May I extend to the President the warmest congratulations of Seychelles on his unanimous election to the presidency of the General Assembly. We also extend our congratulations to his predecessor, Mr. Joseph Garba, for the competent way in which he directed the work of the forty-fourth session.
I should also like to pay a well-deserved tribute to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for the efforts he has made in the cause of peace and security the world over. We wish to assure him of our support in meeting his difficult responsibilities.
At a time when we are preparing to celebrate the forty-fifth anniversary of our Organization, it is appropriate to recall, in these grave times, the circumstances that led to its establishment - the Second World War, an unprecedented disaster. It was at that time that nations traumatized by that deadly war resolved to preserve future generations from the scourge of war by bequeathing us the United Nations Charter.
The San Francisco Charter, in its immutable principles, remains today the best guarantor of peace and our collective security. Of course, we have not always been able to have those principles respected. But the climate of detente, dialogue and co-operation that prevailed just a few weeks ago gave use a glimpse of the possibility of a better world in which each would have his role.
Unfortunately, recent events in the Gulf have darkened the horizon. Once again, the use of force has prevailed. The invasion and occupation of Kuwait constitutes a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter and of the sovereignty of a State. Through that violation, the entire international community has been flouted. This situation constitutes a total rejection of the duties and obligations of a State respectful of international law.
Nothing can justify the innovation an annexation of Kuwait by Iraq. That act is a part of outdated political thinking and we are duty-bound forcefully to condemn any violation of the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of States wherever such a violation occurs.
Therefore, and in accordance with the spirit of the United Nations Charter, the Seychelles demands the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait and the restoration of the sovereignty of that State. We call upon the United Nations, the Arab League and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries to redouble their efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict that has pitted Iraq against Kuwait.
The current crisis is all the more disturbing since it involves conflicts of interests that are not always justified. We all know that the innovation of Kuwait is unfortunately not an isolated case. It is one link in a chain of confrontations and military acts of aggression that have been unleashed whenever there is a desire to see so-called moral principles or national interests prevail. None the less, if the events of the relatively recent past are there to remind us that acts of force cannot prevail over the principle of State sovereignty, it is our duty to find a peaceful solution together to every specific situation of conflict.
More than ever before, the international community must remain watchful in order to prevent such an eventuality. It is a moral and undoubtedly financial task for all of us. But it is more particularly up to the major Powers to protect the small States. Unfortunately, very few of us have the means to see to it that law and morality prevail beyond our borders, much less to ensure our own national security.
It is clear that here was a widespread reaction in favor of Kuwait only because the events, consequences and steaks concern the entire world. But it would be extremely desirable to ensure that the mobilization mechanism came into play whenever a State finds itself subject to an act of aggression. On the other hand, if the major Powers have deterrent force, it is equally true that in no case should they fact without a mandate from the United Nations.
The sad plight of Kuwait may to some extent be a result of the unbridled arms race on the part of the big Powers, in particular in the Middle East. Although it may be reassuring to note that that is no longer the case, we hope that the current crisis will not call into question, either in the medium or the long term, the current policy of disarmament. As regards the crisis itself, we can certainly hope that hose same big Powers will preserve us from a disastrous conflict.
The situation in the Gulf not only has taken pride of place over other problems but has also accentuated them. i have i mind in particular the Indian Ocean. For some years now the Republic of the Seychelles has been incessantly calling for the transformation of the Indian Ocean into a zone of peace, security and international co-operation. If the thaw in relations between the big Powers has undoubtedly contributed to changing the situation of tension, the Indian Ocean region remains the subject of the greed of others. That phenomenon can only widen, since the present situation in the Gulf could serve as a pretext for any party to be present militarily in our waters. How far we suddenly are - and yet how near - to the attainment of the objectives sought at the time General Assembly resolution 2832 (XXVI) was adopted.
Are we to believe that there is now no hope at all for the International Conference on the Indian Ocean? We do not believe that to be the case, and that is why today we, the countries of the Indian Ocean, renew our appeal to those who hold power and authority. We ask them to assume their responsibilities so that the colombo Conference, so long awaited, can take place.
We must recognize non the less that in spite of certain setbacks there has been some progress in the global political situation. But there are still many areas which have been highlighted by the Gulf crisis and which call for action. I have in mind the threat of nuclear weapons, the problem of toxic waste, and chemical weapons. Viewed from the angle of this sword of Damocles - compounded by the present and future financial crisis - the preservation of the environment and the problem of debt and development are products of what I shall call and “infernal dialectic”.
It is first and foremost up to the developing countries, of course, to implement genuine programs aimed at improving the management of their environment. In the Seychelles the new national plan launched in June 1990 constitutes a renewal and strengthening of our commitment to the concept of lasting development based on ecological considerations.
It should not be forgotten that our heritage is not only of national interest but also of global interest. It is proper to recall that 42 per cent of Seychelles territory is classified as a natural preserve. Our concerns in that respect are well justified. We can even say that our environment is our primary expert product. Our two main industries, tourism and fishing, depend on it entirely. The very future of our country is at stake.
None the less, in spite of all our goodwill, the challenge that the environment poses cannot be met on an individual basis. In that spirit, we are in favor of a concerted and multilateral approach in the guest for lasting and effective solutions to urgent problems. Resolute support on the part of the international community in the form of additional resources is absolutely necessary. This presupposes a redoubling of efforts on the part of the industrialized countries, and the shouldering of joint responsibilities that can supplement the programs and measures taken for the environment by the developing countries. In this interdependent world the environment can thus become a privileged focal point for international co-operation.
Of course, the International Conference on the Environment to be held in 1992 should be the opportunity to agree upon a global plan of action and practical measures for the protection of the environment at the dawning of the new century. My country is pleased that that Conference will be convened in the near future. We shall be participating actively in the conference within our means.
None the less, we cannot expect magical solutions from the Conference. Furthermore, time is of the essence. The year 1992 may seem a distant date for those for whom the environment is a question of survival. That is why the efforts of those countries that are implementing real programs to preserve their environment must be supported. The initiatives of buying back part of the debt of a country in return for the implementation of conservation programs is an innovative approach which deserves to be put into practice more often. None the less, we believe that in practice it has proven to be somewhat discriminatory, since thus far only certain countries have been able to benefit from this measure. In future all countries showing their resole to preserve nature should be able to benefit from such stimulatory measures. Regardless of the solution adopted, a solution must be found because the future of our planet depends upon it.
With respect to the international economic situation, no one is really inclined towards optimism. The economic situation of Africa and of the developing countries in general is today of greater concern that ever before. We must note that while there have been certain signs of economic recovery in some third-world countries, in many others living standards have declined dramatically. The per capita gross national product has declined sharply because of an increase in debt repayments amounting to over one quarter of the total export income.
Third-world countries today are on the brink of bankruptcy and of the most serious recession ever experienced. The crisis in the Gulf, with all its consequences, can only further aggravate an already disastrous situation.
For many countries the crisis in the Gulf means that the initial development achievements that had been registered have come to naught. Not only have their needs for foreign currency to repay their debts and import oil considerably increased, but assistance will become more scarce and more expansive. Certain donor countries have already announced budgetary restrictions and aid reductions. This means that regardless of the outcome of the current crisis a process of deterioration is now already under way, no matter how quickly the conflict is resolved.
It is therefore more apparent than ever before that only a more constructive vision of the international economic order will enable us to design possible solutions. It seems to me that this is now the overriding role of the United Nations, whose primary objective remains the construction of a more united world.
New struggles require our commitment: the poverty of millions of human beings; our threatened environment; the appearance of new flash points of tension. But these are not insurmountable challenges. They require a renewal of our faith in dialogue and a new climate of co-operation and harmonization. We hope that this session of the General Assembly will bring new momentum towards a more secure future and that it will contribute to relaunching a dialogue, establishing peace and creating a climate conducive to development, which has been so gravely threatened.


At the outset, I should like to make a special appeal to all the countries represented here in the name of a country which has demonstrated its resolve to withstand the most cowardly and inhumane form of violence. I call on every one of you to make one last effort, an effort to seek a new formula and exhaust all avenues of reason and intelligence in order to achieve peace in the Persian Gulf. We must attempt to rescue thousands from the risk of death and desolation. If, at the end of the process, folly wins the day and the use of force becomes necessary, let it be clear that it will be because of the intransigence of those who resorted to violence and not because of a lack of will or generosity on the part of those of us who truly believe that the only worthwhile victory is the triumph of life and peace.
I would like to express my heartfelt congratulations to you, Sir, on your election as President of the Assembly. Your country, although a small one, has always played a key role in this institution. I would also like to express our gratitude to Mr. Garba for his splendid work at the last session. I would also like to pay a tribute to Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar, a distinguished Latin American, for his excellent leadership at the helm of this institution.
Colombia joins in greeting Liechtenstein and the new Yemen, both sitting for the first time as full Members of this Assembly.
Each time that a Colombian Head of State addresses the Assembly, he has begun by reading a long list of names of important officials - young leaders, judges, soldiers and policemen - who have lost their lives at the hands of the drug traffickers. This list was followed by a call for concerted action by all nations to stand with Colombia against the drug scourge. We have made this call because Colombia has paid the highest price in this struggle. That list of names has increased significantly since former President Virgilio Barco spoke to this Assembly less than one year ago.
Today, I am not going to read the list. I would however like to tell the world that today the list is even longer and bloodier than ever. We still face very difficult days ahead.
In the course of the last electoral campaign alone, the drug terrorists assassinated three presidential candidates, including Luis Carlos Galan, my friend, and the candidate I was associated with as campaign manager. This is what has happened as far as our political leaders are concerned. It is, however, the civilian population, ordinary Colombians, who are paying the highest price.
The drug terrorists have placed dozens of car bombs in the streets of our cities. On the day we innocently celebrate as Mother's Day in Colombia, cars filled with dynamite exploded at shopping centres crowded with children. Many of them lost their lives. A commercial airplane exploded over Bogota because of a high-powered bomb placed under a seat by drug terrorists. The building which housed the administrative security department was entirely demolished by a blast of a ton of dynamite placed inside a bus. The terrorists offered to pay the sum of 2 million pesos, almost $4,000, for each policeman killed. Close to 300 policemen were murdered by the paid assassins. It was thus that Colombians came to realise that our mourning would be more frequent than everyone else's.
In today's world addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations is a significant event in the life of any public figure. It is a unique and splendid opportunity to address all the peoples of the world. I believe that my commitment to this audience and this institution requires me to say something useful and meaningful. It should be something that adds to the experience of the Assembly, an organisation endowed by its founders with the unique quality of bringing together all the peoples, all the cultures, all the religions that encompass and guide the human race.
It may be useful to recall the words spoken by William Faulkner 47 years ago, when he addressed the Swedish Academy:
"One should teach oneself that there is nothing more disgraceful than to be afraid."
Colombia is not a powerful country; it is not a wealthy country. Our wealth and our power come from the tenacity with which we maintain our democratic ideals and with which we adhere to the Charter of the United Nations. Our belief and our firm attachment to those fundamental values are our real strength.
Optimism over the inevitable advance of democracy and freedom should not, however, blind us to the obstacles to world stability.
With the abatement of the East-West conflict, which for more than 40 years hung over us like a spectre of war, it is becoming clear that peace does not depend on avoiding the nuclear annihilation of humanity. Today the conflicts and threats that hang over the world community are of another kind, one that is no less dangerous than the arms race or the overweening belligerence between the super-Powers.
As the Secretary-General stated in his report:
"The Charter of the United Nations governs relations between States. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights pertains to relations between the State and the individual. The time has come to devise a covenant regulating relations between humankind and nature." (A,4SS1. p. 22)
Colombia has one of the widest biological bases in the world. In our country there is unique wealth as regards the presence and variety of vegetable and animal species. We believe that that heritage is our own but it also belongs to all of mankind. For this reason in the Orinoquia and the Amazon we have protected an area larger in size than Great Britain. But the responsibility and the cost of preserving the environment should not rest solely on those developing countries that still have the luxury of possessing vast forests and virgin lands. It is inadmissible that those industrialised countries that devastated and continue to exploit natural resources, within the framework of unbridled development, are trying to shirk their responsibilities. The industrialised world has an ecological debt to mankind.
There is on the horizon a dangerous threat of ecological disaster for the developing world imposed by those countries that are primarily responsible for the deterioration of the world environment. If we do not act soon to find more effective machinery within a multilateral framework, the question of the environment will become a new source of conflict between North and South.
Colombia will therefore participate actively in the preparation of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development to be held in Brazil in 1992.
There are other threats to peace and stability, particularly for the developing countries, and 1 am referring to the conventional arms race and the illegal traffic in drugs. Colombia has repeatedly stressed the latter because we have personal experience of the carnage it causes. We hope that nest year the General Assembly will adopt the recommendations of the group of experts crested at the request of my country, which is now working on this subject.
Nor can we disregard the significance of the deliberations of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT).
We hope that the developing countries will concede the liberalization of commercial services, telecommunications and high technology and that at the same time there will be a real opening up of markets for agricultural goods in the industrialized countries, which at present are scanty and not very significant. This imbalance could endanger continuation of the multilateral trade negotiations.
I am sure that at the World Summit for Children, at which so many world leaders will be brought together, with the signing of the final act we will give great momentum to work being done for children and young people throughout the world. My nine-year-old child accompanied me here so that he will be able to bear witness to the efforts that Governments and leaders are making.
The conflict in the Persian Gulf is the greatest threat to world peace in recent times. But paradoxically it gives us an opportunity further to develop detente throughout the world. If the world can stand as one in confronting all acts of aggression and violations of international law and human rights, by whatever aggressor nation, then we shall establish a precedent for co-operation that can serve to bring about stability. On relations with the community of nations are constantly guided by the principles that guarantee civilised coexistence among peoples. Defence of and respect for human rights, the legal equality of States, the peaceful settlement of disputes, respect for rejection of the use of force, and above all non-intervention and the self-determination of peoples - they are the principles that guide our international policies. They give us an active mandate which, as a clear expression of those convictions, determines our actions in the Security Council and in multilateral organisations.
We do not believe it is possible to build peace without pluralism, without tolerance for others’ ideas. That is what we believe in Colombia, and that is why Mr. Antonio Havarro Holf now serves on our Council of Ministers, while barely six months ago he was taking up arms and fighting as a member of the M-19 guerrilla group. Like the hundreds of former guerrillas of that now demobilised insurgent group, he has found in Colombia a climate in which he can leave the armed struggle without renouncing his ideals of social change. The seriousness of his commitment deserves firm electoral support.
I should like to recall that in recent times violence has knocked at the door of every Colombian and has sorely tried the character of the nation. Those who advocate violence failed to realize that our country would rise up in the face of adversity; that in the face of death and suffering, life and hope become greater. Colombians responded to bullets and bombs by voting. They went to the polls and overwhelmingly voted in favour of a democratic and peaceful country.
Drug trafficking may not be as tangible a threat to peace as tanks and combat aircraft, but it is just as real and no less devastating. It has become one of the worst enemies of social integrity and democratic stability. Sooner or later, we will uproot drug trafficking, but if the rest of the international community does not make sacrifices similar to those of Colombia, mankind will never be free of its ferocious grip.
A considerable portion of the billions of dollars drug consumers pay to dealers ends up in the hands of the drug-traffic terrorists who violate the right to life and threaten our institutions. But we have learned to give no quarter to organized terrorism. Drug trafficking is primarily responsible for violations of human rights in countries where traffickers are active.
The world community has been able to activate global co-operation to face possible war and to defend international law. We have in less than a month mobilized enormous war power from one end of the world to the other, and if we can do that I am convinced we are able similarly to achieve satisfactory results in the fight against drug trafficking.
No other nation has fought drug trafficking and its organizations more than Colombia. No other nation has obtained the results Colombia has achieved. In this long struggle, we have struck heavy blows against the drug traffickers and their terrorist structure.
A highly significant percentage of all cocaine seized and destroyed in the world has been the work of the Colombian authorities. This is reflected in the considerable increase in drug prices in the streets of this city as well as in the poor neighbourhoods of Washington, DC. At the other end of the chain, coca-leaf prices have plummeted below the cost of production.
As long as demand does not decrease in the developed world, there will always be more laboratories and the drug traffickers will become increasingly wealthy, regardless of their nationality. To be sure, there are some encouraging signs. The measures adopted by President George Bush against drug use in the United States are beginning to show results at middle-income levels.
That is why, following inexorable market forces, the drug traffic is shifting towards other countries and regions, such as Europe and part of Asia. We do not want even to think about the consequences in Colombia and in high-income countries, such as Japan or the European nations, of a demand for drugs, such as that of the United States.
We have before us a great opportunity. If we take advantage of the current low prices of the coca leaf to push for a massive alternative crop development, and if the world community acts promptly and takes harsh measures to break the other links of the chain, such as the laundering of dollars, the traffic in precursor chemical products and weapons, and increased consumption, it is possible we may then be close to adopting a policy capable of putting an end to this phenomenon.
Colombia actively promotes initiatives which seek concerted international action against the laundering of dollars and the trade in the dangerous precursor chemicals used in the processing of cocaine. We support the call for world conferences to address these important issues in the fight against drugs.
The war on drugs cannot, however, be the sole responsibility of one country or even a small group of countries. Drug trafficking is fed by a network of activities that cross every boundary on the planet and involves, in one way or the other, almost all nations. No one is safe from this threat. Until we have definitively defeated this enemy all over the world, without exception, nobody can rest assured that his sons and daughters will be free of this vice and violence engendered by drugs.
Colombia considers especially important the creation of an international penal jurisdiction in the fight against drug trafficking. That is why we view with the greatest interest discussions on this issue in the International Juridical Committee.
Drug trafficking is, then, an activity which requires multilateral solutions. It is not enough that the United States, Peru, Bolivia and Colombia - the signatories to the Declaration of Cartagena - are resolute in their willingness to face the problem. To be effective, all countries must be involved. No institution is better suited to the task than the United Nations. For this reason, we support the United Nations current effort to evaluate the work being carried out by its bodies in the area of narcotics.
It is necessary to create a single authority within the United Nations with sufficient capacity to face the problem. We expect to play a leading role in such a forum, and we seek to participate actively, regardless of the institutional mechanism finally adopted.
In the light of the recent crisis in the Persian Gulf, President Bush requested and obtained economic assistance to offset the costs of the United States effort and thus help guarantee the effectiveness of the United Nations decisions.
Fighting an enemy even more dangerous to humanity, Colombia has received repeated expressions of solidarity, but very few real measures of support. While nations have demonstrated their economic support for the United States, on the other side of the world, Colombia, fighting against that other enemy of humanity and suffering economic and social hardship has, in fact, received no compensation at all.
It is time that repeatedly announced initiatives be converted into concrete actions. We are waiting for the European Economic Community to translate into concrete action its offers to help Colombia and the other Andean nations. We have been awaiting the adoption of the preferential trade system for the countries that signed the Declaration of Cartagena, also known as the Andean Initiative, and its prompt approval by the Congress of the United States. We hope, too, that there will be initiatives in this area by Japan and the countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations.
We would like to see, within the framework of the Initiative for the Americas, the adoption of a special and speedy procedure of negotiations with those countries most seriously affected because of their firm stand against drug trafficking. Our military, judges and policemen know how to do their jobs. They have received minimal specific aid. We are grateful for that aid, but we insist there is a need for solidarity with the Colombian people, who have borne the brunt of this struggle.
Friends of the United Nations, let us consider for α moment the role of principles in world events. In the Persian Gulf the principle of non-aggression has united the most diverse countries in the world and consolidated the power of the Security Council as an organ designed to impose international law.
In Central and Eastern Europe, where emerging democracies experienced oppression in the past, freedom and democracy have blossomed into a revolution of great historical significance.
In South Africa, the discussions between Nelson Mandela, who was recently released, and the Government are opening a window of hope that the principle of the equality of men, regardless of race, shall prevail.
In Chile, millions of citizens said no to the dictatorship, and chose representative democracy instead.
In Nicaragua, the Sandinista regime honoured its electoral promises.
Throughout Latin America, the principle of democracy is being applied with new strength and vigour.
In Colombia, the people have faith in the future, and have turned optimism into one more reason to continue struggling for peace. We are the Latin American country with the most marked growth in this past decade, and we are continuing to grow. Our democratic principles, tolerance, freedom and respect for the ideas of others continue to strengthen in spite of attacks from violent sectors.
We are speaking about major achievements that seemed unlikely a few years ago. These are exciting times, when sew leadership based on old principles is coming into bloom everywhere.
Within this greet setting^ and under the aegis of this Assembly, rests the responsibility of keeping this flower alive, of caring for its fragile roots and protecting it whatever the cost.
As a tribute of my people, I bring the Assembly its affirmation of an ambitious and comforting rule: courage does pay off. Colombians are willing to defend their right to live free of fear. Colombians will never surrender their basic principles. Colombians will continue to defend their most sacred values in the face of violence, whether or not they stand alone in the world.
As I learned from the words of a peasant of my country, "The most beautiful flowers of the garden may be destroyed, but nothing can stop the arrival of spring."


I wish first of all to offer you, Mr. President, my warm congratulations on your election to your high office. You are guiding the foreign policy of a country with which we have close, friendly relations. We are partners with Malta in developing security and co-operation in Europe. With you as its President this session of the General Assembly is in good hands.
I wish as well to express my thanks to your predecessor, Ambassador Joseph Garba, for the way in which he conducted his presidency.
Our special thanks and appreciation go to the Secretary-General. We are determined to continue to support his courageous and far-sighted initiatives. You, Mr. Secretary-General, have opened up new ways in which the United Nations can successfully perform its peace keeping role.
I take great pleasure in the fact that Liechtenstein, a neighbour with whom we have a close relationship, has become the youngest member of this family of nations.
I extend a cordial welcome in this Assembly to the representative of Namibia, a country with which we are closely associated by virtue of our history, our friendship and our joint efforts to secure its independence.
We warmly congratulate our friends the people of Yemen on having achieved unity. We sincerely hope that the Korean nation, too, will soon be able to overcome its division.
I welcome the statement of fundamental significance made by my Italian colleague, Mr. De Michelis, on behalf of the European Community. We spoke in our name as well.
Over the past year the situation in Europe, and with it the situation in Germany, has undergone fundamental change. Never has it been more obvious how closely Germany's fate is linked with that of Europe. The unity of Germany is a step towards the unity of Europe. The third of October 1990 will be the day of German unity. Xo us Germans, this will be a day of rejoicing, gratitude and reflection. Our long-cherished desire to unite in peace and freedom will be fulfilled. This is a source of great pleasure for us. The world is following the unification of Germany with good will, sympathy and friendship. For this we are deeply grateful.
In this historic phase, the Germans are filled with a sense of history and responsibility; they are not being carried away with nationalistic exuberance. We will not forget the endless suffering that was brought upon the nations of Europe and the world in the name of Germany. We commemorate all the victims of war and tyranny. We recall, especially, the untold suffering inflicted upon the Jewish people. We are aware of our responsibility and we accept it. To the General Assembly of the United Nations I address this message: We Germans are united in the determination that none of this must ever be allowed to happen again.
Our nation will live united again in one democratic State. That State, our common State, will be founded on respect for inalienable human rights. Only peace will emanate from German soil. For all time, the principles enshrined in our Constitution, human rights and human dignity, democracy and the rule of law, social justice and respect for creation, peace and good-neighbourly relations will govern our thoughts and our actions.
As an equal partner in a united Europe, we are resolved to serve world peace. This commitment, which is embodied in the preamble to our Basic Law, determines our policy. It is a rejection of power politics; it implies a policy based on responsibility.
Ever since it joined the United Nations, the Federal Republic of Germany has demanded in this world forum the unification of our indivisible nation. Every year since 1974, I myself have declared in the General Assembly our determination to work for a state of peace in Europe in which the German nation would recover its unity in free self-determination.
On every such occasion, I also had in mind the Germans living in the region I personally come from, the German Democratic Republic. I knew they longed for German unity just as much as we in the Federal Republic of Germany, but they were not able to express their feelings and views here in this Assembly of the United Nations. Now, however, they have demonstrated their commitment to freedom and unity. Together with the, we now rejoice in German unity. We know that it will bring unity for Europe, too. So today, united in heart and in will, we greet the nations of the world.
This occasion fills me with deep gratitude, gratitude which I also extend to my colleagues James Baker, Roland Dumas, Douglas Herd and Eduard Shevardnadse who, especially in recent months, have done so much to help us achieve this objective.
The recollection of last year's session of the General Assembly indicates the problems we had to solve. At that time, we were still involved in laborious negotiations to open the door to freedom for the thousands of Germans confined in our embassy in Prague.
My thanks goes out also to the courageous Hungarian people, who were the first to lift the iron curtain.
We Germans realised all along that only peace and the ending of Europe's division could lead to the unification of our country. We seized the opportunities for co-operation. We renounced the use or threat of force and have kept that pledge. We banked on the peace-inspiring strength of human rights and fundamental freedoms. We established a political order based on freedom in the Federal Republic of Germany.
With the support of our friends and partners, we regained the confidence of the nations of the world, and thus established one of the foundations for German unity. Milestones along the road are the Federal Republic's membership in the Council of Europe, the Western Alliance and the European Community. By taking these steps, we returned to the community of democracies.
Through the treaties of Moscow and Warsaw and the treaty with Czechoslovakia, the foundations were laid for a new relationship with our Eastern neighbours. And the basic treaty with the German Democratic Republic created a modus vivendi between the two German States for the time the nation remained divided.
That German treaty policy also opened the way to the Helsinki Final Act. The momentum of the process of the Committee on Security and Co-operation in Europe and the radical reforms in the Soviet Union under the leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev ultimately made it possible to end Europe's and hence Germany's division.
The peoples of Central and Eastern Europe chose the path of peaceful revolution leading to freedom and democracy. Each of their decisions was a decision in favour of Europe. Through their peaceful revolution the Germans now uniting with us have demonstrated to the whole world their belief in freedom, in unity and democracy, and hence in Europe.
We thank our friends and allies in the West. They have stood by our side in good and in difficult times. To the American people in particular I wish to says we shall never forget the airlift to Berlin.
On the eve of German unification we convey our thanks to President Bush, President Mitterrand and Prime Minister Thatcher for their support, their statesmanly far-sightedness and their understanding of our nation's longing for unity.
We thank our friends in the European Community headed by the President of the Commission, Jacques Delors, and we thank our friends all over the world.
We are grateful to President Gorbachev. His courageous policy has opened Europe's way to a new future and given Germany the chance to recover its unity in freedom. This also means a great deal for the future of German-Soviet relations.
We Germans want nothing other than to live in freedom and democracy, in unity and peace with all our neighbours. In the Treaty on the Final Settlement with respect to Germany, which we signed in Moscow on 12 September, with France, the Soviet Union, the United States of America and the United Kingdom, we Germans reaffirmed the united Germany's responsibility for peace.
With our policy we aim to set a good example. We reaffirm our renunciation of the manufacture of, possession of and control over nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. We renew our commitment to the rights and obligations arising from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear weapons. Our decision to reduce the personnel strength of the armed forces of the united Germany to 370,000 is a significant German contribution to extensive disarmament in Europe.
The united Germany has no territorial claims whatsoever against other States and will not assert any in the future. The inviolability of national borders is s corner-stone of Europe's peaceful order. The united Germany will confirm the existing German-Polish border in a treaty that is binding under international law. Our relationship with Poland is a special manifestation of our European calling. We therefore intend to establish in an additional, comprehensive treaty the basis for a new chapter of good-neighbourly relations between Germans and Poles. Germany recognises and accepts its responsibility to help build a better future for Europe. We want, not a German Europe, but a European Germany.
We belong to the European Community. On 1 January 1993 the common European internal market will have been completed. It will be an open market and thus generate fresh impulses for the world economy.
We want the European Community to be an economic and monetary union and a political union. As the European Community's identity grows on the way to European union, we do not want the Atlantic to grow wider. A transatlantic declaration by the European Community and the North American democracies will add a new quality to our community based on common values and a common fate.
The more quickly we achieve, European union the more we foster the unification of the whole of Europe. On the path to European union the European Community is already becoming increasingly attractive to the whole of Europe. The nucleus of this unique link between the European democracies is the close Franco-German friendship. We pledge ourselves to that friendship as one of the permanent foundations of all German foreign policy. On 3 October 1990 all Germans will be bound up in the European Community and in the Franco-German friendship. The sovereign, democratic and free Germany will be committed to unity, stability and progress is the whole of Europe.
The united Germany will carry greater weight. With it we shall not strive for more power but shall be conscious of the greater responsibility such additional weight implies. We shall accept this responsibility in Europe and around the world. We shall place our weight on Europe's scales in such a way that it will benefit all nations on our continent and hence the whole of mankind. In this way we shall help Europe meet its responsibility is shaping the emerging new world order. Our conduct will bear out all those who confidently support the process of German unification.
A new concept of the coexistence of nations is taking shape. It is based on the awareness of the global challenges and of global interdependence. It takes into account the world's responsibility for future generations. It is the concept of equal rights for large and small nations, of limiting national powers through the transfer of sovereign rights to community institutions, of the interlocking of economic interests, of regional solidarity and interdependence. This concept and not yesterday's policy based on hegemonic aspirations and equilibrium is the model for stability and prosperity in the Europe and in the world of tomorrow.
We Germans are contributing our regained sovereignty to that concept. To Europe this means that the ideological causes of tensions must not be supplanted by now ones resulting from different standards of living. How that the wall has come down and the iron curtain has been lifted we do not want new divisions to take their place, divisions arising from poverty, social injustice or the disparate treatment of nature.
The whole continent must be committed to parliamentary democracy, respect for human rights, the principles of social market economy; social justice, protection of the natural sources of life and the peaceful coexistence of nations. Only in this way can the one Europe emerge.
Over 40 years of division have left scars in Germany and Europe; the healing of those scars will require great political and economic efforts.
We regard our contribution to the reconstruction of Europe as an Investment in the future of our own nation as well as in that of Europe. In this we perceive our European calling - the European calling of us Germane. The unification of Germany will not cause us to forget the aim of unifying the whole of Europe.
Our aim is a Europe based on solidarity and partnership which will fulfil the expectations of all European peoples. Solidarity and partnership must prevail, not rivalry and hegemony. The establishment of a Bound political, economic, social and ecological framework for the process of transformation in Central and Eastern Europe is the main objective of a stability-oriented European policy in which the military factors increasingly lose their significance.
Our economic and political weight and our position at the centre of Europe place a special responsibility on us Germans in this respect and we are facing up to this responsibility.
In this connection we have always been aware that the Soviet Union belongs to Europe. Without the Soviet Union there can be no united Europe.
With the German-Soviet Treaty on Good-Neighbourly Relations, Partnership and Co-operation, which was initialled in Moscow recently, the two countries intend to shape their future together. We want to be able to trust one another in every respect. The Treaty affords the basis for this.
Other members of the European Community also arm negotiating co-operation agreements with the Soviet Union. Through such close co-operation with the members of the European Community, the Soviet Union is tying its future to that of Europe.
The international economic and financial institutions will also have to take this new development into account. Mew thinking is called for everywhere.
We are also seeking close co-operation with all our neighbours in Central and South-eastern Europe, with which we have many traditions and interests in common.
The ending of the East-West confrontation und the development of a new relationship between the member States of the two alliances open the way for a new system of co-operation in Europe in the field of security as well. The changing North Atlantic defence alliance and the European Community, to which the united Germany too will belong, as well as the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) will be pillars of this new system. They will be pillars of a new development in which military security will be complemented by a broader and more solid foundation for co-operation aimed at safeguarding peace. The members of both alliances no longer regard each other as adversaries, nor as a threat.
Fifteen years ago the 35 signatories of the CSCE Helsinki Final Act pledged themselves to freedom, democracy and respect for human rights. Developments since then have borne out that bold decision of 1975. The summit conference due to be held in Paris on 19 November will raise the CSCE process to a new level and create the first common institutions of the new, the one, Europe.
Regular meetings of Heads of State and Government and of Foreign Ministers, а centre for conflict prevention and a secretariat will provide the first, solid foundations for a lasting peaceful order throughout Europe based on co-operation.
A new grand perspective is opening up for Europe. As a country situated in the heart of Europe, the united Germany aware of its pan-European responsibility will do anything possible to ensure that this perspective becomes a reality for all Europeans.
The CSCE in Europe is developing, step by step, with our active participation, into a system of European co-operation, security and stability. The North American democracies are involved in this process as natural and important partners. The fact that the CSCE Conference of Foreign Ministers is to place here, on American soil, nest week is of symbolic importance.
Disarmament and the creation of co-operative security remain the key to the common European house. The disarmament negotiations must keep pace with the dynamic political developments. The pending conclusion of the Vienna negotiations on conventional disarmament will have to be followed as soon as possible by negotiations aimed at eliminating short-range nuclear missiles. Further steps to reduce forces are necessary. We urge the overdue conclusion of a convention providing for a global ban on chemical weapons. These barbaric swans of destruction must be eliminated worldwide. By reducing their nuclear weapons, the super-Powers are meeting their obligations to mankind. The universal validity of the non-proliferation Treaty must be assured for the sake of man's survival. Co-ordinated international efforts are needed to prevent the dissemination of delivery systems for nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.
But disarmament measures do not automatically remove armament factories. Economic expediency must never be accepted as justification for the manufacture of weapons which threaten peace in other parts of the world. The third world must no longer be the market for armaments which disarmament agreements in Europe have made redundant. Consequently, further disarmament agreements should bind contracting parties to use surplus capacities for peaceful purposes.
For years, we have been calling for greater transparency with regard to exports of weapons. Now this matter is acquiring greater urgency and receiving support. I welcome Foreign Minister Shevardnadze's initiative in this respect, the compulsory registration of arm exports with the United Nations should he introduced immediately and all violations of this requirement should be severely punished.
The conversion of armaments factories to the production of civilian goods is a global task in the cause of peace. We are prepared to co-operate with any nation in this new and important field of international security.
We observe the signs of a new age not only in Europe but also in the efforts to solve regional conflicts - from Central America to Afghanistan, from Cambodia to Korea. In the Middle East, the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people has to be reconciled with Israel's right to exist and its security. In the Republic of South Africa the aim is to overcome inhuman apartheid. We hop· the dialogue between the representatives of the black Majority and those of the white minority with the aim of completely removing apartheid, will quickly prove successful.
We condemn Iraq's aggression against its Arab and Islamic neighbour against a Member of the United Nations Kuwait. The community of nations cannot tolerate the invasion and annexation of a country. The human rights of innocent people of all nations have been violated. There is no justification and no excuse for such conduct. Aggression must be treated as aggression, blackmail as blackmail, and the volatile of human rights must be treated as the violation of human rights if the world's sense of right and wrong is not to be injured.
As always, it is the poorest of all who suffer most as a result of this kind of conflict. Oil prices are rising. Those first to feel the effects are the developing countries which have no sources of energy. Years of hard work are being undone. Never before in its history has the United Nations taken such a united and determined stand against an aggressor. Never before has an aggressor had less chance of splitting an international community acting as one.
Time does not work for Saddam Hussein. Only the three routes charted by the Security Council will lead Iraq out of its self-imposed isolation: the complete and unconditional withdrawal from Kuwait; the restoration of that country's full sovereignty; and the immediate release of all hostages. The refusal of the Iraqi leadership to meet these demands is a challenge to the whole community of nations. We give our unqualified support to the implementation of these resolutions of the United Nations. Aggression cannot be, must never be, rewarded.
The determination and joint action of the Members of the United Nations can mark the beginning of a new peace-keeping role for the world Organisation. All Members must recognise and live up to their responsibility. No desire peace for the nations of that region, and we desire the unity of the Arab world, which has been destroyed by Iraq's aggression.
The opportunities for developing a new world order lie in solidarity and joint action. They must be taken. The family of nations acted wisely when, after the terrible experience of two world wars, it placed the responsibility for safeguarding world peace in the hands of the United Nations. There is a good chance now - as there never was in the past - of the noble aims enshrined in the United Nations Charter being comprehensively achieved. The ending of the East-West conflict has helped make this possible. Ideological barriers are falling. The settlement of conflicts by military means is becoming increasingly outlawed. Rule of law is acquiring greater significance.
And thus attention focuses on the Organisation whose task it is to resolve differences among nations by peaceful means. This is the historic hour of the United Nations. The peace-keeping potential of the Charter must be fully exhausted. The community of nations must throw its whole weight behind the Secretary-General's efforts to maintain world peace.
The termination of the East-West conflict will release considerable material, spiritual and political energies with which to overcome the global challenges confronting us; the elimination of famine, poverty and underdevelopment in the third world; the overcoming of the debt problem; and the protection of the natural sources of life.
The United Nations can now  at long last, play its proper role in shaping an interdependent world, a world which must be governed by a sense of mutual responsibility rather than by power politics. We all know that the challenges facing mankind as a whole no longer leave any country free from responsibility. The one world in which we have been placed requires new, joint efforts on the part of East and Nest, North and South, new systems of co-operation and of securing peace, both global and regional. A single State, however great and powerful it may be, is in ever-increasing areas incapable of coping with those challenges alone. The one world calls for joint action, globally and regionally, on account of its vulnerability, which is assuming threatening proportions, but also on account of the many unused opportunities for its development. Interdependence and co-operation are the factors governing the now age we are entering. A new ethical standard is required for the on· world. It must b· a standard of shared responsibility for the world as a whole, for the common environment, and for our common posterity.
Thus a new community of mutual responsibility should emerge as the basis of a new world order - a global order embracing the diversity of nations, their cultures, traditions and religions; an order in which all retain their identity in mutual respect and in which all can live together, reconciled with each other, a global order of peace and co-operation, of freedom and human rights, demands, above all, social justice. True peace exists only where all human rights are respected.
The two United Nations Covenants protecting political as well as economic and social rights must be viewed together. Nowhere must they be simply empty postulations; their practical application to all is needed. A decent human existence also presupposes an unharmed environment. It presupposes the preservation of man's natural sources of life. The safeguarding of global peace demands sot only the ending of man's war against man but also the ending of economic exploitation. It also demands the ending of man's war against nature. There should be a third United Nations human rights covenant to protect the natural sources of life.
The task of the United Nations in this decade is to develop the international legal system further in order to ensure mankind's survival. Never before has it been more important to contemplate the consequences for posterity of the political, security, economic, technological and environmental decisions we take today. However before has a generation's responsibility for the future been greater. But never before have there been such opportunities for new thinking and new action, we Germans intend to devote our talents, our experience and our economic resources to the common effort to accomplish this huge task.
The reorganisation of industry in the new federal states which are about to become a part of our country and our assistance for the reforms being undertaken in Central and Eastern Europe confront us with huge problems. None the less, we shall make even greater efforts to meet our responsibility towards the third-world countries. Our contribution to their development through the transfer of know-how, technology and capital will increase, not decrease.
Solidarity with Central and Eastern Europe does not imply that we are turning away from the third world. The group of countries capable of using and willing to use their material resources to create a better world will on the whole grow larger.
The economic reforms in Central and Eastern Europe, including the Soviet Union, will not only open up new opportunities for the countries concerned but third world nations too, will derive benefit from the larger markets, from the more intensive international division of labour and from the more efficient use of scarce natural resources. In this way German and European unification will produce its peace dividend for all regions of the world.
New thinking and new action are possible only if all concerned recognize their own mistakes. Only then will North and South find solutions to the problems of the future. Only thus shall we all be able to meet our special responsibility in the quest for a global civilization capable of survival.
The development of a market- and ecologically-oriented civilization which is both pluralistic and yet collective and capable of coping with the problems of tomorrow is the real challenge at the end of this century. Economic freedom must not become self-destructive. Technological advancement has made it possible for us to give the world a more humane countenance. But if we fail we shall destroy the sources of life not only for ourselves but for future generations. A strategy for ensuring mankind's survival must assume the place in our thoughts and in our actions which has up to now been reserved for the preservation of national interests, often enough through power politics and the weight of our arms policy.
This above all else is the global conversion of thought and action which we must all achieve both as States and as individuals. We must together embark on solutions which will open up to a world population numbering over 6 billion at the end of this millennium a tangible common perspective for life in decent human conditions. A number of important conferences lie ahead. They must be used for this purpose.
The report submitted by the South Commission chaired by Julius Nyerere shows that a new language has been found a language in which "own" mistakes too are admitted. This report shows that the third world is meeting its responsibility in the one world and for the one world. The industrial countries must respond to this signal. New thinking and new action is called for on both sides. The opportunities for a new beginning in the dialogue between North and South based on fairness and partnership and with each side prepared to learn from the other have never been better than at this moment.
The termination of the East-West confrontation has freed that dialogue from ideological ballast. This makes it easier to concentrate on the real problems of development. An open dialogue between North and South is the major political task of the present time. We must face up to this task and we must do so now.
The indebtedness of the developing countries and its paralysing effects on economic growth and development continue to increase. According to International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates it will rise by 7 per cent to over $1.3 trillion by the end of 1991. Despite progress with the implementation of the extended debt strategy, no breakthrough has been achieved. On the contrary: in view of higher oil prices and interest rates, prospects for the debtor countries have clearly deteriorated. The international financial organizations must do even more to meet their responsibility for development in the third world.
The Uruguay Round must end successfully, especially for the sake of the developing countries. Their growing integration into the world economy must also be reflected in the shaping of general economic conditions. The greatest development resource is the people in the developing countries themselves. These people must be given a hope must be given prospects for the future, for themselves and for their children. The World Summit for Children this coming weekend will provide important stimulus.
The key problem in terms of global ecology is the rapid growth of the world population. Only by means of a global equalisation of burdens in which national economic policies set new priorities in order to level off the extreme disparities in living conditions will it be possible to change general social, economic and cultural conditions in the third world to such an extent that large families will no longer need children as a means of supplementing the family income or as old-age insurance.
Family planning schemes alone will not have any lasting effect on birth rates. They must be complemented by measures to ensure basic economic and social security, gradually to rectify the unjust distribution of income and to improve educational opportunities in many countries.
No one can want the excessive consumption rates for commodities and energy to continue to increase in the industrial countries, or that this trend should be continued by over 6 billion people at the end of this decade. That would spell ecological disaster. All of us in the industrial countries must change our way of life. Governments can help by offering market incentives, by regulation and by redistributing tax burdens. The environment-friendly use of resources and the recycling of materials must be made worthwhile for companies, but not the squandering of energy and other resources.
Another key problem is the changing of the world climate through the greenhouse effect and the depletion of the ozone layer. Bach of the Earth's many environmental problems will be exacerbated if these two central problems are not solved. Air pollution, the extinction of species and erosion, will increase dramatically and reduce the chances of survival of future generations.
The Federal Republic of Germany, being a signatory of the Hague Declaration of the spring of 1989, regards the decisions taken at the Paris economic summit in July 1989 as the political basis for an international convention to protect the Earth's atmosphere. That convention should be signed as a framework agreement at the world Conference on Environment and Development to be held in Brazil in 1992. Supportive measures under the aegis of the United Nations are indispensable if changes in present energy policies are to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and trace gases.
The good-example policy as regards environmental protection will be continued after the unification of the two German States. A policy for safeguarding the environment is also a policy for safeguarding world peace. Responsibility for protecting mankind's natural and cultural heritage is one of the classic responsibilities of the United Nations as it seeks to maintain world peace. This was impressively confirmed by the World Charter for Nature which the General Assembly adopted in October 1982.
We all have the choice of either definitively and irrevocably destroying the Earth within a few decades or adopting a responsible attitude and beginning to use nature's resources and energy sensibly on the basis of partnership and in a genuinely environment-friendly manner.
This means that we must first soberly take stock of the situation, taking into account the consequences for the environment of aberrations ranging from energy wasting to the present climatically damaging exploitation of tropical rain forests to name only two of the many global ecological problems. But it implies, above all, admitting our omissions, our thoughtlessness, and our deliberate blindness to approaching disasters. Let us be serious about the principle of responsibility.
We all realise that we are confronted by global challenges that affect everyone’s survival. The safeguarding of peace, economic development, social justice, disarmament and the protection of life's natural resources are those global challenges. The task of coping with them requires all our energies, ideas and efforts.
The division of my country and of Europe and the East-West confrontation have been a heavy burden on us all. Ideological confrontation, power politics and the striving for superiority over others forced us all into an anus race. They divided Europe and the world. All this has tied up considerable energy. That energy is now being released. We can use it together in Meeting our global responsibility for a peace-keeping task on a scale unprecedented in the history of mankind, that is, for the one world.
On the eve of its unification Germany declares to the family of nations: Ho shall meet our responsibility in Europe and in the world; we shall meet our responsibility for Europe and for the world.
When on the night of 2-3 October 1990, we Germans unite, our mood will be one of gratitude and joy, of reflection and responsibility. It will unite us with the hopes, wishes and objectives of the nations of Europe and of the world. The united Germany will render its contribution to peace and to freedom in Europe and throughout the whole world.


On behalf of the President of the Republic of Kenya, the Honourable Daniel Arap Moi, allow me to convey to Mr. Guido de Marco Kenya's warm congratulations on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-fifth session. Kenya is confident that his wide experience will steer the session to a successful conclusion of its deliberations on complex issues of critical importance to the international community. I wish him a successful presidency.
I wish also to pay a tribute to his predecessor, Mr. Joseph Garba, for the manner in which he conducted the affairs of the Assembly at its forty-fourth session.
My country's sincere appreciation goes also to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for his continued search for peaceful solutions to the seemingly intractable problems of the world. We should also like to talk, this opportunity to congratulate the new Member State of Liechtenstein and to welcome it to the United Nations.
The achievement of independence by Namibia in March this year was a historic event. The freeing of a people from decades of subjugation and discrimination was a testimony to the eventual triumph of good over evil. It was proof of what we have been saying for years that if the international community is genuinely serious about resolving conflicts, then concerted international action can and will rid the world of most of its evils. Kenya is proud to have made a contribution to the United Nations Transition Assistance Group, and we are fully committed to co-operating with Namibia in the years to come.
The past year also witnessed yet another significant contribution of the	United Nations in a conflict-resolution situation. I have in mind the role of the United Nations in Central America, and particularly in Nicaragua with regard to the successful ratification of the electoral process. We are confident that with the support of all Member States the United Nations involvement in the resolution of the Western Sahara conflict will be similarly successful.
Four months ago in this Hall the Secretary-General welcomed a great man long involved in the struggle against apartheids a man whose presence he described as a landmark in the United Nations. The Secretary-General aptly stated that Mr. Nelson Mandela was a symbol of the unconquerable spirit of the people of South Africa and a champion of freedom and justice for all. Kenya joined the international community in applauding the release of Mr. Mandela after he had languished for 27 years in South African jails.
We have over the years sought to portray the indescribable evil of the system of apartheid, but on this occasion I shall quote Mr. Mandela, who said of apartheid "It has established its own brutal worth by the number of children it has killed and the orphans, widows and widowers it can claim as its unique creation." fA,M,960. annex VI. p. 103). I wish also to remind the Assembly of those other words spoken by Mr. Mandela. We said: "It will forever remain an indelible blight on human history that the apartheid crime ever occurred. Future generations will surely ask: what error was made that this system established itself in the wake of the adoption of a Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
"It will forever remain an accusation and a challenge to all men and women of conscience that it took as long as it has before all of us stood up to say enough is enough." (ibid.)

While there can be no denying that there have been some positive developments within South Africa, Kenya nevertheless maintains that those developments are a tentative beginning to the long process ahead. The pillars of apartheid have not yet been completely dismantled, and black South Africans continue to be deprived of their rights, their freedom and their lives. Thus, while we commend President De Klerk for the steps he has taken, we remain committed to the total eradication of apartheid. We reiterate our full support for the maintenance of comprehensive sanctions against South Africa until meaningful changes have been accepted by the majority of South Africans. We also confirm our support for the Declaration on South Africa adopted at the sixteenth special session of the General Assembly. We urge all nations to abide by its call for the non-relaxation of existing measures aimed at encouraging the South African Government to eradicate apartheid until there is clear evidence of profound and irreversible change in South Africa.
The Middle East has been s region of rising tension and confrontations for a long time. However, the situation has recently been exacerbated by the invasion and annexation of Kuwait by Iraq. That invasion has been condemned by the international community, including Kenya. My country, while complying with the United Nations Security Council resolutions on the crisis, urges that no effort be spared in the search for a peaceful solution to the problem. We certainly cannot allow the acquisition of territory by use of force by any State. The Middle East has seen little progress, and Kenya continues to be concerned over the unstable situation in the region. At the core of the problem remains the question of Palestine, and we are deeply concerned at the continued deterioration in the conditions of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories. We appeal to Israel to withdraw from all territories occupied since 1967 and express our regret that all attempts to alleviate the situation have been rejected.
Kenya supports a just and lasting settlement to the Palestinian question based on the relevant United Nations resolutions. We believe that the rights off the Palestinian people, including their right to a homeland, must be realised, as well as the rights o£ all States in the region, including Israel, to live in peace within secure borders. We remain convinced of the importance of convening an international peace conference on the Middle East, with the participation of all the parties on an equal footing, and we hope that such a conference would take place in the very near future.
Kenya welcomes all attempts to achieve peace and stability in South-East Asia, particularly through a comprehensive political settlement of the Cambodian problem. We continue to maintain our position on the right of the people of Cambodia to determine their own destiny free from any outside interference, and we support the current United Nations initiatives aimed at bringing a cease-fire and free and fair elections under United Nations supervision.
In the Korean peninsula we are heartened by the continued dialogue between the two Koreas. Recent positive developments augur well for a peaceful reunification of the two countries to the mutual benefit of all the Korean people. However, should either of the Koreas wish to be admitted to the United Nations Kenya would support such an application. We believe that the unification issue should not be used as a basis for denying the wish of either of the Koreas to become a Member of our Organisation.
With regard to the question of Cyprus, Kenya regrets the lack of progress made in the inter-communal talks under the sponsorship of the Secretary-General. It is our hope that there will be a speedy withdrawal of all foreign troops and settlers from Cyprus and that all States will respect the independence of that Island nation.
It is my country's belief that disarmament is a moral imperative of the international community if the basic objectives of maintaining international peace and security are to be achieved. It is on that premise that we welcomed the successful bilateral negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union in Washington DC, in May 1990. The two super-Powers have signed various accords which include, inter alia, important commitments to cut stockpiles of their long-range nuclear arms and, of particular significance, an agreement to reduce by 30 per cent their stockpiles of nuclear missiles. The long-range nuclear-force agreement - although bumble, like the earlier Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles  in the number of weapons it seeks to eliminate - is of great political significance, especially for many non-nuclear States that advocate a comprehensive nuclear-test ban.
My country, Kenya, views the question of a nuclear-weapon test ban as one of paramount importance. In our view a comprehensive test ban is the only viable way to stop the technological momentum of the nuclear-arms race and is one appropriate tool for practical arms-control policies geared to preventing further escalation in the qualitative-arms competition. It is in view of that that my delegation looks forward to the forthcoming amendment conference of the partial test-ban Treaty in 1991.
With regard to the question of verification Kenya does not share the view that this is an obstacle to the conclusion of β comprehensive test-ban treaty. Verification is an integral part of arms-limitation and disarmament agreements, which must be verifiable in the interest of security and compliance. Although it is a complicated issue, the history of negotiated agreements is on our side. It tells us that when negotiating parties were firmly determined to reach an agreement they were always able to remove all obstacles pertaining to verification measures.
The Secretary-General's government expert study group, of which Kenya was a member, has done a very commendable job in this area, and we hope that the General Assembly will adopt the Group's recommendations, thereby enhancing the United Nations’ role in verification.
For decades African States have demonstrated their commitment to the cause of the denuclearisation of their continent as espoused by the Cairo Declaration of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) in 1964. Kenya continues to attach particular importance to the establishment of zones of peace in various parts of the world. Such zones of peace would not only strengthen the fabric of regional peace and stability but would also extend extra-regional co-operation in the field of socio-economic development. In light of this, the concept of the Indian Ocean as a zone of peace reflects the hopes and aspirations of my country as a littoral State to enhance and share in the prospects of peace and security. We therefore strongly support the proposal to convene the United Nations Conference on the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace at Colombo, Sri Lanka, in 1991. It is our sincere belief that that Conference will not only harmonize the interests of the countries in the region but also those of the major naval Powers and maritime users. Thus we commend the Ad Hoc Committee on the Indian Ocean for the good work it has done in the preparation of the Conference despite the many obstacles it has faced.
Before I comment on the international economic situation I should like to speak briefly on the Horn of Africa - my region - and the law of the sea. In the context of regional co-operation tremendous results have been achieved by the Inter-Governmental Authority on Drought and Development (IGADD) in combating recurrent droughts and desertification, which are the major causes of widespread famine, environmental deterioration and economic hardships in our region. However, it is a matter of great significance that IGAAD has served to foster the spirit of regional co-operation and become an essential forum for taking stock of Africa's problems. It is a forum within which we are able to take stock of the problems impeding economic development in our region. It is in light of that fact that my country has always supported efforts by all parties involved in the search for peaceful solutions to regional conflicts, including intra-State wars, which lead to unnecessary loss of life and seriously hamper implementation of development objectives. Our region is endeavouring to resolve destructive conflicts and to ensure peace among the States members of IGAAD in order to facilitate a better climate for wider regional trade and economic ties, which are a prerequisite for economic integration.
In this regard the Foreign Ministers of the six States members of the Authority met at Nairobi towards the end of August 1990 to elaborate on the implementation of the Declaration on peace, stability and development adopted by their Heads of State and Government on 9 July 1990 at Addis Ababa. That Declaration emphasises the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of States members and the non-use or threat of use of force against each other, as well as the peaceful settlement of disputes. The States members of the Authority have committed themselves to the peaceful resolution of inter-State and intra-State conflicts and to co-operation in all fields of socio-economic development.
Last year my Government joined the growing number of nations that have ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Kenya believes that universal acceptance of that Convention will be the only way in which the whole world can reap the benefits offered by the comprehensive regime of the Convention. To that end Kenya continues to participate actively in the work of the Preparatory Commission in the belief that any issues on which nations may disagree can be solved within that forum in a spirit of compromise.
To give further legal effect to Kenya's ratification of the Convention on this Law of the Sea we passed in 1989 a Maritime Zone Act and a Fisheries Act. Those two Acts of Parliament will clarify Kenya's claim to its maritime economic zone and ensure proper conservation and management of our maritime resources.
During the 1980s world economic growth was slow, highly imbalanced and uneven compared to the previous two decades of the 1970s and 1960s. World output grew by just over 30 per cent in the 1980s, more slowly than in the 1970s, when it increased by over 45 per cent and at a higher rate in the 1960s. That slow expansion of the global economy was characterised by great contrast in experiences and performance. While on the one hand it was a period in which the developed market economies witnessed the longest, uninterrupted growth and expansion since the Second World War, the majority of the developing countries, on the other hand, were faced with continued stagnation and declining economies. The 1980s was, for most developing countries, a decade of struggling under unyielding economic crisis, which seriously hindered progress towards the improvement of economic and social conditions resulting in increasing and widespread acute poverty. Yet the global economy experienced increasing interdependence, increasing population, increasing environmental concerns, increasing trade protectionism, increasing development and application of science and technology and increasing flows of financial resources.
While the developments on the political scene have given mankind so much hope for peace in the future, there is an urgent need to translate that into a real and durable gift through improvement in the economic field in the 1990s.
It was against that background that the developing countries took an initiative at the special session on economic co-operation held in April of this year to find ways and means of stimulating economic growth and development, particularly in the developing countries. The noble objective of improving the world economy for the benefit of all makes the Declaration that was unanimously adopted at that special session the basis for action in the 1990e. It is Kenya's position that the implementation of this important Declaration, in particular through the injection of political will by members of the international community, would constitute a significant step towards the developmental efforts of developing countries.
In the recent past the world has witnessed major changes, some of them extraordinary, some dramatic. The scone of these changes has mainly been in the political arena, but their impact in the economic field is taking shape and will soon transform international economic relations among nations. Among these changes are those that have taken place in eastern European countries and the ongoing economic process of modernisation, together with the unprecedentedly quick response with regard to assistance from the industrialised countries. The debate held at the last summer session of the Economic and Social Council confirmed that those changes have a potential to move North-South co-operation to the periphery of international relations and worsen the already severe social conditions in developing countries. While developing countries welcome the changes in Eastern Europe, they are apprehensive that resources will be diverted to that region at the expense of the developing countries. It was reassuring, however, that developed countries reiterated their commitments to assist the South and said that they would not reduce the current financial resources.
Since its emergence in 1982, the external debt crisis of developing countries has been the major obstacle to those countries' development efforts, their efforts to improve the welfare of their peoples, and has become a matter of serious concern to the international community. Despite the grave concerns that have been expressed, the many strategies discussed, and the various measures attempted so far, the crisis persists and continues to be one of the major obstacles to social and economic development in developing countries. The total debt of developing countries has been increasing, and now stands at the staggering figure of about $1.3 trillion, compared to $6 billion in 1980.
The cost of debt-servicing has been growing rapidly as a result of the unjust rates of interest, which increased excessively in the 1980s and have not shown any signs of improvement. This problem has been exacerbated by a peculiar uneconomic phenomenon: that, from their desperately needed domestic income, the developing countries are now transferring more to creditors in developed countries than they receive from those creditors.
It is noteworthy that various measures towards solving the debt crisis - measures such as the Toronto scheme, the Brady plan, the rescheduling of bilateral loons, the cancellation of some official development assistance (ODA) loans, and conversion debt-equity swaps - have been taken. These are welcome. It is, however, even more noteworthy that such measures have contributed to the control of only a very small proportion of the total debt of developing countries, that they have done little to reduce the overall burden of external indebtedness and its impact on economic growth and social conditions in developing countries. Recovery and the resumption of sustained growth in developing countries demand that immediate measures be agreed upon to end the debt problem. We therefore welcome the recently released report of Mr. Bettino Craxi, the Secretary-General's special adviser on debt, and we hope that his recommendations will help us to find lasting solutions to the debt problem.
The creation of a multilateral trade system that is open, sustainable and just is essential to the expansion of a healthy world trade and to the efficient utilisation of available global resources. The current trends towards increasing unilateralism, protectionism and rivalry militate against stable growth in world trade. Zn particular, they create serious difficulties for the developing countries as those countries endeavour to fulfil their role in world trade, and thereby affect their development. There is therefore an urgent need to maintain an effective multilateral trading system that will safeguard the interests of all trading countries, including the smallest, by ensuring stability, predictability and transparency in the economic and trading environment.
The Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations is the most important event currently taking place in which this issue will have to be addressed. In this connection, we wish to stress the importance of an outcome that will make it possible to take account equitably of the interests of all participants.
The threat to the environment presents challenges that need to be addressed without further delay. Combined with the growing world population and increasing poverty in developing countries, the threat to the environment overshadows the very future of the human race. While the environment is the common concern of all, the developed countries - which have the greatest capability in technology; which control the existing wasteful global production and consumption patterns; and which are the major source of pollution - have the main responsibility to take appropriate measures urgently. The opportunity for agreeing on appropriate measures - an opportunity presented by the preparatory process for the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development and the Conference itself in Brazil in 1992 - should be taken seriously. Kenya, as in the past, will work towards the objective of a clean and sound environment for present and future generations.
The revitalisation of development in the 1990s will require that the Unite:" Nations play its unique role. The various processes that are under way - including the preparations for the Fourth United Nations International Development Decade, the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, UNCTAD VTII and others - present our Organization with an opportunity to contribute significantly to the solution of global problems, especially the acute problems facing developing countries. The Member States have a responsibility to enable the United Nations to perform its important role with increased effectiveness and productivity. Kenya will not be found wanting in this regard.