Preventing future genocide and protecting refugees
⊙ 연설배경
이 연설은 '난민의 어머니'라고 불린 오가다 사다코 전 UN 고등난민 판무관이 1997년 4월30일 미국 워싱턴 홀로코스트 기념관에서 행한 연설이다.
그는 이 연설에서 세계적 난민을 돕기를 호소하고 있다.
⊙ 오가타 사다코
1927년 일본 도쿄 출생했다.
일본 세이신(聖心)여대를 졸업했으며 미국 캘리포니아주립 버클리대에서 박사학위를 받았다.
1976년 일본 유엔대표부 공사와 특명전권공사를 역임했으며 1990년부터 유엔난민고등판무관을 지냈다.
세계적인 난민 구호활동에 적극 참여했다.
⊙ 원문읽기
I am honoured to join you this evening in this impressive monument to memory and to vigilance.
Some years ago I went to ①Majdanek，an experience I shall never forget.
The fields，dwellings，collected remnants of shoes and glasses － were the most sobering reminder of life lost.
Today，I see again the haunting images of destruction and despair.
They reinforce me in my task as ②United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to protect and assist those who manage to escape from persecution and war.
This task is as rewarding as it is difficult.
I therefore need the help of countries like the United Sates and of people like you.
My Office is responsible for over 26 million refugees and other uprooted victims of wars and persecution.
I am fortunate to have a relatively small but superb staff of 5,400 committed to defending the rights and saving the lives of refugees in over 120 countries，from Armenia to Zaire，from Bosnia to Guatemala.
학습 노트로 저장하기
이 기사와 등장한 경제 용어 정의를 PDF 한 장에 정리해 가져갑니다. 비회원은 예시 카드 · 가입하면 어떤 기사든 저장
Quakers，Puritans，Catholics from Ireland，Jews who fled the Inquisition，and in this century people from central Europe，Latin America and Southeast Asia.
America has been and continues to be a life line for oppressed people from all over the world.
Today's system of international refugee protection was born out of the Holocaust.
At the end of the Second World War，there were millions of refugees and displaced persons in Europe.
One of the major challenges to the newly－created United Nations was finding homes for these survivors，who were ③traumatized and packed into crowded camps but could not return to their former homes.
It soon became clear that a massive program of resettlement to new countries of asylum was the only answer.
America was such a country.
You opened your doors and received numerous victims of the Holocaust.
Despite their painful personal histories，these resettled refugees created successful new lives.
Some of them or their children may be in this audience.
Their success is an eloquent testimony to the resilience of the human spirit.
I also salute the many voluntary agencies who helped the refugees of the past and are helping the refugees of today.
At the same time the immediate problem of European refugees was being addressed in the years after the war，it became apparent that a new international system had to be created to establish human rights and to protect refugees.
One lesson drawn from the Holocaust was that a government which starts out by terrorizing its own citizens will progress to threatening its neighbours.
States recognized that human rights were a cornerstone of international peace and security and pledged to promote them.
As part of this new commitment to human rights，the right to seek and enjoy asylum was included.
The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights，which owes so much to Eleanor Roosevelt，proclaims that right.
Refugee protection was reinforced by the Refugee Convention of 1951.
It enshrines the principle that no one shall be returned to a country where his or her life or freedom is threatened.
The World Jewish Congress played an important role in drafting the Convention，which today is subscribed to by 134 countries around the globe.
I have dwelt on the origins of my Office for some of the same reasons we remember the Holocaust; to commemorate the millions of lives lost，to celebrate the refugees that have been saved and to illuminate the choices we must make today.
The main question is; have we learnt sufficiently from the past？
First，are we doing enough to prevent new genocides？
Second，are we doing enough to make sure at least that those escaping from genocidal situations find safety and protection？
You may find my questions rhetorical. Indeed they are.
Looking at the killing fields of Cambodia，the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and the genocide in Rwanda，I am afraid we have not done enough.
I could make this list much longer，but I have deliberately selected the worst cases of crimes against humanity，the consequences of which my Office is grappling with at the end of this century.
As we all know，genocide，characterized by the intent to destroy national，ethnic or religious groups，is the most violent and pernicious form of human rights violations.
Yet in the decades since the Holocaust，we have not been able to prevent or halt even the most brutal forms of violence against whole groups of people.
It is true that the international human rights movement and especially the end of the Cold War have brought progress.
The allied intervention in northern Iraq protected the Kurds there.
The humanitarian interventions in Somalia and Bosnia saved people from starvation.
In many other conflicts United Nations peace keepers prevented new outbreaks of violence.
Numerous life saving relief operations were mounted.
All these attempts were unthinkable some decades ago.
They are very positive，but not enough.
Why did it take until August 1995 before the people of Sarajevo and other besieged cities in Bosnia were saved by NATO and peace was pushed through？
Is neutrality morally and practically viable in the face of widespread atrocities？
Why was no country prepared to step into Rwanda at the height of the genocide in 1994？
Why was the Multinational Force，that had been authorized to come to the rescue of hundreds of thousands of refugees in eastern Zaire，canceled in December of last year？
Thousands of people have perished in eastern Zaire since then.
The answer to these questions seems clear.
It is because the major powers perceived no strategic interests or because their interests did not converge.
In that sense the situation does not fundamentally differ from the Cold War years when political interests，stemming from ideological confrontation，were a cause for not halting the killing fields of Cambodia.
In my view there can be no true globalization，if it is only economic，if we do not even reach out to halt genocidal situations.
While respecting cultural diversity，true globalization means universal respect for human rights，of the positive side of man，of the responsibility to provide protection against evil.
That lies at the heart of refugee protection.
Now，we have to take it one step further and be prepared to halt the worst evil at its source.
That is my hope at the threshold of the next millennium.
▶ Words & Idioms
① Majdanek : 나치 유태수용소가 있었던 폴란드 남동부 마을.
② United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees : 유엔 고등난민 판무관
