政党社团之声
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    BURMA-缅甸风云
[主页]->[政党社团之声]->[BURMA-缅甸风云]->[貌强:Busdachin’s Speech to VIII UNPO GA in Taiwan ]
BURMA-缅甸风云
·缅甸僧伽与人民,是鱼水关系
·缅甸僧伽们入世行动了
·钦族阵线谈印度与缅甸军政府
·缅甸民族委员会08年元月24日声明
·缅甸掸族拟加入众土族委员会ENC
·缅甸掸族领袖赛万赛答缅甸文摘问
·由红色高棉想到缅甸军政府
·缅甸掸族的61周年掸邦节
·克伦族掸族领袖游说欧盟6年15次
·平等、民主、发展——救缅甸!
·与赛万赛谈2008年初缅甸局势
·缅甸联邦民族委员会对曼侠被杀害之声明
·人倒下,但曼侠英魂永远活着!
·缅甸革命师生痛失曼侠学兄
·曼侠名列缅甸军政府刺杀单
·谈缅甸国民大会、公投、普选
·美国教授讲缅甸的过去现在未来
·反对缅甸5月公投与2010年普选?
·国际缅甸僧伽总会拜访海牙UNPO
·正视缅甸宪法公投与大选
·缅甸问题以和为贵、利民为本
·缅甸独裁政府——你不打,他不倒!
·缅甸联邦民族委员会有关“宪法公投”声明
·国民党马与民进党谢的选后感言
·温教授评缅甸公投与大选
·NCUB的缅甸反法西斯63周年声明
·达赖喇嘛发表“对全球华人的呼吁”
·“黃金甲--詩篇”
·寒竹点评 “达赖言论”
·缅甸另两大力量对宪法公决的声明
·缅甸在野另七党派反对宪法公决
·给斯宾诺莎的信
·缅甸在野众党派对停战集团的呼吁
·请国际监察员来缅甸察督全民公投
·缅甸钦族委员会第二周年大会声明
·分离运动与自决权问题
·缅甸僧伽新年祈祷民主快来
·Burmese Monks Pray for Democracy
·达赖、缅藏、僧伽喇嘛、背后黑手
·UNPO第九届大会将在欧洲议会召开
·缅甸僧伽昭告人民书
·缅甸国内外僧伽民众4月26日反宪法公投
·缅甸工联FTUB向国际控诉
·缅甸联邦民族委员会五一劳动节声明
·中国学者谈缅甸民主前景
·缅甸僧伽对国际救济的紧急呼吁
·送缅甸将军们上国际刑事法庭
·Deliver the Junta of Burma to the International Criminal Court
·缅甸新宪法、军政府、反对势力
·缅甸反对党派不承认伪宪法与公投结果
·熊飞骏:马英九胜选的十大启示
·民意转求真正缅甸联邦制——不闹独立了
·缅甸众民族团结阵线12党不承认伪公投伪结果
·缅甸风灾,丹瑞大将有话说
·缅甸妇联要扭送丹瑞集团到国际刑事法庭
·缅甸反对力量、军政府、国际刑事法庭
·缅甸军政府要吃掉停战集团了
·缅甸军政府逼迫停战集团缴械参选
·缅人与团体到国际刑事法庭状告缅甸将军们
·缅甸人民恳求联合国:驱逐非法军政府!
·缅甸掸邦第四特区不任军政府宰割!
·反对军政府代表缅甸出席联合国2008年大会
·缅甸民选议员致函联合国与安理会
·缅甸教授与书生座谈“德先生”
·缅甸人民为何痛恨8——尤其8888?
·明天会更老还是更好?
·悲欢离合+生老病死
·秘方:马铃薯胡萝卜苹果三鲜榨汁
·温教授貌强合述缅甸的过去与现在
·对温教授貌强合述缅甸史之补充-1
·缅甸是东南亚另一只经济小虎?
·为2010年大选,甘巴里再访缅甸
·缅甸军政府撕毁停战协定?
·联合国与欧美对风灾后缅甸改变策略
·缅甸东掸邦民族民主自治区岌岌可危
·看佤邦联军如何死里求生
·美国加州缅华移民思想言行录
·恸上世纪60年代南洋排华
·后溪穴治腰酸背痛近视眼花
·蹲功——改善糖尿血压心肺功能
·联合国须送缅甸将军们上国际刑事法庭!
·缅甸掸邦四大特区坚决保家卫邦
·缅甸17停战组织与民主联合党
·缅甸军政府对东北众土族磨刀霍霍
·中风要三小时内急救!
·KNU苏沙吉七访西班牙
·缅甸果敢特区被攻陷了!
·强烈谴责缅甸军政府对果敢人民的暴行!
·战争是缅甸军政府特意发动的!
·缅甸果敢,君知多少?
·缅甸佤邦联军枕戈待旦决战
·果敢已沦陷,下个受害邦该谁?
·赛万赛与貌强谈大缅族主义的民族压迫
·果敢彭家声与伊洛瓦底记者的谈话
·缅甸众土族以小人之心度君子之腹?
·来电为缅官白所成喊冤平反
·缅甸僧伽与学生要求军政府停止民族压迫
·缅甸果敢沦陷区昨晚的来电
·联合国的人权宣言,缅甸不用遵守?
·华夏人道主义救援队缅北来电实录
·缅甸反对势力在2010年大选前的动态
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
貌强:Busdachin’s Speech to VIII UNPO GA in Taiwan

The following speech was delivered by UNPO General Secretary, Marino Busdachin, to the Opening of the VIII UNPO General Assembly, 27 October 2006, Taipei, Taiwan:

   =======

   Unrepresented Nations and Peoples OrganizationVIII General Assembly 27 – 29 October, 2006Taipei, Taiwan Honourable Members of the Government and the Parliament of Taiwan,

   Distinguished Representative of the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy,

   Distinguished Delegates of UNPO Members,

   Ladies and Gentlemen,

   First of all, on behalf of the 63 Members of the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization, and so in the name of more than 200 million people, I would like to convey my gratitude to you all for honouring me with your distinguished presence and with your remarkable contributions to the VIII General Assembly of our organisation.

   Thank you also for your warm and generous welcome. It was both more than I deserve, and, if I am honest, more than I am used to.

   This day, here in Taipei, will forever be an important date for UNPO, marking the departure point for all future growth and achievements.

   It is not by chance that UNPO made the choice, more than a year ago, to make this moment here in Taiwan. UNPO is here today to give support to the fundamental and inalienable right of Taiwan to Freedom, to Democracy, and to Self-Determination.

   Taiwanese Identity and Taiwanese Democracy have become intertwined and inseparable, a true treasure for every individual and citizen of Taiwan.Allow me to be direct for a moment. It is difficult to see how far the Chinese and Taiwanese governments might travel along the path of reconciliation over the next few years.

   Nevertheless, small steps of progress might always promise hope. These include enhanced cross-strait economic and personnel exchanges, improving the atmosphere somewhat and so maintaining tensions under control. Perhaps there is hope even for a resumption and revival of cross-strait dialogue in a region that remains dangerous.

   The anti-secession law, passed in March 2005, is among the recent PRC pronouncements that have indicated a firm stance on the question of independence, but with small signs of flexibility in relation to other cross-strait issues.

   Notably, though ultimately enacting the law, President Hu Jintao is said to have moved away from considerations of a definite time-table for reunification, a concept much discussed under Jiang Zemin.

   Meanwhile, Chinese leaders also have warned that possible constitutional changes, affirming Taiwan’s permanent independence, would be interpreted as a cause for war.

   The push towards reforms strengthening Taiwan’s status as a separate an independent country, led by President Chen, has been driven by a mix of factors. These include internal political and democratic dynamics, and the undeniable growing public sense of a separate national identity.

   Taiwan’s leaders and Taiwan’s citizens believe Taiwan’s formidable democratic accomplishments entitle it to a legitimate standing in the international community.

   Current circumstances provide important assurances that cross-strait tensions can be kept within bounds, staving off the threat of military conflict and confrontation until the end of President Chen’s term in 2008. The Chinese leadership, whilst flexible on some issues, remains ultimately constrained by strong nationalism and undemocratic policies.

   Political experts and analysts continue to debate whether China is undergoing a democratic transition or not. They have never stopped to ask whether the glass is half full or half empty. Let me say that the glass remains dry, and completely empty.

   However, there are possibilities for progress and smaller steps, including enhanced exchanges, an improved atmosphere, and perhaps a revival of formal cross-strait dialogues.

   Nevertheless, misunderstandings and miscalculations still stand poised to lead to an uncertainty and dangerous situations.

   China’s fear is today that self-determination could become the new norm of international relations. China has feared that the doctrine of “humanitarian interventionism” might supplant the doctrine of state sovereignty. Since 9/11, the international war against terrorism has firmly re-established state sovereignty as the predominant principle of international relations.

   China has exploited this war against terrorism in order to justify its repression of East Turkestan, Tibet, and Inner Mongolia, and in order to soften the criticisms and protests of the International Community. This is particularly true of its policy against Taiwan.

   Policy has confirmed China’s status as a military giant, and a rapidly growing economic power, but it remains, unfortunately, a political midget.

   In the last years China has become much closer to European and EU policy. We must ask whether the EU policy towards China is adequate and effective. Must Europe lift the EU Arms Embargo? I think not.

   How can the European Parliament’s Resolution on democratisation and the respect for Human Rights in China be implemented?

   In this respect, the question of the participation and representation of the democratic State of Taiwan at the UN remains unresolved. It represents the unjust exclusion of Taiwan’s governmental agencies, civil society organisations, as well as individuals, from the activities of the UN and its related bodies, de facto depriving the people of Taiwan of their fundamental right to benefit from and contribute to the duties of the UN.

   Considering the important role played by Taiwan in several international organisations, notably the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), as well as its full diplomatic relations with 23 UN Member States, including 120 embassies, general consulates and representative offices worldwide, Taiwan’s efficiency, democratic ideals and dynamism should be beyond question.

   Taiwan’s long-standing commitment to the UN principles, the UN Charter, international law and their substantial cooperation within the International Community as a responsible global citizen, warrants substantial consideration by all UN Member States.

   UNPO considers the time ripe to call for justice and equal rights, and to end the conventio ad exludendum of Taiwan and its people from the United Nations.

   Finally, and in closing, let me also once again express my gratitude to the Right Honourable Ken-Marti Vaher, former minister of Justice of Estonia, and present here today to remind us all of that UNPO was born as an idea in Estonia in the summer of 1990.

   The Cold War still raged on, the Soviet Empire had not yet collapsed.This was a different, older world, another millennium.

   We stand here today, ready to launch a new UNPO, able and ready to face the challenges of the new world order that has yet to come.

   And if our spirits are right, and our courage firm, the new world will be with us.

   (Mr. Marino Busdachin: appointed as Executive Director in 2003, unanimously elected as UNPO General Secretary in 2005, served as UN representative in Geneva, New York and Vienna 1995-2000, member of the Extra-ordinary Executive Board of the Transnational Radical Party 2000-2002, currently a member of the General Council of TRP. founded the NGO “Non c’e’ Pace Senza Giustizia” in Italy 1994-1999, as well as founding and serving as President of No Peace Without Justice USA 1995-2000, campaigned for the establishment of the International Criminal Court, represented Civil Society at the Rome Conference founding ICC. Worked to establish the ad hoc tribunals on war crimes in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and campaign on the death penalty in the United Nations from USA in 1993, led the TRP to recognition by the UN as an NGO of the first category, led and coordinated the TRP in the former Yugoslavia 1991-1993 and in the Soviet Union 1989-1993, campaigned for civil rights in Italy in the 1980s, elected in 1974 as a member of the Federal Council of the Radical Party, between 1978-1982 elected member of the City Council of Trieste, where he attended Law University ) .

[下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场