Let me begin by congratulating
you, Sir, upon your election to the presidency of the forty-
eighth session of the General Assembly.
I feel particularly privileged and honoured to address
the General Assembly on behalf of a people that struggled
for half a century to regain its fundamental human and
national rights and that, despite the outright military victory
it won, took the unprecedented step of organizing a free and
fair referendum so as to join the community of independent
States on the basis of its freely expressed wish and on solid
legal grounds.
As I speak here today, I cannot help but remember the
appeals we sent year in and out to the General Assembly
and the States Members of the United Nations, describing
the plight of our people and asking for legitimate sympathy,
support and recognition. We appealed to the United Nations
not only in its capacity as a representative of the
international community, but also because of its special
responsibility to Eritrea. For it was the United Nations that
decided in 1950, at the beginning of the cold war, to deny
the colonized people of Eritrea their right to
self-determination, thereby sacrificing their national and
human rights on the altar of the strategic interests of the
super-Powers.
In adopting that resolution, the United Nations affirmed
that it remained an international instrument which the
General Assembly could be seized of at any time. But for
the next 41 years, as a brutal war of aggression was
conducted against the Eritrean people, initially with the
active support of the United States and later with a much
worse and massive involvement of the Soviet Union, and
despite the repeated appeals of the Eritrean people, the
United Nations refused to raise its voice in the defence of a
people whose future it had unjustly decided and whom it had
pledged to protect. Not once in 41 years did Eritrea, scene
of the longest war in Africa, and victim of some of the
grossest violations of human rights, figure in the agenda of
the United Nations.
This deafening silence pained our people. It also gave
a free hand to the aggressors, thereby prolonging our
suffering and increasing the sacrifices we had to make. But
it neither shook our resolve nor undermined our belief in the
justness of our cause and the inevitability of our victory. As
an Eritrean proverb says: "The rod of truth may become
thinner but it cannot be broken." Indeed, justice has finally
prevailed. This is a source of hope and happiness not only
for the Eritrean people, but for all those who cherish justice
and peace.
While we rejoice at the peace and freedom that have
been attained and the promising prospects that lie ahead, we
are confronted with the reality of a devastated country and
population. The extent of the physical and economic
destruction visited on our country, in terms of infrastructure,
industry, agriculture, education and health services, as well
as the more painful human losses - the death of over
150,000 people, the exile of a quarter of the population,
Forty-eighth session - 30 September l993 9
massive displacement, and over 100,000 disabled and
orphaned - are appalling by any standard, especially when
measured against the meagre resources and small size of our
population.
Formidable as our problems are, we are confident that
we can and will rebuild our devastated country and provide
a decent life for ourselves. It is our firm conviction that
outside assistance, no matter how generous, cannot of itself
solve our problems. Ultimately, deliverance will depend on
our own efforts, on the mobilization and efficient utilization
of our resources. But as we start to clear the rubble and
pick up the pieces after three decades of war and destruction,
we find that our resources are too limited for the awesome
task of rehabilitation and jump-starting our economy. We
cannot help but ask: Will the United Nations and the
international community come to our assistance this time or
will our pleas once again go unheeded?
At this critical juncture of its history, Eritrea needs and
deserves international support and assistance, not only
because the United Nations and the international community
bear special responsibility for Eritrea, but also because it is
a test case for the United Nations "Agenda for Peace" and
the whole concept of peace-building. Eritrea has not only
secured peace and stability; it has made the rare achievement
of establishing warm relations of cooperation with its former
enemy, Ethiopia. And it is tackling the task of
reconstruction with popular support and participation, with
commitment and determination, with sound and flexible
policies, with prudent and efficient utilization of limited
resources, and with a demonstrated readiness to promote
regional understanding and cooperation.
Unfortunately, the response of the United Nations and
the international community so far has not been encouraging.
Though the active involvement of the United Nations in the
referendum was generally commendable, United Nations
contributions to the Eritrean referendum - one of the most
successful electoral processes in which the United Nations
has ever been involved - was less than $2 million, a meagre
sum compared to the tens of millions of dollars devoted to
similar exercises, many of which were dismal failures.
Similarly, the response of the international community to the
programme for the repatriation of half a million Eritrean
refugees from the Sudan fell far short of reasonable
expectations, and the Government has found no alternative
but to start the programme regardless of funds and expected
problems. Eritrea has also embarked on a crucial
demobilization programme - it has demobilized close to one
third of its 90,000-man army in the first phase - without
United Nations or other contribution. It had to cut back
some of its rehabilitation and development projects and
borrow money to finance this first phase.
In our efforts at mobilizing international resources, we
have repeatedly been met with such excuses as "a lack of
funds", "competing demands", "more pressing priorities" and
"donor fatigue". There well may be some truth in all of this.
And we are appreciative of the constraints and commendable
efforts of some donors. But, I believe, we cannot and
should not hesitate to acknowledge that, by and large, the
international aid programme is deeply flawed, unfair, unjust
and ill-structured to respond to the vital needs of recipient
communities. Assistance and the amounts of assistance
appear to be decided, not on the basis of need or the
capacity to put the assistance to good use, but - even after
the proclamation of the end of the cold war - on the basis of
the interests and agendas of donors. Moreover, the
international community tends to be more responsive to
putting out fires than to preventing them, and once the fires
are put out it often turns its back on the smouldering
combustible remains.
One of the most disquieting features of the present
international situation is the marginalization of the entire
continent of Africa. Every indicator shows that Africa is
sliding back and being left behind, which results in
intolerable poverty, suffering and desperation for millions of
its people. There is no denying that the onus of the
responsibility for these problems falls first and foremost on
us Africans. But, I believe, the international community
must squarely face the fact that it also bears responsibility
for Africa’s plight. Many of the dictators who have sown so
much havoc and suffering were in fact brought to power and
sustained during the years of the cold war by sections of the
international community. Perhaps more significant is the
fact that the now discredited economic policies and failed
projects were generally designed and approved by
international donors and implemented under the direction of
an army of foreign experts and advisers.
In our present highly interlinked world, Africa’s
marginalization, the poverty and desperation of its people, of
its youth, cannot be walled in within the continent’s
boundaries. They are bound to threaten global prosperity
and stability. The frustration and resentment that continue
to swell and may well explode must be defused in time.
Once again Africa must seize its own destiny. Its people
and leaders must tap deep into their human and material
resources and come up with the wisdom, strategy and
commitment to lift Africa from the mire. But as they set out
on this difficult road the international community needs to
come to their assistance, not with hand-outs that only
10 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
increase dependency, not with the familiar packages and
projects that have gone down the drain, not with
preconceived formulas and attitudes of "We know what is
best", but in a spirit of partnership dedicated to helping
Africa to stand on its own feet and contribute to the
enrichment of human life and the protection of the
environment.
Of course, not everything in Africa has been bleak.
Just as gross human failure is not limited to Africa - witness
events in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Soviet Union
and elsewhere - Africa has its share of positive and uplifting
developments and successes. We are following with much
interest the determined and promising efforts of several
African countries, both at the individual country level and
within a regional context. Despite the neglect and inequities
of the international community, many African peoples are
making a determined assault on poverty and social injustice.
In our part of the continent, Eritrea and Ethiopia have
already started mutually beneficial economic cooperation,
and, together with the other countries of the Horn, are
working to set up a regional mechanism to foster peace and
cooperation. We strongly believe all of the many positive
developments in Africa should be duly recognized.
In view of the positive developments in the Horn of
Africa, the tragedy that has gripped Somalia has been
profoundly disturbing. As the bloodletting among our
Somali brothers assumed harrowing proportions, and at a
time when many were hesitating, we strongly advocated the
constructive intervention of the international community,
under the umbrella of the United Nations, to save lives and
help extricate Somalia from the destruction it was heading
for. Despite our opposition in principle to external military
intervention, we realized early on that the extraordinary
situation in Somalia demanded extraordinary measures.
It was therefore with great relief that we welcomed the
decision of the United States Administration to intervene in
Somalia. Encouraged, we sought - individually and in
conjunction with our regional partners - to ensure that the
intervention would be guided by clear and comprehensive
security, and humanitarian and political objectives. And we
did not hesitate to share our views on the size, type and
length of stay of the intervention force needed for the
success of the mission. But unfortunately our views were
not heeded, although we were, and still are, better placed to
understand and work in the realities of neighbouring
Somalia.
Be that as it may, we recognize and appreciate the
achievements of the international intervention in Somalia.
The improvement of the humanitarian situation and the
March 1993 Addis Ababa Accords on national reconciliation
are major steps forward. At the same time, the worsening
security situation in Mogadishu and the increasing toll in
human lives, including women and children, have cast a long
shadow on the intervention in Somalia. Repeated mistakes
in handling the situation have led some people openly to call
for an immediate end to the intervention.
It is our conviction that a precipitate withdrawal of
United States troops - which we strongly warned against
from the beginning - would not only signal a lack of United
States commitment to the intervention, but would eventually
make the position of the United Nations Operation in
Somalia (UNOSOM II) untenable. This would plunge
Somalia into a catastrophe much worse than the anarchy that
prompted the intervention in the first place. We therefore
urge the United States and the international community at
large to stay the course in Somalia and to shoulder their
responsibility to the Somali people in the hour of their
greatest need. We also urge them to review, frankly and
dispassionately, the intervention to date, build on the
successes and achievements and, more importantly, admit
and correct mistakes.
We sincerely believe that the countries of the region,
whose role has so far been deliberately or otherwise
neglected, can make a constructive contribution to the
international effort. Consulting them informally every once
in a while, as has been the case in the past, is clearly not
enough. They need to become part of the process in a more
meaningful and formalized way, as it concerns and affects
them directly and more than anyone outside the region.
The advent of the new State of Eritrea happily
coincided with the end of the cold war, that era of
super-Power rivalry that caused so much human misery and
led to the virtual paralysis of the United Nations. Like the
rest of humanity, we place much hope on the new era, on
the prospects of an enhanced role for the United Nations, a
role that would make it truly representative of "We, the
peoples of the world". And yet we have no illusions that a
new, just and equitable world order has dawned. We see too
many old habits and practices - inside the United Nations
and outside it - to entertain any illusions. Although we hope
for successes, we see that the failures of United Nations
initiatives far outnumber any of its successes. Injustice
endures within nations and between nations.
We are awed by the challenges that continue to face
humanity and are deeply aware of our minuscule capabilities.
Still, Eritrea is determined to make its own small
Forty-eighth session - 30 September l993 11
contribution to the betterment of human life in its own
corner of the world.


I should like to pay tribute to the wisdom of the
Assembly in electing Ambassador Insanally to preside over
this session, thus highlighting the outstanding role of his
country, the Republic of Guyana, and beyond it that of Latin
America in international relations.
I also wish to congratulate the members of the Bureau
and to extend to the outgoing President, Mr. Stoyan Ganev,
our warm congratulations on the excellent work done during
his mandate.
I should also like to reaffirm the full confidence of
Côte d’Ivoire in the Secretary-General ,
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali. President Houphouët-Boigny,
who has met him several times this year, greatly appreciates
his impartiality and ability and his great devotion to his
duties to the international community.
Finally, my delegation congratulates and welcomes the
States admitted since the last session to our Organization,
which is thus moving ever closer to its objective of
universality.
The substantial transformations that have taken place in
the world since 1989 have given rise to profound changes in
international relations. All the points of reference that
allowed us to analyse these relations with certitude have
disappeared. The new atmosphere of confidence and the
spirit of understanding, and at times of solidarity, that
prevail in relations between States and peoples give grounds
for hope and the rapid advent of a new international order
that will be more stable, more just and more able to meet the
aspirations of peoples for shared happiness in a world that
hungers for bread and thirsts for truth. Today’s world is
moving towards a convergence around certain values,
including the primacy of respect for human rights, the
imperative need for democracy, development and
disarmament and the leading role of law in international
relations. Such development can only give rise to great
hopes by opening up the possibility of correcting past
mistakes, sharing the benefits of progress with all and
ensuring the fullness of peace.
With the beginning of real disarmament and the recent
signing of the Convention banning chemical weapons, the
relationship between war and peace is today undergoing a
clear qualitative change. Unfortunately, however, we must
recognize that the international situation is far from
satisfying our hopes for justice and lasting peace.
Indeed, the collapse of the bipolar world seems,
paradoxically, to have opened the door for new threats to
international peace and security. The accumulation of poorly
bandaged wounds, blind ambitions and feelings of rivalry
and hatred built up over decades has re-emerged in various
regions of the world in the form of extremely devastating
and brutal fratricidal conflicts. Thus, Europe, whose level of
socio-economic development did not prevent it from
destroying itself twice in less than thirty years, is today still
in the grip of a terrible conflict in the former Yugoslavia.
That anachronistic and indescribably barbarous war has
justified the creation, for the first time within the United
Nations system, of an international penal tribunal, under
Security Council resolution 827 (1993). So too, Africa,
pushed aside by the disappearance of the bipolar world, has
been torn by numerous internal conflicts with unfortunate
consequences for the entire continent, which needs, rather,
stability and peace within African States, between African
States and between Africa and the rest of the world in order
to deal with the imperative needs of its development and
economic integration.
The situation in Somalia continues to be of great
concern, despite the presence of the United Nations peace-
keeping forces, for the spectre of anarchy, intolerance in all
its forms and violence continues to hover over that country.
We hope that the tireless and commendable efforts of the
international community to re-establish peace in that country
will, within the allotted time, lead to a positive conclusion
and the reconciliation of all its sons and daughters.
We also hope to see very soon a resolution of the
conflict in Liberia. Recent developments in that brotherly
and neighbourly country, which led to the conclusion of the
Cotonou Agreement on 25 July 1993, tend to make us more
optimistic about the rapid restoration of peace.
Côte d’Ivoire has always wished fervently to see the
re-establishment of peace in Liberia and has, in addition,
acted along these lines, as the Yamassoukro Accords attest.
We are gratified by the formation in that country of a
transitional government in the form of a State council
entrusted with the organization of general elections. We
welcome the firm determination of the political elements in
Liberia to work for the ultimate collapse of the wall of
hatred and enmity between Liberian brothers and thus to lay
the foundation for a future of peace and prosperity for all.
In this context it is urgent that the international community
commit itself further to finding the necessary means for the
rapid deployment of new contingents to reinforce the
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
Military Observer Group (ECOMOG) in Liberia to promote
the effective implementation of the provisions of the
Cotonou Agreement, particularly with regard to the entry
into force of the Council of State, disarmament and the
cantonment of factions. It is equally urgent that the
international community come to the assistance, within the
framework of Chapter VIII of the Charter, of States or
regional organizations, participating in peace-keeping efforts
in Liberia. It is also necessary that the question of the
delivery of humanitarian assistance be rapidly resolved to
allow for the regular supply of those regions of Liberia
where famine is raging in order to prevent the incursions of
armed bands in search of food that attack border villages and
hamlets. Here we should like to congratulate all the non-
governmental organizations that are making every effort,
with courage, tenacity and dedication, to save human lives
in that strife-torn country.
It is also fitting to welcome the conclusion of the
International Conference for the Protection of War Victims
held at Geneva from 3 August to 2 September this year,
organized by the Swiss Government and the International
Committee of the Red Cross. That Conference allowed for
a reaffirmation of the provisions of the major treaties of
international humanitarian law aimed at the protection of
populations during armed conflicts and for sensitizing public
opinion concerning the valid bases of those provisions and
the plight of civilian victims.
Concerning Angola, progress made at the outset in the
application of the Bicesse peace agreements in May 1991
now needs to be maintained, and efforts must be made and
encouraged, both in the Security Council and in African
forums, for the achievement of a just and lasting peace.
Côte d’Ivoire knows only two paths for the settlement
of conflicts: resort to force or resort to negotiation, that is
to say, dialogue. Recent events in the international arena
have consecrated the value of dialogue, which has always
been advocated by President Félix Houphouët-Boigny, for
the peaceful settlement of all conflicts. They clearly indicate
how dialogue, conducted by responsible individuals, can,
regardless of the nature of the conflict, serve as an extremely
useful instrument for peace.
In South Africa, the recent developments in the political
situation are most encouraging, despite the uncertainties of
the moment resulting from the escalation of violence. For
this reason we welcome with satisfaction the joint statement
of the political parties of South Africa concerning their
intention to organize free and democratic elections in April
1994. We also welcome the establishment of an executive
transition council that, for the first time in three centuries of
white domination, after the first multiracial elections will
involve the black majority in political matters.
30 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
We send out an urgent appeal to those elements
opposed to democratic changes in South Africa to refrain
from acts likely to jeopardize the sensitive negotiation
process, which would delay South Africa’s return to the
family of nations. We welcome the new spirit inspiring the
South African leaders, particularly Mr. De Klerk and Mr.
Mandela, a spirit that led to the historic request made by the
African National Congress (ANC) to the international
community to lift the economic and diplomatic sanctions
slapped on South Africa. We also welcome the agreement
reached between the South African and Namibian
Governments concerning the transfer of the port of Walvis
Bay and the surrounding islands to the jurisdiction of the
Namibian Government.
In the Middle East we can finally discern, after so
many years of war and built-up hatred, the prospect of a
settlement to the Arab-Israeli conflict. The mutual
recognition of Israel and the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO) and the signing in Washington on 13
September of the historic agreement on Gaza and Jericho
convince us that the process begun in the Middle East is
now irreversible, despite the obstacles that might arise on the
road to peace.
This is the moment to hail the courage, lucidity and
self-abnegation of the high Israeli and Palestinian officials
who have risen above circumstances and resolutely chosen
peace. Their ardour in working for peace after such a
lengthy period of war has been recognized and saluted by
the international community. It is quite fitting that the
members of the jury for the Houphouët-Boigny Peace Prize,
established by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization, unanimously awarded the Prize for
1993 to those illustrious leaders of Israel and Palestine.
As for the situation in the Gulf, where peace is still
precarious, we reiterate our unswerving support for the full
implementation of all resolutions on this conflict, particularly
Security Council resolution 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, as
well as resolution 833 (1993). We call on the parties
concerned to respect these provisions. We believe that this
resolution is a major asset in assuring security and stability
in the region.
In Asia, we welcome the outcome of the conflict in
Cambodia, where the United Nations undertook one of the
most ambitious and complex peace-keeping operations it had
ever conducted. We congratulate the members of the United
Nations Secretariat and the States that supplied various
contingents for the success of this operation, which allows
world public opinion fully to appreciate this other activity of
the United Nations which is too often ignored.
If the conflicts born of the cold war are now beginning
to find solutions, it is none the less clear that we have
entered upon a period of uncertainty, questioning and
instability, with the re-emergence of a number of secondary
conflicts that had been effectively frozen or repressed during
the cold war and that are essentially of ethnic, tribal or
religious origin, as illustrated by the wrenching events in
Nagorny-Karabakh, Abkhazia, and the former Yugoslavia.
It is becoming clear as well that in today’s world there are
fewer and fewer identifiable enemies and more and more
problems that are very difficult to identify.
The United Nations remains the indispensable recourse
for confronting these conflicts. Here, we solemnly wish to
state our full support for the proposals of the Secretary-
General contained in "An Agenda for Peace".
The strengthening of preventive action by the United
Nations must prompt us to pursue the process of
restructuring and revitalization of its bodies to allow it to
cope with these new challenges. Given the dominant role of
the Security Council in peace-keeping and international
security, the question of equitable representation in that body
should allow for a lengthy reflection so as to find a solution
acceptable to all - in this case, the expansion of the Security
Council to accord with the growth in the number of our
Organization’s Members and in the complexity of the
problems submitted to it.
Such an expansion should be based on rigorous and
objective criteria which we need to define together, bearing
in mind the imperative need for effectiveness in the taking
and implementation of Security Council decisions. The
United Nations, as a reflection of universal values, cannot
stand outside the trend towards democratization which is
sweeping across the world.
The World Conference on Human Rights, held in
Vienna last June, was of pivotal importance, allowing for a
reaffirmation of human rights. If we can rightly be gratified
by the fact that this Conference recognized the right to
development as a fundamental human right to the disastrous
economic situation in numerous regions of the world, and
particularly in Africa, should remind us here of the need for
a general awareness of the fact that human rights cannot
flourish in a context of poverty and misery.
In looking back over the economic situation, we note
that global economic activity in 1992 was characterized by
a slow recovery, growing by only 1.1 per cent. This weak
recovery is primarily the result of a moderate growth in the
global production of the industrialized countries, as well as
a noticeable drop in the total production of those countries
which formerly had planned economies. Unfortunately,
these trends continued in 1993, and thus we are seeing a rise
in unemployment and the emergence of serious social
tensions throughout the world.
These not very optimistic elements observed in the
industrialized countries can only have negative consequences
for other countries, particularly those of the developing
world, among which the African countries remain the most
vulnerable.
We can therefore hardly be surprised that in the last
United Nations Development Programme report on human
development in 173 countries, 41 of the 53 African countries
are among the 50 last countries in the classification. These
pessimistic conclusions were reaffirmed in the reports of the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
We are aware of the causes of this serious recession.
Aside from the drop in economic activities in numerous
industrialized countries, those causes are the collapse of
commodity prices - for minerals, mining and agriculture -
and the subsequent exacerbation of the foreign-debt burden
on our economies, which in turn limits our investment
capability. Additional causes that should be noted are the
general inadequacies in economic management as described
in the World Bank study entitled "The African Capacity-
Building Initiative". All these factors taken together have
led to the present crisis in our countries, manifested above
all by a drastic drop in economic growth and an intolerable
rise in unemployment, particularly among our young people
- the driving force of our countries.
The image this brief sketch of the African economic
and social climate projects is hardly encouraging. In the
face of such a situation, we believe that prospects for seeing
the advocated solutions succeed lie primarily in a consistent
approach to them.
Our States have had the political courage to embark
upon deep-rooted economic reforms and our peoples have
progressively become aware of the need for the adjustment
effort. Thus in Côte d’Ivoire, for several years now, we
have been implementing a set of measures of economic
policy aimed at creating the conditions for economic
recovery. The stabilization phase of this process has
primarily tended towards putting our public finances on a
sounder footing, which is basic to the revival of our
economy and its integration into a larger collective within
the region and throughout the continent.
The extension of the democratic process in Africa is
evident. But it is also clear that there can be no democracy
without economic development, nor genuine sustainable
development without democracy. One of the primary
conditions of this development for our countries is just
remuneration in primary commodities - mineral, mining and
agricultural.
Statistics show that Africa represents only 2 per cent of
the value of world trade, and that inter-African trade
represents only 5 per cent of the value of the region’s total
external trade. These data remind us once again of the
economic urgency for Africa to achieve genuine economic
integration within the continent.
In West Africa, this exercise has already begun, in
particular within the Economic Community of West African
States (ECOWAS), whose treaty has just been revised, and
above all within the West African Monetary Union
(WAMU), with the upcoming establishment of the West
African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU).
From our point of view, such an exercise in structuring
and harmonizing the institutional and legal framework of
economic integration should be carried out and should
rapidly be extended to all regions of Africa in order to pave
the way for the building of the African Common Market,
which we all so wish to see.
It is also appropriate to note the great hopes we place
on the establishment of the African Import-Export Bank,
whose primary objectives will be to increase the level of
African exports and of inter-African trade. We should also
note the significant progress made in laying the groundwork
for an expanded cooperation between our States in several
areas, such as those of business law, the insurance industry,
and the establishment of a body for regional statistics.
We wish here particularly to emphasize the extremely
important role played in the area of financing by the African
Development Bank in implementing the objectives of
integration in Africa. We must hail the will this institution
demonstrates in its efforts to establish positive correlations
between actions implemented within the framework of
structural adjustment programmes and the objectives of
regional economic integration. This step by the African
Development Bank affects the central elements of the
development strategies of African countries.
32 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
It goes without saying that such integration can be
implemented only in an environment which is one of peace,
stability and security. We therefore welcomed the creation,
within the OAU and ECOWAS, of machinery for the
prevention, management and settlement of conflicts.
We must recognize that our efforts at regional
integration will remain futile as long as the global economic
environment remains unfavourable and as long as our
partners in the developed countries lack the necessary
political will resolutely to tackle our countries’ problems in
this interdependent world of solidarity.
At a time when the marginalization of Africa is
increasing, we welcome the positive initiative of the
Government of Japan to hold, several days from now in
Tokyo, the International Conference on African
Development, which will allow the developed countries to
better grasp the specific problems of Africa.
We must acknowledge, however, that any assistance
offered by the international community will be only a small
contribution, given the magnitude of the development needs
of the African continent. This assistance will be effective
only if consistent and lasting solutions are found to our
problems within the framework of an international
cooperation even further based on interdependence and
solidarity, in particular in the areas of international trade,
foreign debt, the environment, the war on drugs, and the
important question of raw materials, to avoid confining our
countries to the exclusive role of purveyors of raw materials
and allow them also, through the transformation of these
products, to become consumers in trade relations.
More specifically, the Rio Conference, by adopting
Agenda 21, reached a consensus on the planetary level
concerning the need for immediate and bold international
cooperation in the area of sustainable development and the
environment. In applying Agenda 21, Côte d’Ivoire, for its
part, has established regional environmental committees to
draw up its white book on the environment, which will help
it zero in on the objectives laid down in the Agenda.
In this context, the elaboration of an international
convention on the struggle against desertification is of
critical importance for Africa, and we continue to place our
hopes in the work of the Intergovernmental Negotiating
Committee on that convention.
Ultimately, given the importance and complexity of the
areas affecting the question of the environment, it is
indispensable for the international community to openly
support the development efforts of the African countries by
granting them adequate financial resources and by helping
them strengthen their scientific and technical capacities.
Concerning the question of drugs and its financial
ramifications, the gravity of these issues requires that the
international community give them serious thought. The
most recent studies of this phenomenon indicate that Africa
has become one of the major centres for this illegal traffic.
At the same time, we note that local consumption of hard
drugs, in particular heroin and cocaine, are notably
increasing in numerous African countries.
This represents, therefore, a global scourge against
which individual States are doomed from the outset, for the
ravages of drugs spare no continent and no country,
regardless of how powerful they may be.
Africa is the weak link from which the international
drug trade profits. Thus, given the extreme vulnerability and
the precarious nature of the means available to the African
continent to combat this danger, the international community
should supply - specifically through the United Nations Drug
Control Programme, with which my country is fruitfully
cooperating - the needed financial resources.
Since the end of the bipolar war, history has speeded
up. We are the privileged witnesses of political events of
the highest importance, events that will shape international
relations along the lines of a rapprochement among nations
and will therefore contribute to the strengthening of peace
and global security, essential foundations for the building of
a more just world order and one of greater solidarity.
However, despite the dynamics of peace, which promise
better tomorrows, we must admit that the ideas of peace and
security can no longer be limited solely to the political field,
for the truth is that peace and security can be genuine only
if economic development and social progress are ensured for
all.
The effective globalization of the economy as well as
the ever-increasing interdependence of nations today requires
also an acceleration of history on the level of international
economic relations, for the world must become aware of the
fact that there can be no lasting peace, no universal
prosperity, if the greatest part of humankind is on the
sidelines of economic development and social well-being.
In such a context, therefore, the North-South dialogue
must be reactivated with the goal of seeing that further
means are established to eradicate underdevelopment and
poverty, which today represent the greatest threat of our era.
For peace does not coexist well with poverty, as President
Felix Houphouët-Boigny often says.
The capability of the international community to grasp
this danger and to find rapid and lasting solutions will
determine our joint survival.


First of all, I take great pleasure in expressing to
the President of the General Assembly the sincerest
congratulations of the people and the Government of
Honduras on his well-deserved election to the presidency of
the General Assembly at its forty-eighth session.
In entrusting this very delicate role to him, the
international community is recognizing his personal merits
and those of our sister nation of Guyana. We are convinced
that with his experience and proven capacity he will conduct
the work of this Assembly with great success.
My delegation also extends a warm welcome to the
new Members of our Organization: the Czech Republic, the
Slovak Republic, The Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia, Eritrea, Andorra and the Principality of Monaco.
We do so fully convinced that within the framework of the
United Nations we will establish and strengthen strong bonds
of friendship and cooperation with them, and that their
participation will contribute effectively to the full realization
of the principles and purposes enshrined in the United
Nations Charter.
Pursuant to those same principles, the Republic of
Honduras calls, as it did at the previous session of the
General Assembly, for greater support and resources to be
accorded to the universal organs for the legal settlement of
disputes, such as the International Court of Justice, whose
rulings contribute to the peaceful settlement of disputes
brought before it. We are pleased to state that a year ago
Honduras and El Salvador were handed down a ruling by the
International Court of Justice on their border dispute; we are
now complying with that ruling and the border populations
are living in complete harmony.
On the question of disarmament, in taking note of the
vital discussion of the destructive power of nuclear weapons,
we urge the nuclear-weapon States to arrive at sound,
verifiable agreements on the reduction and destruction of
such weapons and their means of delivery, taking into
account the great danger the use of these and other weapons
of mass destruction represents for humanity, and ensuring
that the growing financial resources released from the arms
race are transferred to the needs arising from international
cooperation for development.
It is only natural that, in activities in the field of
general disarmament, priority should have been given to
nuclear disarmament, but this must not impede renewed
efforts in the field of conventional disarmament, particularly
on a regional basis.
Honduras has observed with great concern the tragic
situation still prevailing in Bosnia and Herzegovina: the
escalation of hostilities, massive violations of human rights
and attempts to enshrine in legal instruments territorial
conquests obtained by aggression.
My country therefore unreservedly supports the Security
Council’s efforts to protect the displace populations, to
provide them with food, medicine and protection, and to
46 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
obtain a cease-fire and a solution to the various problems
that stand in the way of restoring peace to the region.
In Somalia, there is no national government to ensure
that the United Nations intervention in that country will not
only mitigate the hunger which unfortunately afflicts its
inhabitants but also make it possible, with the full
participation of the Somalis, to follow the path to peace,
coexistence and the restoration of normalcy.
That path of hope has already been taken with great
determination in South Africa, and the international
community is rejoicing at the end of the last vestiges of
apartheid and the beginning of national reconciliation and
reconstruction.
It was with rekindled hope that the entire world learned
of the outcome of the negotiations which, under the inspired
mediation of the Government of Norway, led to the recently
signed historic agreement on mutual recognition between the
State of Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization.
This is one more step towards the normalization of good-
neighbourly relations in the Middle East with respect to the
right to self-determination of peoples.
The Honduran Government, which has followed with
interest and concern the fierce struggle that for decades has
pitted Israelis and Arabs against each other, welcomes this
positive development and hopes it will be accompanied by
peace agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbours.
Similarly, our country has followed with great attention
the course of events in Haiti, where we have welcomed the
agreement reached between President Jean-Bertrand Aristide
and the head of the country’s armed forces, through the
mediation of Mr. Dante Caputo, the Special Envoy of the
Secretaries-General of the United Nations and the
Organization of American States (OAS).
The text of this agreement, in addition to contemplating
a series of basic provisions for the solution of the crisis,
calls for the return of Haiti’s legitimate President, and for
compliance with all commitments undertaken both in the
United Nations and in the OAS. Our country expresses its
resolute support for all measures that may be taken to
comply with the timetable established in the Governors
Island Agreement, which led to the parliamentary ratification
of Prime Minister Robert Malval, which in turn has made it
possible to suspend the embargo on Haiti.
In Central America, the Tegucigalpa Protocol of
13 December 1991 has entered into force. It adapts the legal
framework of the former Organization of Central American
States to the new realities of the region by establishing a
system of Central American Integration which, acting under
the impetus of the regional summits, is strengthening and
fostering a new system of economic, social, cultural and
political integration for the benefit of all Central Americans.
In accordance with this basic objective, my country
aspires, with increasing determination and political will, to
see our region established as a region of peace, freedom,
democracy and development which is more actively involved
in the new reordering of the international community.
However, in spite of the progress in the regional peace
process, many of the root causes of the Central American
crisis persist, and the advances that have been made are only
a starting-point in confronting the underlying causes of the
armed conflict which threaten to destroy all that has been
accomplished.
Peace and development will be securely established
only if a broad and participatory commitment is achieved,
involving both the Governments and the organized sectors of
civilian society of each of our nations.
It is a fact that the difficulties of any one Central
American country have an effect on all other countries of the
region. Concerted action within a regional framework is
therefore necessary, to allow internal processes to be
strengthened while fully respecting the particular
circumstances of each country.
The Government of Honduras therefore appeals to our
fellow Central Americans to meet in the near future in order
to give a new thrust to coordination of the efforts which
benefit from international support and to make it possible for
us to view with hope the economic integration now under
way.
The challenge of establishing peace in Central America
requires that we give priority to the geographical areas most
affected by poverty. This in turn requires us to promote
greater social participation by deepening the process of
decentralization through a concept of human development at
the local level and expressing that social development in
realistic macroeconomic policies which encourage both
domestic and foreign investment.
In Honduras this year we will be holding our fifth
consecutive general election since the restoration of
democracy in 1980, and it is our policy to give firm support
to the economic integration of the Central American isthmus
Forty-eighth session - 28 September l993 47
in order to consolidate the results of growth with greater
social well-being.
A revitalized Central America with sustainable
economic growth, while respecting the natural environment
and continually acting to rapidly improve the quality of life
of its inhabitants, is the best guarantee of permanent security
for the region bathed by the Caribbean Sea, within which
Central America, in harmony with the principles of the
member countries of the "Community of the Caribbean", can
consolidate an era of peace and cooperation by the end of
this century.
The third Ibero-American summit, held at San Salvador
de Bahia, Brazil, examined with concern the subject of
development, with emphasis on social development. In so
doing, it reaffirmed in that community of nations the
commitment to representative democracy, the promotion of
the observance and defence of human rights, and the
promotion of the economic and social development of our
peoples, which are united by language, tradition and by a
shared future.
To follow up on what was decided in this new forum
for cooperation, we Ibero-Americans must strengthen our
commitment to the successful convening of the World
Summit for Social Development, an initiative of the Chilean
Government supported enthusiastically by Honduras, and
which we hope will be given a final impetus by this General
Assembly.
There can be no doubt that all of these attempts to
achieve prosperity for our nations must inevitably involve a
willingness on the part of the industrialized States to include
us in trying to establish an open, multilateral trade system
that gives our products greater access to competitive markets
so that more and more countries can reach satisfactory levels
of growth and trade.
Unfortunately, the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade
Negotiations has not yet been concluded, and this is a source
of grave concern to the less developed States whose
expectations are affected along with the programmes of
structural adjustment they are carrying out with great
sacrifice, as an effective contribution to a better ordering of
the world economy. Protectionist measures imposed by
certain States on exports from our region not only cause a
decline in the prices of those products but also impede
access to international markets, thus helping to plunge our
economies into a climate of uncertainty by restricting the
possibilities of investment and continued growth.
The need to achieve greater global economic stability
without regard to the economic and political might of any
individual nation should be examined along with the growing
convergence of opinions concerning global priorities with
regard to the environment; this was demonstrated in a clear
and positive way at the Earth Summit held at Rio de Janeiro
last year.
The deterioration of nature must be avoided. Together
we can design preservation strategies that also make it
possible to make rational use of our natural resources in
order to meet our countries’ requirements for employment
needs and economic growth. In Honduras, we have
established a Ministry of the Environment charged with
designing policies and strategies aimed at creating
mechanisms to protect and preserve our ecosystem and its
endangered species of flora and fauna.
Lastly, as regards the restructuring of the United
Nations, Honduras supports the proposal that the Security
Council be expanded to include new permanent and non-
permanent members so as to reflect the realities of today’s
world, allowing for the rotation of membership and an
equitable geographical distribution in the composition of the
Council.
We are also in favour of the revitalization of the United
Nations in the economic, social, cultural and related spheres.
It is essential that the necessary measures be adopted as soon
as possible to strengthen the capacity of those organs
concerned in order to discharge the functions conferred upon
them by the Charter of the United Nations in the sphere of
international cooperation.
We welcome the steps that have already been taken to
achieve the objectives we have set, but we believe that we
need to arrive at a more effective and more economical
United Nations system, one which is at the same time less
passive in executing the programmes adopted here.
The emergence of new conflicts and the persistence of
old ones in different parts of the world reconfirm, if such a
thing is necessary, the proven wisdom of trying to achieve,
as we approach the fiftieth anniversary of the United
Nations, an integral structure of harmonization and peaceful
cooperation for the international community. Let us pledge
to achieve this with our votes and our actions.


Since PLO Chairman Yasser
Arafat shook hands with the Israeli Prime Minister on the
White House lawn, nothing seems impossible any more.
The end of the cold war has opened opportunities to set
aside some of the most intractable, destructive and polarizing
conflicts of our time.
Apartheid is coming to an end in South Africa. Eastern
Europe is free. Russia and the other States of the former
Soviet Union are shaking off the stifling effects of more than
70 years of communism. Germany has been peacefully
reunited.
In Asia, Cambodia is moving towards national
reconciliation after almost 20 years of war. Viet Nam and
Laos are reintegrating themselves into the South-East Asian
community.
China and Taiwan held direct informal talks in
Singapore and Beijing this year. They will continue their
own dialogue at their own pace. They should be encouraged
to build confidence by working together, as they already
have in the Asian Development Bank and the Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation Council (APEC) and as they hope to
do in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).
Change has its own dynamic. And not all changes are
benign. The post-cold-war problems are legion and well
known. It will be a challenge for the United Nations to
respond. In recent years, there has been a marked expansion
in the number and scope of the operations and activities
authorized by the Security Council.
Established procedures, such as the Security Council-
mandated Commission that has demarcated the boundary
between Iraq and Kuwait, have made and will continue to
make positive contributions to stabilizing the post-cold-war
world, providing authoritative reference points. United
Nations specialized agencies, such as the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), are playing an important
role in holding renegade countries like North Korea to
internationally accepted standards of conduct in the critical
area of nuclear non-proliferation. The international
community must continue to support such tried and tested
measures and organizations.
But there is also an expectation that the end of the cold
war will enable the Security Council to play more ambitious
roles and at last assume "primary responsibility for the
maintenance of international peace and security" under
Chapters V and VII of the Charter. In Cambodia, Haiti and
Somalia, among other places, the United Nations is breaking
new ground by actively interposing itself as a vital
stabilizing actor in situations which would once have been
considered essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of
States.
The legal, diplomatic and political implications of these
developments are still unfolding and are not yet fully
understood. Not everyone is entirely comfortable with them.
But I believe that most Member States regard the trend as
generally positive and as making for a more secure world.
The majority wants a more active and effective Security
Council.
The Secretary-General’s report on the question of
equitable representation on and increase in the membership
of the Security Council, submitted in accordance with
General Assembly resolution 47/62, has thus occasioned
great interest. There is wide consensus that if it is to be
effective in the next century the Security Council cannot
simply extrapolate its mandate from the starting-point of
1945 after the cold-war interregnum, but must accurately
reflect the current configuration of global power.
International order cannot be built on nostalgia. Too great
a disjuncture from reality will doom the Security Council to
eventual irrelevance. As membership of the United Nations
expands, there is also a general expectation that the Security
Council should become more representative of the
Organization as a whole.
The composition of the Security Council is a
compromise between the principle of the sovereign equality
of States and the realities of power politics. That all States
are equal but that some, for better or for worse, have a
disproportionate influence on the international order is a fact
of life. Great-Power leadership is vital. It is a reality.
Recognition of the special status of great Powers is thus a
requisite for effective action by the Security Council. When
it comes to the crunch, only the great Powers can make a
decisive difference. But the temper of our times also
demands that if action is to command a general consensus:
the great must seek the mandate of the many.
Forty-eighth session - 6 October 1993 17
The issue is, however, more easily defined than
resolved. The only previous increase in the size of the
Security Council began in the 1956 session of the General
Assembly with discussions on an increase of non-permanent
seats. Agreement was reached only in 1963 and came into
force two years later, almost a decade after the process had
begun. The lapse of time shows the complexities involved.
The difficulties are still with us. To be sure, there are
established principles laid down in Article 23 (1) of the
Charter to guide the way to a possible further expansion of
non-permanent seats. But there are no such guidelines for
the more crucial question of an increase in permanent
members. The Secretary-General’s report must therefore be
realistically considered as only the beginning of a long
process of debate whose outcome cannot be confidently
predicted at this point.
There are two basic problems. The first is simply to
decide what is the current configuration of international
power that should be reflected in the distribution of
permanent seats. This is not as straightforward as it may
seem. When the Charter was being drafted, the end of the
Second World War, with easily discernible winners and
losers, was in sight and was being prepared for. The
intention was for the winners to have primary responsibility
for guiding the new international order. Yet even then, two
of the "Big Three" victors, the Soviet Union and the United
Kingdom, were sceptical of Roosevelt’s view of China’s
ability to play a major role in the post-war world.
Churchill’s insistence on including France among the elite
group was met with similar scepticism by Roosevelt and
Stalin.
It will be even more difficult to decide who belongs to
the new elite. The end of the cold war took everyone by
surprise and was far from clear-cut in its resolution.
Economic, political and military power no longer necessarily
cohere in one single locus. The United States is victor, but
its economic recovery is slow and its competitiveness
blunted. Russia is in serious economic and political
difficulties but, because it has nuclear weapons, it remains
a military great Power exercising a commanding influence
on its former dominions, where the threat of chaos in the
post-cold-war world is also greatest. Japan and Germany are
clearly world economic powerhouses, but both lack an
internal and regional consensus on the use of military forces
beyond their borders.
The second problem is even more fundamental and
vexing. The United Nations is an international Organization.
It is not and was never intended to be a supranational
organization. The United Nations was created by sovereign
States and can do nothing without their assent, in which
process the permanent members have a more than
proportionate say through their veto. I state this without
rancour as a fact well known to all. Any design for
enhancing the effectiveness of the Security Council therefore
cannot just be based on abstract wisdom concerning the
requisites of the international order. No plan that has any
prospect of succeeding can avoid reckoning with calculations
of the national advantage of the current permanent members.
But if the new Security Council is really to reflect the
current international distribution of power, the process
should logically entail the deposition of some from the elite
as well as the anointment of others. Even if some were to
be elevated without necessarily displacing others, the
expansion of the small group of the select would imply the
relative diminution of the status of the current permanent
members. It is not surprising, therefore, that only one
permanent member has so far come out unambiguously in
favour of an expansion in the number of permanent seats.
It does not take a cynic to wonder whether it was
emboldened to do so because the others have been so
conspicuously coy on this critical point. No country has
ever voluntarily relinquished privilege and power. We are
after all in the company of sovereign States, not saints.
There is no circumventing the veto. There is no
constitutional means of amending the Charter without the
assent of all the permanent members, some of whom may
believe they stand to lose by it. Yet change is imperative if
we are not to squander the opportunity afforded by the end
of the cold war - more so for small States that have few
better choices than an effective United Nations for their
security.
To make progress, there is no alternative but gradually
to shape a consensus through a patient process of debate and
discussion. To force the pace or attempt to impose a
majority agreement will not work. At this preliminary stage,
it would be most useful to try to identify and build
consensus on objective general criteria that all permanent
members, present or aspiring, must fulfil. This is a more
clinical and constructive approach than engaging in a horse
race or a beauty contest to pick specific countries. To
attempt to do so at this stage is premature and would only
be divisive. But the identification of objective criteria will
set a common standard and, if we can agree on them, a
consensus on specific countries will naturally emerge.
This will entail thinking through the role of the United
Nations into the next century. What challenges will the
18 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
United Nations face in the next decade? What will be the
role and priorities of a new Security Council under these
conditions? What capabilities will it need? These difficult
questions demand the most exhaustive possible examination.
The General Assembly should consider the formation of a
working group, representative of the whole membership, to
consider them and formulate agreed objective criteria for the
expansion of the Security Council, especially its permanent
membership.
To stimulate discussion, Singapore suggests the
following:
First, there should be a level playing field with regard
to all present and future members of a possible expanded
Security Council. Anachronistic references to "enemy
States" in Articles 53, 77 and 107 of the Charter should be
removed. It is time to set aside the baggage of the past.
Suggestions that there could be or should be a different set
of permanent members without the veto are also impractical.
No country that is capable of making a contribution as a
new permanent member will accept such second-class status
for long. It will only undermine the principle of great-Power
cooperation, in the absence of which the Security Council
cannot function. Nor is it practical or even desirable to do
away with the veto. The fact that the veto has been abused
does not detract from its intended function. It is a
recognition of the hard reality that great Powers will not
consent to put their power at the disposal of a sheer majority
for the implementation of decisions which they do not agree
with. It is a safety valve that prevents the United Nations
from undertaking commitments that it lacks the power to
fulfil. However, to minimize the misuse of the veto, if
permanent membership is expanded at least two vetoes
should be required to block a resolution.
Secondly, privilege must be paid for. An expanded role
for the Security Council will require more resources. A
United Nations perennially on the brink of financial
insolvency cannot effectively meet the challenges of the next
century. A permanent member should therefore carry a
larger portion of the financial burden of the United Nations.
Each permanent member should pay at least 9 per cent of
the operating expenses of the United Nations as well as
11 per cent of the costs of the peace-keeping operations of
the United Nations, which are the average percentages of the
permanent five’s current collective percentage of these
budgets.
Thirdly, permanent members must have muscle and the
will and the capability to wield it for the cause of the United
Nations. The main mission and primary responsibility of the
Security Council is to maintain international peace and
stability. Force will be needed in pursuit of order and the
Security Council cannot be effective without a sword that is
sharp and ready. All permanent members should be
prepared to give effect to Article 43 of the Charter and be
ready to place their military forces at the disposal of the
United Nations and shed blood to uphold international order
if necessary.
This list is by no means exhaustive. Other members
will have their own suggestions for appropriate criteria. I
urge all members to participate in discussions on the
expansion of the Security Council so that we may have the
benefit of the fullest possible range of views and emerge
with the widest possible consensus.
Finally, Mr. President, I should like to congratulate you
on your unanimous election. I am confident that you will
lead the Assembly at this session effectively. I should also
like to take this opportunity to welcome the six new
Members that have joined the Organization. I am certain
that they will contribute positively to the work of the United
Nations.


I wish, on behalf of the
Uganda delegation, to join those representatives who have
already congratulated Mr. Insanally of Guyana on his well-
deserved election to the presidency of the United Nations
General Assembly at its forty-eighth session. His election to
this high office is a tribute to his personal qualities and also
an honour to Guyana, with which Uganda enjoys warm and
friendly relations. Given his wide experience, and especially
his intimate knowledge of the United Nations, I am
confident that he will successfully guide its deliberations
during the session. In this effort, he can count on Uganda’s
cooperation and support.
I wish also to express the appreciation of my delegation
to Mr. Insanally’s predecessor, Mr. Stoyan Ganev of
Bulgaria, who presided with distinction at the forty-seventh
session.
Our appreciation goes, equally, to the distinguished
Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who has
provided dynamic and courageous leadership to our
Organization. He has come to grips with one of the biggest
Forty-eighth session - 7 October l993 29
challenges to the international community - conflict
resolution - and his incisive reports are an inspiration to us
all.
It is with happiness that, on behalf of the people and
Government of Uganda, I express a warm welcome to the
Czech Republic, Slovakia, Eritrea, the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia, Monaco and Andorra as new
Members of the United Nations. We look forward to
working closely with them in our common efforts to fulfil
the objectives and achieve the goals of the Organization.
Allow me to convey to the people and Government of
India Uganda’s profound sympathy and solidarity following
the tragic earthquake that struck that country last week,
causing enormous destruction and massive loss of life.
The dramatic end of the cold war created a wave of
optimism. The ideological rivalry and the attendant
confrontation between the major Powers yielded to
understanding and cooperation, and the nightmare of the
nuclear annihilation of the world receded - even if, in our
minds, it was not totally eliminated. We believe that we are
witnessing the dawn of a new era that promises the
beginning of a new order based on peace, justice and equity
- as envisaged in the United Nations Charter - both within
and between nations. Whether we can succeed in attaining
that lofty goal is one of the challenges of our time.
However, the events of the last few years have
tempered this sense of optimism. We see contradictory
developments - some positive and others negative. On the
one hand, there are positive developments in disarmament,
the resolution of conflicts, and the emergence of democratic
governance in many countries. But, on the other hand, we
have witnessed the dangers of ethnic and religious
intolerance, which have generated centrifugal forces in many
parts of the world, often with debilitating tolls in human life,
suffering and the destruction of property. I wish to caution
against the danger of making purely ethnic and religious
considerations the basis for forging a modern State. The
challenge is to find democratic solutions for peaceful and
equitable coexistence in a heterogeneous society.
The divide between North and South, reflecting
affluence on the one hand and widespread poverty and
deprivation on the other, is widening. The same division
between the haves and the have-nots is reflected within
many nations. Clearly, the deterioration of economic
conditions in developing countries, if not adequately
addressed, can only lead to despair and frustration. In the
long run, such developments will pose a danger to
international peace and security. The international
community should keep at the top of its agenda the urgent
task of ensuring that the positive changes ushered in by the
demise of the cold war equitably benefit all mankind. It is
incumbent upon us to encourage and promote the positive
trends while endeavouring to eliminate or minimize the
negative aspects. Marginalization of developing countries
cannot be in the interest of a better world. We should
muster the will to face the political, economic, ecological
and social challenges that stand in the way of the
emancipation of the developing countries.
At the last session of the General Assembly the
Secretary-General showed the way forward in his "An
Agenda for Peace", when he outlined his views on how the
United Nations should carry out its task of maintaining
international peace and security. He underscored the need
for an early warning system for crisis situations and the need
for timely preventive action, and he suggested peace-building
measures that need to be taken. Uganda supported, and
continues to support, the Secretary-General’s endeavour in
this area.
In our view, a critical pillar of conflict resolution, both
at the international and the regional level, is the political will
of the parties to the conflict and a commitment on their part
to translate that will into practical actions. Where that will
and commitment exist, solutions have been forthcoming,
even to what were perceived as intractable problems.
Another critical element in this regard is the capacity to
enforce solutions where agreements exist. When a group’s
major consideration is military victory, contrary to the
agreements reached, this may call for legitimate international
intervention. I have in mind, for example, a number of
agreements brokered between the parties by regional
organizations or the United Nations which have then been
deliberately scuttled for no legitimate reason. The situations
in Yugoslavia, Somalia, Liberia and Angola are vivid
reminders of the need for such a capacity. It is untenable
that the international community should fail to act while
senseless loss of life is perpetuated or chaos obtains in a
country, as was the case in Somalia and Liberia. As many
speakers have stated, sovereignty should not be used to hold
a population hostage. A capacity to intervene in such
situations should be in place. This is the question that we
should ponder in the course of our deliberations, with a view
to establishing parameters for such eventualities.
30 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
In our continent, Africa, the contradictory positive and
negative trends have also manifested themselves, both in the
political arena and the economic sphere. In southern Africa,
we are on the verge of achieving the goal the international
community has always sought, namely, dismantling apartheid
and putting in place a democratic and non-racial Government
in South Africa. Here we have an example of political will
and determination, and the capacity to translate that will into
reality.
Uganda welcomes the progress made in South Africa
and the decision to establish the Transitional Executive
Council (TEC), the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC)
and the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA). These
are vital steps that should pave the way for free and fair
elections next April, which should lead to the establishment
of a transitional Government based on universal adult
suffrage. We salute Mr. Nelson Mandela and other leaders
of the liberation movements and President de Klerk for their
vision and statesmanship, which have made this progress
possible.
With regard to the call to lift sanctions against South
Africa in response to this progress, Uganda’s approach has
always been guided by the position of the people of South
Africa, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the
Commonwealth and the United Nations. We are therefore
supportive of the statement adopted on 29 September in New
York by the OAU Ad Hoc Committee on Southern Africa,
which recommends the lifting of all economic sanctions,
with the exception of those relating to the arms embargo and
nuclear matters, as recognition of the progress made thus far.
We also agree with the Ad Hoc Committee’s call for
vigilance until the Transitional Executive Council is
established and for the establishment of full diplomatic
relations following the installation of an elected interim
Government of national unity.
As regards Mozambique, Uganda welcomed the signing
of a peace accord between the Government of Mozambique
and RENAMO on 4 October 1992. We had hoped that by
now all obstacles to the implementation of the accord would
have been settled. Addressing the Assembly on 27
September, President Chissano, outlined the progress made
in the revival of the country’s economic and social activity
as a consequence of a cease-fire being effectively honoured.
The deployment of the United Nations Operation in
Mozambique (ONUMOZ) provides an atmosphere conducive
to implementing the provisions of the General Peace
Agreement. We commend the Government of Mozambique
for the flexibility and statesmanship they have demonstrated.
We call on RENAMO to reciprocate equally and to comply
with Security Council resolution 863 (1993), so that the
people of Mozambique can embark on the important task of
national reconstruction in an atmosphere of peace and
stability.
Uganda deeply regrets the resumption of hostilities in
Angola, which clearly has negative consequences for the
whole region. Remarkable progress had been made,
culminating in the United Nations-supervised elections last
year. Unfortunately, the hopes and aspirations of the people
were dashed by the resumption of hostilities which
interrupted the electoral process. The only way forward lies
in national reconciliation and the acceptance of the rules of
democratic governance. Uganda supports Security Council
resolution 864 (1993), the implementation of which would
pave way for a lasting solution. It is incumbent upon
UNITA to abide by this resolution.
In our own region Uganda welcomes the agreement
between the two parties, the Rwandese Government and the
Rwandese Patriotic Front, on a process of national
reconciliation and the installation of a broad-based
transitional government. Uganda, like other countries in the
region, is ready and willing to support the Rwandese people
in their endeavour to find a lasting settlement of their
problems. This would also help foster stability and
cooperation in our subregion. I wish to pay a tribute to
President Ali Hassan Mwinyi and the Government of the
United Republic of Tanzania, to the Organization of African
Unity, and to all those who have been helping the parties to
reach this accord.
The United Nations has a critical role to play in the
implementation of the Rwanda agreements. Both parties to
the conflict requested the United Nations to provide a neutral
force. We are happy to see that this request has received
positive consideration by the Security Council. The Council
has accepted the Secretary-General’s recommendation for the
establishment of a neutral force known as the United Nations
Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR). In the
meantime, Uganda has agreed to the deployment on the
Rwanda-Uganda border of the United Nations Observer
Mission Uganda-Rwanda (UNOMUR) - as part and parcel
of confidence-building measures - and stands ready to give
additional support as and when requested.
The conflict in southern Sudan continues to be of great
concern to, and a source of anguish for, us in Uganda. The
civil war has escalated rather than abated, resulting in loss
of life, increased refugee flows, and the displacement of the
population to neighbouring countries, Uganda included. We
urge the parties to the conflict to cooperate in support of
Forty-eighth session - 7 October l993 31
regional efforts designed to find a lasting solution. I wish
also to appeal to the international community to continue
providing humanitarian assistance and to be supportive of
negotiations for a peaceful settlement.
The situation in Somalia is a vivid example of both
natural and man-made disasters. Uganda welcomed the
decision of the Security Council in 1992 to provide
humanitarian assistance to the Somali people and to restore
order in Somalia. The United Nations operations helped to
end massive starvation and brought hope to the people of
Somalia. Uganda is also supportive of the second United
Nations Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM II), whose
mandate is to provide an appropriate atmosphere for
continued humanitarian assistance and for reconstruction and
rehabilitation, and to facilitate an overall political settlement.
We were encouraged by the Addis Ababa agreement of
March this year whereby various Somali political forces
agreed upon a programme of disarmament and reconciliation.
It is sad that the situation in Somalia took a dramatic turn
for the worse with the killing of members of the United
Nations peace-keeping force. We regret the loss of life and
attacks on the peace-keeping force. I wish to express our
sincere condolences to the bereaved families and their
respective Governments. It remains our conviction that these
incidents, reprehensible as they are, should not lead the
United Nations to divert from, let alone abdicate, its
responsibilities towards the Somali people. Much has been
achieved. Normalcy has been restored to much of the
country, although chaos and armed resistance continue in a
number of areas, especially in and around Mogadishu, where
they imperil international efforts. We call on Somali
political leaders to cooperate with the Intergovernmental
Authority on Drought and Development (IGADD), the
Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the United
Nations in efforts aimed at achieving peace and
reconciliation and setting in motion transitional
arrangements, including the establishment of a broad-based
government. I wish to take this opportunity to commend
United Nations personnel, the countries which have provided
material and financial support, and the volunteers who have
risked their lives in this worthy cause.
As regards the situation in Liberia, Uganda supports the
initiative of the Economic Community of West African
States (ECOWAS) for the settlement of the crisis. We
welcomed the Cotonou Agreement signed on 25 July 1993,
which provides for a cease-fire and for the transitional
arrangement leading to elections early next year. The
ECOWAS Miliary Observer Group (ECOMOG) has clearly
been a stabilizing force in Liberia. That is why it has been
entrusted with the supervision and implementation of the
Cotonou Agreement. We look forward to the full
implementation of this accord.
All this provides an example of the matching of the
political will of the parties to the conflict to the capacity in
the region to implement the agreed settlement.
Equally, the Security Council decision to make it easier
for the United Nations to supplement regional efforts in the
search for agreements and in their implementation is most
welcome. Apart from enhancing the regional capacity for
peace-keeping, the Security Council decision helps to
engender confidence.
At the OAU Summit held in Cairo in July this year,
African States agreed to set up, within the OAU, a
mechanism for conflict resolution. The positive
developments in Liberia and Rwanda, where the OAU and
the pertinent leaders in the subregion have effectively
discharged this role, are indicative of the potentialities of the
regional mechanism.
In the Middle East, the mutual recognition between the
Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel, together
with the agreements signed between them, constitute a
breakthrough of historic proportions. This is yet another
illustration of the dictum that where there is a will, vision
and statesmanship, a way forward will be found. This
development holds the promise for concord and cooperation
in the Middle East region as a whole. We welcome the
Declaration of Principles on Palestinian interim self-rule in
the occupied territories. These arrangements, which
envisage a five-year transition period, are an important step
towards a comprehensive and lasting settlement in
accordance with Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and
338 (1973). We commend Chairman Arafat and Prime
Minister Rabin for the courage and statesmanship they have
displayed. We encourage all of them to persevere in the
task ahead and on the journey they have begun. I wish also
to express Uganda’s appreciation to Norway, the United
States, the Russian Federation, and all those who were
instrumental in the reaching of this historic accord.
Three years have elapsed since the outbreak of the Gulf
crisis. We are glad that the sovereignty of Kuwait was
restored. It remains our hope that, with positive
developments elsewhere in the region, it will be possible for
the people in the Gulf to be reconciled and to solve the
outstanding problems so that harmony and cooperation can
be re-established. This requires, among other things,
32 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
compliance with Security Council resolutions relating to the
Gulf War settlement.
Uganda supports the efforts by the Secretary-General to
ensure an overall settlement of the Cyprus problem. Any
settlement, while taking into account the legitimate interests
of the parties, should safeguard the sovereignty, unity and
territorial integrity of Cyprus.
As regards the Korean peninsula, Uganda supports the
aspiration of the Korean people to peaceful reunification.
We encourage them to continue their dialogue towards this
objective.
In Cambodia we have just witnessed the fruitful
completion of the peace process in accordance with the Paris
Agreements. Under the auspices of the United Nations
Transitional Authority in Cambodia (UNTAC) the
Cambodian people have been able to exercise their right to
vote and to decide on their own Government in the general
elections for a constituent assembly. We are happy to see
that a new democratic Constitution, with a constitutional
monarchy has been peacefully promulgated. I wish to
express the gratitude of the Uganda delegation to the
Secretary-General and the UNTAC personnel who, under the
able leadership of Mr. Yasushi Akashi, the Special
Representative of the Secretary-General, have contributed
towards a comprehensive settlement of the Cambodian
question. Our appreciation goes equally to Viet Nam,
France, Australia, China, the United States of America and
the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN),
which, at different stages, contributed to the peace process.
It is to us a matter of deep regret that in the former
Yugoslavia, instability, strife and war based on ethnic and
religious differences continue unabated. In pursuit of the
reprehensible notion of "ethnic cleansing", atrocities are
being committed. In spite of the grave situation, it has not
been possible for the Security Council and the international
community to act decisively to put an end to the agony and
suffering there. The injunctions of the Security Council
continue to be flouted with impunity. We reject and
condemn the notion of "ethnic cleansing". I wish, however,
to commend the United Nations Protection Force for the
efforts it has made under the most difficult of conditions.
On disarmament, Uganda is encouraged by the progress
achieved in the wake of the demise of the cold war. The
United States and the Russian Federation under START II
have significantly reduced their nuclear arsenals. We were
encouraged by the decision of the United States to extend
the moratorium on nuclear tests until 1994, by the
declaration of Russia not to resume testing even if others
did, and by France’s commitment not to be the first to
resume. In spite of the recent set-backs, we hope that this
moratorium will hold. Uganda, however, believes that a
comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty is the ultimate
solution. As a State party to the non-proliferation Treaty,
we shall continue to participate actively in the preparatory
process leading to the 1995 Review Conference. We support
the extension of the Treaty, subject to periodic reviews. We
shall also seek to remove the imbalances in the present
Treaty and to secure increased assistance for developing
countries in the area of the peaceful application of nuclear
energy.
We maintain that there exists an intrinsic relationship
between the disarmament process and development.
Developing countries paid a heavy price during the height of
the cold war as world attention was focused on acquiring
additional armaments under the doctrines of deterrence.
Many of them were trapped in civil conflict arising from
ideological wars. As the resources devoted to building
armaments are released in the disarmament process, these
should be applied for development both within and between
nations. Unfortunately, at the international level, we have
yet to see the peace dividend being channelled towards
assistance to developing countries.
At the national level, Uganda, after the restoration of
peace in the country, has now embarked on a process of
scaling down its army to a level which the economy can
sustain and which at the same time meets our legitimate
defence needs. This is a bold decision by the Government,
which, in the long run, should release resources for
development purposes. I wish here to express our
appreciation to those countries and organizations which have
agreed to assist us in the resettlement and integration of
demobilized soldiers within the civilian community.
This session is taking place in the aftermath of the
momentous World Conference on Human Rights that took
place in Vienna. That Conference reaffirmed the
commitment of the international community to try to secure
the full and universal enjoyment of human rights. We hope
that as a result there will be increased awareness in the
world of the importance of human rights and a determination
to build the requisite capacity at the national and local levels
to ensure their enforcement.
Linked with the human rights issue is the question of
democratic governance and the rule of law. Democratic
governance promotes human rights. In Uganda, as part of
the restoration of democratic civilian rule, the Constitutional
Forty-eighth session - 7 October l993 33
Commission has already produced a draft constitution. The
election of a Constituent Assembly, which is to deliberate
and agree on the Constitution, will be held in December this
year or early next year.
Whether in Africa or anywhere else, the
democratization process may be difficult, but it is an
essential ingredient for peace, stability, the rule of law, and
the full respect and enjoyment of human rights. This is
particularly urgent in developing countries, in Africa in
particular. They are essential aspects and conditions of the
development process. We must therefore bring our full
energies to bear so that the democratization process may
gain momentum.
One of the major objectives of the United Nations,
enshrined in the Charter, is the promotion of economic and
social progress. In our quest for peace, it is imperative to
address the economic and social challenges, which, too
often, are the fundamental causes of conflicts in many
regions.
The present world economic situation is very grim.
There has been a prolonged recession in the developed
countries which, in turn, has had a negative effect on the
world economic situation. This has been devastating for the
developing countries, which have had to labour in a harsh
international environment. The crippling external debt is one
of the major obstacles for developing countries. In Uganda,
for example, it is estimated that we shall spend about 60 per
cent of our projected export receipts on debt servicing. The
debt problem has been exacerbated by the unfavourable
terms of trade, especially the collapse of the prices of
commodities, which are the mainstay of our economies.
Coupled with the reduction of resource flows, this has
hampered our development. Yet, while still experiencing
these conditions, our countries have undertaken structural
adjustment reforms which call for heavy sacrifices on the
part of the population, especially the very vulnerable people.
For these programmes to achieve the desired objectives of
sustained growth, it is imperative that further measures on
debt relief, including debt cancellation, be put in place, more
so in respect of sub-Saharan African countries. There is also
an urgent need to increase significantly the volume of
resource flows in support of development efforts in these
countries. We look forward to the urgent and balanced
conclusion of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade
negotiations. We are hopeful that a successful conclusion of
these negotiations would increase world trade and increase
the access of our products to world markets. This should
help to increase our export earnings.
Regrettably, for Africa the critical economic situation
and the trend of marginalization continue. It is crucial to
arrest and reverse this trend if Africa is to succeed or even
survive in the geopolitical and economic system of the
twenty-first century. We need to enlarge our economic
space. Forging regional integration is an imperative if
Africa is to end its underdevelopment and to be integrated
into the global economy.
African integration will create economies of scale,
which are essential for the diversification of the African
economies, making full use of Africa’s natural resources,
increasing self-sufficiency and strengthening the continent’s
position within the global economy. It is precisely for this
reason that the Organization of African Unity adopted the
Abuja Treaty creating an African Economic Community.
The Treaty stipulates, inter alia, the strengthening of
subregional economic groupings. In this regard, the
countries of the Eastern and Southern Africa Preferential
Trade Area have resolved to establish a subregional common
market. A treaty to this effect will be signed in Kampala,
Uganda, on 4 November this year. We appeal to the
international community to be supportive of regional
integration by providing assistance to put in place the
necessary infrastructures.
The Rio Earth summit was an important milestone on
the road to forging a global consensus on sustainable
development. Uganda welcomes the adoption of Agenda 21,
which spelled out measures to be adopted by the
international community. As a follow-up, Uganda has drawn
up a National Environment Action Plan to address our
environmental problems. We welcome the establishment of
the Commission on Sustainable Development and of the
Negotiating Committee for an international convention on
drought and desertification, in line with the wishes of
African countries.
In spite of the progress made, we notice a reluctance on
the part of the donor community as regards fulfilling the
commitments agreed upon in Rio. This is especially true
with regard to providing new and additional resources. I
wish to stress that for us in Uganda the cause of
environmental degradation is poverty. Forests, for example,
are being depleted daily because the people use their trees as
a source of energy. To reverse this trend we need capital to
exploit hydro-electric power or solar energy, both of which
we have aplenty. We urge the international community to
appreciate this problem.
As regards reform of the United Nations, we maintain
our position that we shall support those measures which
34 General Assembly - Forty-eighth session
improve efficiency and which do not distort the priorities
that have been agreed on, and which reflect the interests of
all Member States. We are also supportive of the proposals
for the enlargement of the Security Council to reflect
present-day realities. We reaffirm that an important criterion
to take into account is that a country, big or small, seeking
membership of the Security Council must fully embrace, and
be seen to act in accordance with, the underlying values of
the United Nations mandate for peace, respect for human
rights, democratization and other accepted international
norms. It is also important that the composition of all
United Nations organs accord with the principles of the
Charter, notably the principle of sovereign equality of
nations and the principle of democracy. It is with this in
mind that we shall examine all proposals for restructuring
that are before us.
We stand at a historic watershed on account of
contradictory trends which characterize the current transition
to a new world order yet to be shaped and defined. We
have, one hopes, a unique opportunity to construct a firm
foundation for the edifice of a future in which the interests
of all of us can be adequately catered for.