Mr President, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Today I would like to highlight five topics that are, as it seems to me, important for all of us and for our common approaches to the international agenda.

The first topic is the timing of this meeting as regards the global situation.

The current UN General Assembly session is taking place in a very crucial and uneasy point in time. Without exaggeration, we are living through one of the breaking moments of the modern history. Besides the economic crisis - the first wide-scale crisis of globalisation era - the world development continues to be threatened by regional and local conflicts, terrorism and trans-border crime, food shortage and climate change.

The impact of this crisis continues to be suffered by the majority of the countries of the world, even though the downturn has slowed down. Albeit so far we were able to avoid the worst scenario, the question is still pending: how the huge disbalances and deficits accumulated in the world and national economies amounting to trillions of dollars will be overcome?

The unification agenda has been dictated by life itself. And this dictates the growing demand for the UN as a time tested mechanism of harmonisation of interests of different counties and peoples.

As never before, we are feeling the need for informal collective leadership, increased role of such formats as G8, and recently, G20, as well as other negotiation and mediation fora. These platforms act not against anyone but in favor of advancing converging interests of their participants.

At the morning session the President of the United States spoke and I would like to note an idea brought up by Mr Barack Obama who said that no country is able or should try to dominate others. This idea is absolutely correct. We should agree on common approaches which should be afterwards implemented via various mechanisms, including those of the UN.

Another distinctive feature of the modem time is the increasing role of the regional organisations. They become even more active throughout all the continents. This trend is absolutely consistent with the principles of the UN. Russia, on its part, will continue to strengthen the mechanisms of regional interaction together with its partners across the CIS and in the framework of the SCO and BRIC. These mechanisms help respond collectively to common threats, and mitigate the consequences of the crisis for our peoples and increase sustainability of national economies.

The second point I would like to address is that of the current problems.

Let me dwell on those which cannot be effectively addressed without and beyond the United Nations.

The first one is the insufficient coordination of currently existing mechanisms of world economy governance, inadequacy of their "rules of the game", the gap between the financial markets and the real sector of economy. We need to make joint efforts to establish such financial and economic model that would guarantee everyone from such turmoil in the future.

In fact, nearly all countries have confronted a drop in volumes of production and in the living standard of millions of people. The crisis has exacerbated social problems, it became a trial for the young people at the start of their life, and caused significant growth in unemployment throughout the world including Russia.

A painful blow was delivered to the plans to alleviate poverty. A real threat of disruption of the Millennium Development Goals has manifested itself. We must do our utmost to prevent such a development.

The donor assistance to the countries in need cannot be put off "to the later". The tasks assigned as priority by the world community must be addressed by all means. The arrangements made at the G20 Summits and the UN Conference on world financial and economic crisis and its impact on development must be fulfilled within the timeframes we have set.

The second major task here is to address the issues of global energy security. Three years ago at the St Petersburg G8 Summit, principles of a new legal framework for such cooperation were formulated. The goal is to harmonize the interests of all participants in the energy "chain": suppliers, consumers and transit countries.

Recently, we have detailed these principles and invite everyone to engage in their further constructive discussion. We believe that these discussions should be conducted with active involvement of profile multilateral institutions including the UN family agencies.

The third task that Russia deems important is the throughout strengthening of the United Nations potential. The UN must rationally adapt itself to new world realities. It should also strengthen its influence and preserve its multinational nature and integrity of the UN Charter provisions.

The reform of the UN Security Council is an essential component of its revitalisation. The time has come to speed up the search for a compromise formula of its expansion and increased efficiency of its work.

Another aspect of my address related to disarmament.

A highly challenging task is to move forward the process of multilateral disarmament under the UN auspices. You are aware that positive trends have emerged in overcoming the protracted crisis in this area. The Conference on Disarmament in Geneva has adapted its program of work. Let me mention the Russian-Chinese initiative regarding a treaty on the prevention of the placement of weapons in outer space as well as our proposal to universalise the Russian-American Treaty on the Elimination of the Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles.

Russia will steadily follow the path of verifiable and irreversible reductions in nuclear weapons as an essential element of the reset in our relations with the United States. President Obama and I signed a relevant document in Moscow last July. A mandate for further negotiations was agreed upon - to elaborate a legally binding treaty. This treaty should replace the Treaty on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms, which expires this December.

I would like to emphasise the objective relationship between strategic offensive and defensive arms. There is another aspect to it relating to the recently announced adjustments in the US plans of antimissile defense system development. As I said to President Obama at our meeting earlier today and as I would like to reiterate now, such decision was, in our view, a constructive step in the right direction that deserved the positive response of the international community. We are prepared to engage in a thorough discussion of the US proposals and relevant Russia’s initiatives regarding cooperation in this area to reach generally acceptable arrangements.

The real progress in nuclear disarmament is impossible without addressing such matters of principle as NMD and non-nuclear SOA potential. I expect that the work on a new treaty will be fully consistent with relevant provisions of the joint document endorsed by the US President and me during our meeting in Moscow.

We believe that other nuclear states should join the disarmament efforts of Russia and the United States. It is not necessary for them to wait for further progress in the Russian-American disarmament process. We can start elaborating in advance acceptable and practical arrangements that take into account the differences in the size of nuclear potentials. For instance, we can use as an example the decisions of the 1921-1922 Washington Conference on the naval armaments when the participants agreed on the maximum size of their fleets without trying to achieve their equal levels. If we use the same approach today based on the actual volumes of nuclear arsenals we will give the rest of the world a necessary signal of certainty that the unaccounted numbers will be added to the "equation" of strategic stability.

The 2010 NPT Review Conference will focus on the issues of nuclear disarmament, strengthening of the nuclear non-proliferation regime and peaceful atom. We are looking forward to its success.

The Global Nuclear Security Summit scheduled for next April will provide a good opportunity for a more detailed discussion of these issues.

We have also agreed with the US Administration on joint steps for further progress in such aspects of nuclear security as prevention of nuclear terrorism, and expanding the access for all good faith NPT Members to the achievements of peaceful atom.

We call for collective cooperation on these matters.

In order to reach a common understanding on such important issues we must engage all nations and influential international organisations into the above-mentioned negotiation processes.

The international community has at its disposal such well-tested measures for increasing the level of regional and international security as nuclear free zones. In particular, there is an urgent task, an absolutely urgent task of establishing a zone free of all types of WMDs and their means of delivery in the Middle East. This is a long-standing issue. And the 1995 NPT Review Conference had adopted a relevant resolution in this regard.

Russia as a member of the Quartet of international mediators on the Middle East settlement consistently supports the efforts aimed at strengthening the nuclear non-proliferation regime in the Middle East. Russia has made specific proposals in the framework of the NPT review process to search for generally acceptable ways of implementing the relevant NPT decisions. All countries of the region need to take an active stance on this issue and demonstrate their willingness to ensure a real progress in establishing a nuclear free zone.

We also need to speed up the work towards a mechanism to ensure peace and security in North-East Asia. Russia made its proposals in this regard to the participants in the Six-Party Talks. Under the present circumstances this task becomes even more urgent.

Concern number four on our agenda is regional conflicts and regional security.

We intend to continue to participate in the search for efficient options of settlement for regional conflicts.

We are convinced that the use of force can only aggravate this situation. This was demonstrated by a reckless attempt of the Georgian authorities to resolve the problems in their relations with South Ossetia by military means.

Then, in August 2008, we were very close to the situation when a local armed conflict could grow into a full-scale war. I am certain that this is understood by everyone present here and in order to avoid repetition of such developments we need to have clear and effective mechanisms to implement the principle of indivisibility of security. Without it we will not be able to step over the legacy of the past era, to overcome its instincts and prejudices. Moreover, the irresponsible political regimes should not have any opportunity whatsoever to cause disputes among other counties.

The role and place of the modern nations in ensuring global security is one of the most relevant topics. We have repeatedly witnessed situations when the problems emerging on the territory of individual states acquired regional or even global character. Incompetence and inefficiency of national government institutions can provoke consequences that represent risk for many countries. Of course, the prevention of such consequences is a complex issue. But we must think it over together as well.

These issues were at the focus of discussion in the Russian city of Yaroslavl where a representative international conference was held recently. The outcome of this discussion is that the future belongs to the smart politics. The current global crisis is not only the crisis of economy but also the crisis of ideas caused by reaching a "critical mass" of accumulated outdated policies and development models.

Russia has come up with the initiative to sign a European security treaty and proposed a fresh look at this problem so as to abandon the outdated policies. The Cold War is over, as we all believe. But the world has not become more secure. Today we need genuinely modern solutions. We also need clear legal framework for already existing political commitments. We need no declarations, or appeals, or empty talk, but really clear legal frameworks which will, among other points, strengthen one of the principles of the international law, the principle of not ensuring one’s own security at the expense of security of others.

Our initiative concerns the Euro-Atlantic space. However, its key provision on indivisibility of security is a universal principle applicable to all regions of the world that is fully consistent with the letter and spirit of the UN Charter. The principle of indivisibility of security should become an integral part of the international law.

Now, the final point I would like to raise here, the values.

Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues,

The protection of human rights and interests, universal application of generally recognised norms and principles in this area should become a basis for strengthening confidence and stability in the international relations.

We all share the values that are rooted in the norms of morality, religions, customs and traditions. I am referring to such essential concepts as the right to live, tolerance to dissent, responsibility towards one’s family, charity and compassion. This is the basis for both the daily life of people and relations among nations.

However, the world is regretfully witnessing growing nationalist moods, numerous manifestations of religious intolerance and animosity. Therefore, we consider it to be extremely useful to establish a High Level Group on interreligious dialogue under the UNESCO Director-General. This is especially relevant on the eve of 2010 declared by the UN as the year for Rapprochement of Cultures.

And finally, I cannot but touch upon one more topic as I stand on this podium, the topic of special significance to the Russian people and to great number of people throughout the world. Next year we are going to celebrate the 65th anniversary of the end of the World War II.

Russia made a proposal to adopt a relevant UN GA resolution and hold in May next year its special session to commemorate all victims of that war. We cannot allow its horrible lessons to be forgotten.

However, from time to time we see the neo-Nazi organisations raising their head. Racial, national or ethnic crimes are being committed. Attempts are being made to whitewash the Nazism, to deny Holocaust, revise the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal.

I am convinced that firm and joint resistance to manifestations of neo-Nazism and attempts to revise the results of the World War II enshrined in the UN Charter should remain a priority task for the United Nations.

Ladies and gentlemen,

The creation of the UN has become one of the main achievements of the world community in the 20th century. The UN and its activities are a true symbol of the 20th century. There is no and cannot be an alternative to this organisation and its fruitful efforts. We have no right to forget that the UN possesses a unique international legitimacy. And we all must preserve and strengthen this shared wealth of the peoples of the world.

Thank you for your attention.

Dmitry Medvedev