ourselves, with our innermost values and conventions, and with our public professions about human rights and civilization. A Europe that can tolarate this form of slavery in its midst, at the dawn of the 21st century, must answer to the charges of hypocrisy, double talk, complicity , callousness, or at the very least indifference and ineffectualness.

Therefore, the action plan on combating trafficking in Human beings that this Ministerial has just endorsed is a credit to our organization.

However, from the outset, our delegation remained convinced that this action plan deserved a similarly vigorous mechanism to ensure its implementation. We would have preferred a more robust mechanism, with greater independence, a wide range of initiative and able to go, both literally and figuratively, wherever the ravages of human trafficking would take it. No other threat or crime cuts as much across all borders, and unites in some obscene embrace, origin countries and destinations countries through transit countries.

Mr. Chairman,

I have dealt at some length with the institutional issues that concern all of the OSCE, because they are the backbone of an organization which indeed has direct existential significance to my country and the challenges we face.

These days our challenges are regional, not just local. The news coming from our region are never dull. And they definitely have not been uninteresting lately.

In this last year of 2003, all three neighbors in the South Caucasus, Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia had presidential and/or parliamentary elections. Not only our three immediate geographic neighbors -- the Russian Federation, Iran and Turkey Փ but further afield the European Union and the USA, create a matrix within which questions of energy, security, military alliances and sub regional conflicts must be addressed, while the societies directly concerned must pursue their transitions towards democratic and free market systems.

The Government of Armenia believes that stability is a basic precondition to allow these tensions to work themselves out without additional dislocations and confrontations. We are committed to that stability and believe that the interest of all can be accommodated without creating further cleavages. Cooperation among neighbors, open borders, the peaceful resolution of pending disputes, and at all times, the maintenance of constitutional, democratic legitimacy can go a long way to prevent explosions or implosions.

We want for Georgia that which we want for ourselves. Georgia is our good neighbor and friend. It is home to half a million ethnic Armenians. Georgia is our major conduit to Europe and to the world. So, at the end of the day, we are no less interested in the stability of Georgia than are Georgians themselves. We are pleased that there have been no major interruptions in our political or economic relations. We are therefore ready to welcome and work closely with any government that expresses the aspirations of the people of Georgia.

Armenia is committed, Mr. Chairman, to bring about a region where cooperation will replace confrontation, where confidence of trust between people will underpin agreements between governments, where borders are bridges not walls and obstacles. We believe everyone has a role to play in making our region one of stability, peace and prosperity. Including Nagorno Karabagh.

Whereas the unresolved conflict in Nagorno Karabagh is being presented as an element of instability in the region, Nagorno Karabagh itself is a stable, established entity which can contribute to peace. Let me explain. Next spring, we will mark the 10th anniversary of the worldՉs longest lasting, and today, its only self-monitored ceasefire. There are two reasons for this success. One is the balance that had been achieved and recognized. The other, perhaps more important, is the political will on all sides, to avoid bloodshed, to allow people to continue with their lives as their elected leaders work towards finding a solution.

During these 10 years, the people of Nagorno Karabagh have indeed tried to live normal lives. This summer, Mr. Chairman, the people of Nagorno Karabagh marked a decade of life of their own making, with the freedom to determine their own future and with functional, independent institutions. These institutions not only have provided them with security within their borders, but also lay the foundations for a vigorous society, an active economy, a democratic public life and popular culture. In these ten years, they have held three presidential elections, a similar number of parliamentary elections and they have developed supportive infrastructure. They have, in a word, tasted peace and focused on economic development. This is a polity that recognized that its strength and legitimacy is derived from its practical, demonstrated commitment to a way of life for which it has fought Փ and won.

Mr. Chairman,

Perhaps on the anniversary of the ceasefire this spring, their leaders and the international community can find the political will to codify the common desire for a realistic and just resolution of this conflict. A cease-fire is a temporary peace Mr. Chairman. Perhaps we can turn the worldՉs longest lasting self-monitored temporary peace into the worldՉs first self-monitored permanent peace. In all this, the OSCE has its own important contribution to make. And in the case of Nagorno Karabagh, the OSCE is in a unique position. For more than 10 years, from Minsk Group to its co-Chairmen, the Minsk process has been at the center of a search for a negotiated, peaceful solution between the parties to the conflict. With elections both in Armenia and in Azerbaijan, understandably, 2003 has been a year of inactivity and the very useful and productive presidential dialog was interrupted.

We believe the co-Chairs are ready to help the sides resume the talks and we will continue to support the essential and central role of the co-Chairs in moving things forward. It would be a historic opportunity lost, if the talks, when they begin, return to a tabula rasa, rather than take advantage of the principles and frameworks which have already emerged.

Let me conclude Mr. Chairman, with a few words of heartfelt appreciation for your chairmanship which was the manifestation of the best of cliches about the Dutch work ethic, pragmatism and tolerance.

We are looking forward, with great expectations to the Bulgarian chairmanship as well as the Slovenian contribution, and the enthusiastically selected Belgian chairmanship.

We are confident the next several years will further consolidate the OSCEՉs place among important European structures.