page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
page 22
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
page 59
page 60
page 61
page 62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page 66
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page 98
page 99
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
page 104
page 105
page 106
page 107
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
page 114
page 115
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124

""peaking to an audience at the ColumbiaUniversity, Nicolas Sarkozy, President ofthe French Republic, warned that if we donot change world governance, we willhave no chance to respond to the conflicts of tomorrow.He referred to the fact that the climate conference inCopenhagen did not deliver a binding agreement as the"caricature of a failure of the method" of globalgovernance.There is not a single country in the world, in the 21stcentury, that can lead the world all by itself. In the20th century it was possible; at the end of World War IIwe could imagine such a power. But in the 21stcentury we must all understand that in order to leadthe world - a world that has become multipolar - wemust accept that strength implies dialogue. The second major area of action for the two of us [MrSarkozy and Mr Obama] is the new world governance.I was in Copenhagen for the environmental summit.Copenhagen represented the failure of a method to thepoint of caricature. How does this work? We have a UNSecurity Council that has a certain number ofpermanent members with veto powers. But the Councilwas defined in the wake of World War II. Do you youngstudents at Columbia know that not a single Africancountry is a permanent member of the SecurityCouncil? [And yet the continent has] a billioninhabitants! Do you know that not a single Arabcountry - [although the Arab world has] about ahundred million inhabitants - is a permanent memberof the Security Council? Do you know that India - witha billion inhabitants, and becoming the world's mostpopulous nation in 30 years' time - is not a permanentmember of the Security Council? That Japan, theworld's second-largest economy, is not a permanentmember of the Security Council? Why? Because 60years ago they lost the war. Is that reasonable? Do youknow that not a single Latin American country is apermanent member of the Security Council?How can anyone expect us to resolve major crises,major wars and major conflicts within the framework ofthe UN without Africa, without three quarters of Asia,without Latin America, without a single Arab country?Is that reasonable? Is that sensible? Is it evenimaginable? Who can believe that?I am told, yes, but they are all members of the UNGeneral Assembly. There are 192 countries in theworld: the G192. So we move from a system at theSecurity Council, where we want to solve problemswithout two thirds of humanity, to a system where thesmallest country can block the agreement of all theothers. The United States of America and Europe mustdemand the reform of world governance to make roomfor the continents of tomorrow, which are entitled togive their opinion. How do you want Brazil or India orAfrica to assume their share of the responsibility for theworld's major conflicts if they are not asked theiropinion? Would you like to be told that you arewelcomed to pay, but as far as your opinion isconcerned, we do not want it? Who can work that way?Who can understand it? That is why, along with GordonBrown, we submitted the text of an interim reform ofworld governance and of the UN Security Council.As the French President, I was a member of the G8.And I say: "It is hard to imagine that the G8 representsanything without China, India, Mexico or SouthAfrica." I am told: "Well, that is not a big deal, they areinvited to the luncheon at the end of the G8 summit."Five representatives of two and a half billion of theworld's inhabitants are invited to cross the globe tocome and eat with us. And we did not foresee that oneMain Picture: Presidentof the French Republic,Nicolas SarkozyRETHINKING WORLD GOVERNANCEHOW CAN ANYONE EXPECTUS TO RESOLVEMAJOR CRISES,MAJOR WARS ANDMAJOR CONFLICTSWITHIN THEFRAMEWORK OFTHE UN WITHOUTAFRICA, WITHOUTTHREE QUARTERSOF ASIA, WITHOUTLATIN AMERICA,WITHOUT A SINGLEARAB COUNTRY?016G8 MEMBER COUNTRIESSNICOLAS SARKOZY,PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC

G8 MEMBER COUNTRIES017day the G5 would be the one refusing to invite the G8,rather than the G8 refusing to invite the G5.My dear friends, I am not saying this because I want tomake myself look good in Africa, Asia or Latin America.I am saying it because if we do not change worldgovernance, we will have no chance to respond to theconflicts of tomorrow. nThe above remarks are extracted from a speech byNicolas Sarkozy, President of the French Republic,delivered at Columbia University on 29 March 2010during the President's official visit to the USA.Source:The French Ministry of European and Foreign Affairs.