Mr. Chairman, we thank the Secretariat for its hard work under your leadership on this gender action plan. We believe this is an area where we believe the OSCE can and should do more -- both to ensure that our own internal practices are correct and that we as an organization assist participating States in implementing OSCE commitments with respect to gender issues. We believe there is plenty of room for progress in this area, in terms of employment standards, employment numbers, field mission activities, and OSCE institution priorities. In Istanbul, we made a commitment to equality of opportunity, which we now need to translate that into reality.

The plan rightly points out that the first priority would be to ensure equality of opportunity and treatment for women within the OSCE itself. We believe the OSCE must lead by example: with hiring and employment practices that help to ensure equal treatment of women. But we as participating States must do even more, because we have to provide the candidates for high-level positions which are more representative. I would add, however, that we need to do this in a context that avoids establishing a quota system. It also want to say that this document needs to reflect greater attention to specific employment standards with respect to sexual harassment, relationships in the workplace, and anti-nepotism and cronyism standards.

We also support increased work in OSCE missions and institutions to promote women's rights within the framework of OSCE commitments.

We believe, however, that it may be more effective to separate these two tracks -- to deal with internal policies on the one hand and with our work to assist participating States with implementation of OSCE commitments on the other hand.

Separating the two could allow us to go forward promptly to put our internal house in order. This should be relatively straightforward and with few budgetary implications. We could then shift the focus of our discussion to what the OSCE as an organization can do to assist participating States, particularly in our field activities.

This action plan is extremely ambitious. We should be realistic and set priorities with what we can actually accomplish. Many of the ideas here have budgetary consequences as well as consequences for the way missions allocate their resources, personnel and programs. These need to be examined individually and on their own merits. If we take on these new tasks—and we probably should—we must ensure that adequate resources are devoted to them.

We also need to be careful to keep our mandates focused. For example, the action plan says, "in promoting the advancement of women, the OSCE should apply the full range of international instruments on equality, non-discrimination and the human rights of women." We believe the OSCE should focus on advancing its own commitments and working with States to implement them.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to throw out for consideration the possible transformation of this document as part of the process we are currently setting underway. Currently, it falls somewhere between an advocacy document and a statement of goals and objectives. I would like to ask if we could use our decision-making process to set the goal of transforming this into a negotiated document which enjoys the consensus support of all OSCE States? If we set a tight timetable for such a process, say 60 days, we could promptly give this effort greater force while avoiding allowing the process to become a means to avoid action.

We look forward to participating actively in the new working group to discuss the action plan in more detail and to translate our commitments into reality.