Sir, it is a pleasant duty for me to address to you, on behalf of the  people and the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea and on my own behalf, our sincere congratulations on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at the forty-third session. Your political and diplomatic experience and your personal abilities constitute pledge for the successful outcome of our work.
I also wish to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Peter Florin, for the skilful manner in which he carried out his important duties in presiding over the General Assembly at the forty-second session.
Lastly, I take special pleasure in paying a warn tribute to our very distinguished Secretary-General, Mr. Peres de Cuellar, who my people and Government continue to held in the highest esteem. I am pleased to have this opportunity to pay a tribute to the tireless and meritorious efforts he has unceasingly made for peace throughout the world, which have helped to strengthen the confidence we have always had in him. His faith in the Charter and his dedication to the fulfilment of his mandate, which is complex, arduous and often thankless, have done much to strengthen the role of the world Organization in the maintenance of international peace and security.
Some 10 years ago, on 25 December 1978, the Vietnamese troops of aggression occupied by country, Cambodia. Since 1982, the date of the formation of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, Prince Norodom Sihanouk, as President of Democratic Kampuchea, has emphatically denounced the acts of coercion committed by the Vietnamese occupation troops against the unfortunate Khmer people.
There can be no political solution for the Cambodian situation unless Viet Nam  sincerely wishes to reach a negotiated settlement with the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea and desists from delaying tactics. In order to block the  process of a political settlement of the Cambodian situation, Viet Nam has sought to link the withdrawal of its troops from Cambodia to the non-return of the Khmers Rouges to power and the cessation of all aid to the armed forces of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea.
The present situation in Cambodia was brought about by the invasion and occupation of that country by Vietnamese troops, who are still there today. Our- top priority, which is also of the United Nations resolutions on Kampuchea, continues to be the withdrawal of all Vietnamese troops from Cambodia, whether their presence is officially acknowledged or disguised. As for the other problems, they are internal matters which will have to be resolved among the Cambodian parties. The solution has already been implicitly mentioned In the resolutions adopted annually since 1979 at the United Nations: self-determination of the Cambodian people, through the organization of free general elections without pressure or coercion.
A genuine peaceful solution can be arrived at only in the following conditions} first, withdrawal of all Vietnamese occupation forces from Cambodian territory, which roust be carried out not unilaterally but within the framework of a general negotiated agreement, under international supervision and in keeping with a precise time-table·, secondly, the dismantling of the Phnom Penh regime installed by Viet Nam and the State of Democratic Kampuchea} thirdly, the formation of a Quadripartite Provisional Government of National Reconciliation} fourthly, the establishment of machinery for international supervision in the form of a United Nations commission or any other international commission or whatever other measure may be necessary, such as an international force for the maintenance of peace and security, and, fifthly, the organization of authentically free general elections under international supervision.
Peace in Cambodia depends on national reconciliation based on equality among all the political parties of the coalition and on respect for human rights and fundamental freedom, within the framework of a liberal democratic government. Thus, it is not a question of trying to isolate, still less, e1ininate, anyone. We are talking about a government of national reconciliation, that is, the Quadripartite Provisional Government of National Reconciliation, whose task it would to prepare and organise general and free elections under international supervision.
After the general agreement on the total withdrawal of Vietnamese forces from Cambodia, an international conference will be convened with the participation of all the countries concerned, the five permanent members of the Security Council and the United Nations Secretary-General. That conference will adopt all necessary measures to guarantee the agreement, as well as the independence and neutrality of Cambodia and prevent any possible return of Vietnamese forces and the illegal and violent seizure of power by one of the Cambodian parties.
The Jakarta informal Meeting, which was held from 25 to 28 July 1988, was the first of Its kind to bring together the three Cambodian parties of the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, that of Phnom Penh and Viet Nam, and also the other parties in the region concerned with the Cambodian conflict, who were able to exchange views, we hope that the Working Group, which is to met soon in Jakarta, will prove able to achieve concrete results.
The Khmer people was deeply affected by the words of compassion towards them spoken by the President of the United States, Mr. Ronald Reagan, and also the words of solicitude spoken by Foreign Minister of the People's Republic of China, and other heads of delegations of friendly countries.
To return to a normal situation and restore peace, security and justice in any country, the total withdrawal of the Vietnamese occupation troops has become an imperative necessity. However, for greater credibility, I have proposed that this withdrawal be negotiated and internationally monitored. National reconciliation will have to take the form of the establishment of a quadripartite provisional government. This Quadripartite Provisional Government of National Reconciliation must be formed on a new basis, because the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea cannot agree to take as a basis the pro-Vietnamese communist regime of Phnom Penh.
In order to facilitate the formation of the Quadripartite Provisional Government of National Reconciliation I have proposed to the two other parties in my Government the changing of the name of Democratic Kampuchea and its flag and national anthem. His Royal Highness Sawdeoh Norodom Sihanouk has already given his agreement in principle to these changes. I believe that these changes - or rather this return to the national names and symbols adopted by the whole Cambodian people - are going to be a prelude to national reconciliation, a prelude to the new national unity that is needed for the restoration of peace in Cambodia and for the establishment of a some of peace, freedom and neutrality in South-East Asia, in keeping with the wishes of the member countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations and, in particular, to the ending of the sufferings of our people.
I take this opportunity to reiterate on behalf of the Khmer people, my respectful gratitude to His Majesty the King of Thailand for the kind compassion he has shown our refugee compatriots and to His Majesty's Government for the hospitality accorded to then in border camps.
We are grateful also to all the friendly countries that have given constant, valuable support in all spheres to the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea and all the Khmer people in their national liberation struggle against the Vietnamese invaders and occupying forces.
Ws are grateful to the Secretary-General for the personal interest he has taken in the Cambodian question, and for his tireless quest, in the framework of his mandate and assisted by his Special Representative, Mr. Rafeeuddin Ahmed, for a just and lasting solution to the problem of Kampuchea in conformity with the Charter and relevant resolutions of the United Nations.
I must say again how grateful we are for the important role being played by the United Nations and the Secretary-General, and extend our gratitude also to his Special Representative, Mr. S.A.M. S. Kibria and the Director of the United Nations Border Relief Operation (UHBRO), Mr. Y. Y, Kim, and all the staff, who have proved so able in helping those of our unfortunate compatriots who are considered to be displaced persons.
If Cambodian society is too be truly democratised, if human and individual tights are to be respected, it is essential to promote the education of Khmer children at all levels, both in border camps and within the country.
The thrust of sustained, common efforts by the entire international community, with the United Nations as catalyst, to prevent a nuclear holocaust has led to recognition of the fact that a nuclear war can never be won and must never be fought. The world has welcomed the ratification by the two super-Powers of the  Treaty on the elimination of their intermediate-range and short-rang· land-based missiles and the improvement in East-West relations. The withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan under United Nations supervision and within the framework of a signed agreement the cease-fire between Iran and Iraq after eight years of war, the withdrawal of South African forces from Angola and the prospect of the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), on Namibia, and the acceptance· by the parties to the Western Sahara conflict of a peace plan submitted by the United Nations have led to some relaxation of regional tension and strengthened the hopes that world tension will gradually ease.
However, the genuine, persistent political will of all and the constant vigilance of all countries and people which push peace and justice are necessary if further progress towards the implementation of international peace and security is to be made.
International peace and security continue to be threatened by numerous local and regional conflicts generated by policies of power, domination and expansion that put under foot the purposes and principles of the Charter, including the principles of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other States, respect for the right of peoples to self-determination, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. Until conflicts are resolved on the basis of respect for the principles of the united Nations Charter, it is illusory to hope for a climate of international trust conducive to the elimination or reduction of armaments.
In Afghanistan, the heroic struggle of the Afghan people and its mujahidin, combined with international pressure and the tireless efforts of Pakistan and the United Nations and its Secretary-General, finally collapsed Soviet forces to withdraw from that country. But that doe, not mean the war is over. By continuing, through its military assistance, and advisers, to keep alive the regime it has installed in Kabul, the Soviet Union persists in its interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan, prevents the Afghan people from exercising its right of self-determination, and continues to fuel tension in that region of southern Asia. The Afghan people and its mujahidin are being compelled to pursue their just struggle to restore Afghanistan's independence, sovereignty, non-aligned status and territorial integrity. The international community must continue its assistance and support in that struggle.
We who are fighting for the same cause reaffirm our complete solidarity with and strong support for the Afghan people and its mujahidin in their valiant struggle until the attainment of their noble objectives. We wish also to pay a heartfelt tribute to the Government and people of Pakistan for their great compassion for and generous assistance to the Afghan refugees, and for their important contribution to the efforts that led to the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan.
In Asia, the mounting tension in Korea makes clear the increasing urgency of adopting practical measures that will make possible the independent, peaceful reunification of the country. In this connection, it is important to prevent a military confrontation and reduce the tension between the two parts of the country by the adoption of a declaration of non-aggression. We welcomed the negotiations last August at Panmunjon between parliamentary delegations from the North and the South, and are pleased that these will be required soon.
Still in Asia, we assure our dose neighbours to the north, our Lao brothers and sisters, who for years have endured and struggled against repression and coercion under the Vietnamese yoke of our unswerving support and fraternal solidarity.
In the  Middle· East the situation has deteriorated everywhere ·. In the occupied Arab territories, the violence and high passions that have been growing for months are clear proof that it is vitally necessary for a negotiated settlement of the entire Middle East and Palestinian problem to be pursued within the framework of an international conference, under United Nations auspices, and with the participation of the representative of the Palestinian people, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO). Peace can be restored only through the exercise by the Palestinian people of its inalienable national rights, with strict respect for the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of foreign territory by force and for the right of all States of the region to live and coexist in peace and security.
In Lebanon, despite the presence of United Nations forces, foreign armed intervention continues to fan the flames of discord. It is of the highest importance that all foreign troops be withdrawn from Lebanon and that the Lebanese people finally regain the cohesion and national unity that will enable it to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of its country, restore peace, and rebuild the economy.
The cease-fire between Iran and Iraq has permitted a relaxation of tension in the region. Without underestimating the considerable and numerous problems that remain unresolved, it may be said that the cease-fire, which was achieved thanks to the praiseworthy, dedicated efforts off the Security Council and the Secretary-General, opens the way for the implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987). We hope that with political will on all sides it will be possible to move towards a settlement of that painful fratricidal conflict.
In Africa, the economic situation remains a source of great concern. We reaffirm to all brother African countries and people our complete solidarity and assure them of our war warmest congratulations and deep admiration for their courageous and noble efforts to implement Africa’s Priority Programme for Economic Recovery 1986-1990. But those efforts are hampered by the problem of external debt and the excessive debt-servicing burden. Moreover, Sudan in particular Khartoum, has been stricken by unprecedented floods which have caused widespread devastation, and sub-Saharan countries continue to face drought, flood, plagues of locust· and conflicts, with the consequent millions of refugees, malnutrition and famine.
We call upon the international community, especially developed creditor countries, to support and adopt the measure· advocated by the Organisation of African Unity to resolve Africa's external-debt crisis, including the convening of an international conference on this problem.
We should emphasize that the economic and social crisis of the African countries has been further aggravated by the rising tension in southern Africa which has had harmful consequences throughout the continent. The aggravation of tensions is due to the policy of apartheid and the illegal occupation of Namibia by the Pretoria regime, which utterly disregarding universal condemnation of its actions, has not only refused to release Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners, but is also even further intensifying its bloody repression, prolonging the state of emergency, condemning to death and threatening to execute anti-apartheid blacks in South Africa - in particular the Sharpeville Six - mistreating religious figures and banning all the political activity of anti-apartheid organisations, having representatives of South African anti-apartheid movements abroad assassinated, and committing an increasing number of acts of aggression and destabilization against front-line countries. Southern Africa will know peace and stability only when apartheid is eradicated as that will make possible the establishment of a non-racial, democratic government in South Africa and the advent of the independent of Namibia within its territorial integrity.
In this respect we believe that the development of the anti-apartheid struggle has amply demonstrated the need for global mandatory-emotions against the Pretoria regime accompanied by a plan of assistance to the front-line States. We ardently trust that the quadripartite negotiations to restore peace in Angola and to eliminate obstacles to the decolonization and independence of Namibia will succeed in compelling South Africa to give effect to Security Council resolution 435 (1973$.
Lastly, we whole-heartedly welcome the successes scored by the Government and people of Chad under the guidance of President Hussein Habre in their attempts to consolidate the independence and sovereignty of Chad, to restore their territorial integrity and to embark upon their reconstruction of their country in peace stability and harmony with all its neighbours. We renew our fraternal solidarity to them.
In Central America the situation continues to be grave notwithstanding the progress achieved in the field of verification of the obligations arising from the Esquipulas II agreements. This progress highlights the real possibilities of establishing peace and democracy in the region through dialogue and negotiation, Ш wish to pay a tribute to the five Presidents of the Central American States who declared in San Jose their political willingness to press ahead with dialogue and negotiations in order to fulfil the Guatemala commitment and we welcome the work done by the Contadora Group and the Support Group, which decided to continue to co-operate in this process of peace and democracy in this region. This is the only road to peace and stability and the only way to preserve the interests of the region as a ,hole.
Now that the Organisation is preparing to celebrate at the end of this year the fortieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, now that the hope of better times is burgeoning with the approach of the new year and the dawn of a new century, and with the award of the Nobel Peace Prise to the United Nations peace-keeping forces, an award that was very well merited, let us hope that the millions of our human brothers who are seeking change and renewal in their lives will see their dreams come true thanks to the efforts of the United Nations and its Secretary-General in what the Gitanjali, the lyrical offering of the Bengali poet, described so aptly in the following words:
"In this paradise of freedom, ay fattier, let ay homeland awake."


Mr. President, I wish at the outset to convey to you the best wishes of the President of the Republic of Kenya, the Honourable Daniel T. Arap Mai, and his hope for the success of the deliberations at the forty-third session of the General Assembly. I should also like to convey to you my delegation's and ray own warm congratulations on your election to the challenging high office of the presidency of this session. Your well known diplomatic skills and wide experience guarantee the successful outcome of our discussions in this body. I pledge to you the full co-operation and support of my entire delegation in fulfilling these expectations.
I also wish to convey to your predecessor, the Deputy Foreign Minister of the German Democratic Republic, Mr. Peter Florin, my delegation's appreciation of the exemplary manner in which he presided over the work of the last session of the Assembly.
The fundamental principle underlying the Charter of the United Nations is the maintenance of international peace and security. This principal objective cannot be realized without effective leadership. In the recent past the United Nations has been seen by many as having a marginal influence in solving the critical issues of the day. Indeed, the very existence of the Organization has been critically questioned. However, looking at recent events of the year, the United Nations has made important contributions to resolving regional conflicts. The cease-fire in the war between Iraq and Iran has been realized through United Nations efforts. The withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan has come about as a result of United Nations intervention. The decision by Viet Nam to withdraw its troops from Kampuchea was prompted by repeated calls by the United Nations for Viet Nam to do so. In southern Africa, Angola, Cuba and South Africa are working on an agreement that will start the process towards the independence of Namibia in the framework of United Nations resolution 43 5 (1978).
While mindful of the tension between the super-Powers, we can attribute this list of successes by our Organization to the patient, strong and effective leadership given by our Secretary-General. I therefore wish to pay a warm tribute to him and to his staff for these resounding successes.
Kenya has always stated its conviction that resolution 435 (1978) remains the only basis for Namibia's independence. Therefore, while we are gratified to see the important understanding reached between Angola and Cuba on the question of the deployment of the latter's troops in Angola, we continue to hold the view that Namibia's independence should not and must not be linked to the issue of Cuba's troops in Angola, The United Nations should now proceed with the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) without any further unnecessary delays.
With regard to South Africa itself, we remain gravely concerned that, despite continuous international appeals and pressures, the racist regime in that country has not released Nelson Mandela and all other political detainees, as demanded by the United Nations through its numerous resolutions. Moreover, the decision of the Pretoria regime to place that country under a state of emergency belies its oft-repeated assurances of commitment to real change and democratic rule in South Africa. By now it must be clear to all that the true intention of the minority racist regime in South Africa is the perpetuation of its illegal and oppressive policy of apartheid, which the international community has long declared illegal and a crime against humanity.
South Africa must therefore cease and desist from its cunning manoeuvres aimed at delaying the eradication of apartheid by instituting cosmetic changes in the name of so-called reform. Kenya calls on this body and peoples of goodwill everywhere· to continue to exert pressure on the Pretoria regime to abandon apartheid. Nelson Mandela and all other political prisoners and detainees in South Africa must be released unconditionally and immediately so that they can participate fully in the democratic process of their country. South Africa should also immediately lift the state of emergency and its ban on liberation movements operating both inside and outside the country, and refrain from its acts of destabilization against its neighbours and other African countries in the subregion.
The large system of apartheid has made many South Africans suffer. A large number have left their homes to seek refuge in neighbouring States. South Africa continues its threats to destabilize neighbouring countries, causing mass movements of displaced persons within those States and outside and therefore further increasing the volume of refugees.
In order to alleviate the plight of the refugees and the burden imposed on the States hosting them, the Member States of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) agreed on the need for burden sharing in resettling the refugees. They did this in consonance with the international community, which resolved after the Second World War to contribute to the cost of the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees.
However, in recognition of the deteriorating refugee situation in southern Africa, the OAU Council of Ministers, at its fortieth meeting, in 1987, called for a conference on the problem. One of the main aims of the Conference was to formulate ideas on how to assist front-line States. The co-operation received from the international community, and particularly the Government of Norway, which made the Conference possible, has been encouraging. The implementation of the agreed programme and plan of action will require the co-operation of all Member States. The international community is also urged to look into the plight of these refugees, because their needs, which are unique, have to be scrutinized, appraised and well understood in order to provide them with the appropriate forms of assistance.
The war between the two fraternal States of Iran and Iraq resulted in the loss of numerous lives and untold suffering for many families in both countries. Kenya hailed the two countries agreement to a cease-fire with effect from 20 August 1988. While commending the leaders of the two nations for their courage and statesmanship in agreeing to halt the bloody conflict, our deepest gratitude goes to our Secretary-General, under whose auspices the two countries were able to come to the negotiating table in a bid to resolve their differences. Kenya is proud of its modest contribution, in connection with a United Nations observer team, to the quest for a lasting peace between the two countries, with which it enjoys cordial relations.
While we observe some signs of relaxation of tension in various parts of the world, in the Middle East the signs are in a different direction. The uprising of the Palestinians in Israeli-occupied territories clearly demonstrates the frustration of those people, who have lived under military occupation for more than 20 years. Israel, in its mistaken belief, has resorted to excessive use of force to suppress demonstrations. The use of force cannot be the answer.
Kenya has said time and again that no lasting peace in the area can be achieved until the legitimate rights of the Palestinians are recognized, including their right to self-determination and to a State of their own. We recognize the rights of all States in the region, including Israel, to exist within internationally recognized boundaries. We therefore call upon Israel to withdraw from all the Arab land occupied since 1967, as this is the only path to the achievement of a durable and lasting peace.
In Central America, unlike other regions where the peace process is gathering momentum, we note with concern that very little progress has been realized despite the efforts of the Contadora and Support Groups. We therefore call upon all the States of the region to redouble their efforts in the search for peace in the light of the current favourable international political climate.
In the Korean peninsula, we are encouraged by the recent developments in favour of a dialogue between the two parties. We therefore call for continued constructive dialogue between the two Koreas towards a peaceful settlement of the problem.
The continuing arms race remains a major threat to the survival of mankind. More clearly than at any other stage in history, the entire international community is now in agreement regarding the serious danger posed on our planet by enormous arsenals of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. It was against this background that we had hoped that the fifteenth special session of the General Assembly - the third special session devoted to disarmament - held in June this year, would provide an opportunity to agree on a course of action that could give further momentum to the disarmament process. Unfortunately, the session ended without reaching agreement on a concluding document, in spite of the international climate provided by the signing of a Treaty between the two super-Powers. However, although no agreement was achieved by the special session, we must look ahead and use the little that was accomplished as a basis for future efforts. Good proposals were made at that session and should be examined for future adoption.
In the recent months we have observed some very encouraging signs of easing of tensions in most parts of the world. The ongoing negotiations on arms reduction between the two super-powers have demonstrated that significant process in disarmament can be attained if there is genuine trust. In this regard, we welcome the recently concluded Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles.
The continent of Africa has undergone, in the course of its history, a series of unforgivable and humiliating experiences, such as slavery, balkanization, colonization, economic plundering and exploitation, to mention but a few in this sad catalogue. However, as if this were not enough punishment of Mother Africa, another scourge has been inflicted on Africa during the last few months. I am referring to the recent sordid revelations that toxic and radioactive wastes have been callously dumped in some African countries by certain companies from industrialized countries. This was and still is an outrageous criminal act.
This "garbage imperialism" poses a serious and very harmful threat not only to mankind but also to the global environment. It is quite ironic that while billions of dollars are currently being spent on the cleaning of the environment all over the world, some immoral companies have the temerity to dump toxic wastes, knowing full well the end result of this despicable action. The international community should condemn this callous action and take decisive measures at the subregional and regional levels to enact laws to punish severely the perpetrators of this vicious action.
As the 1980s come to an end, the global economy continues to be in a sorry state, despite some growth rates in the industrialized countries and in South and East Asia. Large international payment imbalances persist and there is a risk of instability in stock markets, exchange rates and interest rates. This deteriorating situation is a direct consequence of continuing divergences in the macro-economic policies of the industrialized countries. Unless there are significant changes in these policies, this may lead to a world-wide economic recession.
The economic conditions in the developing countries, particularly those with heavy debt problems and those in Sub-Saharan Africa continue to worsen, despite their stabilization, adjustment efforts and fiscal austerity measures. There are no prospects of improvement and the outlook for the future remains quite uncertain. These countries are likely to be plunged into a prolonged period of declining per capita income leading to severe poverty and socio-political unrest.
International economic relations continue to be characterized by inequalities in the share of global wealth between the developed and the developing countries. This has been made worse by the unilateral and inequitable economic policies of many of the industrialized countries.

In the past it was taken for granted that once recovery in economic growth in the industrialized countries was on stream, it would be rapid enough to sustain development in developing countries, and that the transformation of financial and productive structures by the industrialized countries would not be disruptive to development efforts elsewhere, particularly in developing countries.
This approach does not seem to work at all. The slow-down in the world economy in the 1980s has demonstrated that the imbalances among industrial market economies constitute a serious threat to developing countries. The debt crisis, which was precipitated by the slow-down in world trade, deteriorating terms of trade in commodities, the decline in imports from developing countries, the unanticipated sharp and persistent increases in interest rates, and the swing to a net negative transfer of resources serve as a clear warning that in order for the global economy to recover and be on a sustainable growth trend, the benefits of interdependence must be mutual and self-reinforcing. The current vicious circle of poverty and waste in the third world - where over two thirds of the human population and abundant natural resources are to be found - must be broken in order to release the potential for generating global wealth for the benefit of all.
Despite the slow-down in growth, many developing ' entries are continuing their efforts to improve social conditions under drastic fiscal austerity. There are however limits to such efforts under the present unfair international trading system, the negative transfer of resources and the burden of debt. The cost in terms of environmental degradation, waste in human and natural resources, and declining incomes threatens human well-being and the very survival of life on our planet Earth. As the United Nations Children's Fund has observed with regard to the possible nature of a new international development strategy for the 1990s, the prospects for slow growth or stagnation in developing countries·. "... present a major challenge to the world community as it prepares for the 1990s. This is especially so if our objective for the years 2000 is to overcome the worst aspects of mass poverty: widespread malnutrition, hunger, ignorance and the deaths of nearly 40,000 small children daily ... . If these trends continue, per capita income levels in the least developed countries in the year 2000 will still be well below that of 1980 and, for many African countries, even below that of 1970, 30 years earlier."
According to the World Bank, in .con teas t to other developing regions, sub-Saharan Africa has shown consistently weak economic performance over an entire generation. To make matters worse, during the 1980s per capita income has fallen to about three quarters of the level reached by the end of the 1970s. Africa’s poor economic performance has now begun to erode the region's productive base. By the mid-1980s, gross investment levels in many countries were too low to maintain the capital stock. Consequently, healthcare and education, among other things, have deteriorated.
African Governments, individually and collectively, ace committed and have undertaken comprehensive reform measures to improve the economic performance of their countries. However, the severe structural economic imbalances and the vulnerability of African economies to worsening external environment have had, and continue to have, a serious negative effect on those efforts.
It was in consideration of this reality that at the special session of the General Assembly on the critical economic situation in Africa held in 1986, African Governments submitted a Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1990, which was adopted with the international community making a commitment to respond to Africa's efforts. At the conclusion of the recently concluded mid-term review of the implementation of the Programme, it was acknowledged that, under severe austerity measures, the majority of African countries had undertaken reform and structural adjustment measures aimed at improving economic performance to bring about accelerated recovery and lay the foundations for sustained development. It was also recognized that the reform efforts of the African countries had not been matched by international measures to sustain them and that the African economic performance had deteriorated further.
Although the international community has taken some commendable initiatives in support of Africa's efforts with regard to debt relief and resource flows, the magnitude and nature of the African economic crisis calls for increased support and immediate vigorous translation of commitments into concrete action in order to produce the desired results. On their part, the African countries have renewed their commitment to these reforms and structural adjustments in order to improve their economic performance and the well-being of their people. Kenya appeals to all concerned, individually and collectively, to take all necessary initiatives and to make every effort to carry out the recommendations made in order to accelerate the full and timely implementation of the Programme.
Finally, Kenya would like to join other Member States in congratulating the United Nations p-ace-keeping forces on winning the Nobel Peace Prize this year in recognition of their services in the maintenance of peace and security. With the lowering of tensions between the super-Powers, the United Nations is entering a new phase that is ideal for revival of the multilateralism for which all of us have been yearning. We have come to realize and equally appreciate the indispensability of the United Nations in our world of today. In this regard, we must have a strong United Nations to which all Member States are committed. Kenya, a staunch believer in the United Nations, will not be found wanting in rendering its unflinching support to our Organization.


For the past few years, we have been meeting hers with the financial crisis hanging over the United Nations like the sword of Damocles. Today the financial crisis continues unabated, primarily because of the reluctance of a few Member States to meet their legal dues, but the sword of Damocles has vanished. There is now widespread global recognition that the United Nations is an indispensable instrument in the search for peace. After the Afghanistan and Iran-Iraq agreements, the critics of the United Nations have been silenced, at least for quite a while.
Under these auspicious circumstances, I am pleased to see you, Mr. President, presiding over a General Assembly session which will mark a turning-point in the history of the United Nations. With your extensive international experience and your country's commitment to the ideals of the United Nations, I have no doubt that you will bring to this session the right measure of fairness, firmness and guidance. I would also like to place on record our appreciation for the excellent work done by your predecessor, Mr, Peter Florin, who presided over one of the busiest year." in the life of the United Nations.
There is no doubt that 1988 will go down as one of the most remarkable years in United Nations history. Seemingly intractable problems are now making gradual progress at the negotiating table. A large part of the credit for this must go to the United Nations Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, who never lost faith in the United Nations ability to contribute to peace even in some of the recent dark days of the United Nations history. His courageous and dedicated efforts, combined with his unflagging patience, resulted in the agreements on Afghanistan and the cease-fire in the Iran-Iraq war. We applaud his commitment to finding solutions to the other equally intractable problems in the Middle East, southern Africa, Cyprus, Western Sahara, and especially Kampuchea.
We are troubled that the hints of peace we get from Viet Nam on the Kampuchean problem remain meagre and uncertain. As long as the invasion and occupation of Kampuchea continues to threaten the peace and stability in North-East Asia, we are gratified that the Secretary-General and his Special Representative, Mr. Rafeeuddin Ahmed, continue to work on the Kampuchean issue. We also believe that the United Nations commitment to the search for peace in Kampuchin is in full inconformity with the letter and spirit of the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement, which declared in its latest Summit Meeting, in Harare, that "the United Nations represented the most appropriate international forum with the central role in the maintenance of international peace and security and peaceful settlement of international disputes and crises ...". (A/41/697, Political Declaration, para. 314) While the remarkable political developments of 1988 deserve our full attention and scrutiny at this General Assembly, they will not be the focus of my remarks. These recent developments represent significant changes in the political currents. Underneath these currents there are more significant tidal changes taking place which could significantly alter the political and economic landscape of our globe. These deep tidal changes are more difficult to perceive than the swift changes of currents we see on the surface, but their impact could be more enduring and perhaps determine the shape of the twenty-first century.
These tidal changes are manifesting themselves in the remarkable change in the attitudes of all the major Powers and richer and more developed nations. In the past few decades the conventional wisdom in most multilateral forums was that it was the poorer, struggling nations of the South that faced a precarious and uncertain future. The richer and more developed nations of the North, viewing the future with greater self-confidence, were expected to channel their resources, imagination and energy to helping the South.
Quite suddenly, in the past few years, it has been the richer nations of the North which have begun to speak and behave like endangered species. All these major Powers, perhaps with the rare exception of Japan, are now afraid that unless they make dramatic adjustments in their economic policies they may slip badly behind in the new industrial and technological race that has been unleashed. Nations that ate able to ride on the new technological wave will assure themselves of a privileged place in the twenty-first century; those that are not will be- considerably weakened.
It is this realization that explains, for example, the dramatic reforms being undertaken in the Soviet Union under the banner of perestroika - a word that is now as easily recognizable in the English language as in the Russian. Any nation that worries about its future today should attempt to carry our equally bold restructuring, or perestroika, of its social, economic and political systems.
There is no other choice, as demonstrated also by another large and important nation, China, which is attempting equally dramatic and no less visible changes in its economic system.
Significant as these developments have been, they are dwarfed by the changes taking place in the even more developed economies. The largest bilateral trading relationship in the world is between the United States and Canada, with trade totalling 3130 billion per year. This trading relationship is likely to be further strengthened with the expected ratification of the United States-Canada free trade agreement by the two countries, resulting perhaps in the creation of a single, enormous North American market.
Large as this market may become, it could still be smaller than another giant economic animal that will emerge in four years' time: the single European market. The decision in 1987 of the 12 Parliaments of the European Community to ratify the Single European Act virtually guaranteed the market's creation by 31 December 1992. The progress towards it may be slow, since the process of formulating it will be based on 300 directives, 200 of which have been put to the Council of Ministers of the European Community and 69 of which have been passed. The political will to create a single European market is manifest.
The economic benefits of such a single market could be immense. Today the Community has a total population of 320 million and a combined gross national product of $4.6 trillion. One study, by the Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs of the European Commission, entitled "The Economics of 1992" and published in 1988, predicted an increase of gross domestic product when the single market is created of between 3.2 per cent and 5.7 per cent in the medium term, a 4,5 per cent to 7.7 per cent decrease in consumer prices, and the creation of between 1.3 million and 2.3 million new jobs. Other equally important changes will be taking place with the creation of the single European market, in the form of the gradual removal of the administrative barriers that separate the 12 nations.
In 1992, or a little later, it will be possible for goods and services to flow freely among the 12 countries - perhaps an unprecedented development in the history of man, since a similar removal of national barriers has been accomplished in the past only through empire-building. Today these barriers are being removed voluntarily. For the citizens of the European Community this means that they will be able to go to college, work or retire in whichever European country they choose; to travel around without having to show passports; and to save their money in any of the 12 currencies, which may eventually become one currency.
We can imagine what the world would look like if the other subregions were to attempt equally dramatic reductions in the artificial barriers that separate nations. Here again, the established wisdom is that it could not happen in other parts of the world, which are beset by national, ethnic or territorial conflicts. This may be so. Yet it may be salutary to remind ourselves that only 44 years ago the battlefields of Europe were drenched in the blood of millions of soldiers trying to defend or extend frontiers. If some of those soldiers are alive today, and some of them surely must be, they must be puzzled that the frontiers they defended with blood and enormous sacrifice are now being voluntarily dismantled in some significant respects.
All countries which are at war today should pause to reflect on the European experience. If the armies of Viet Nam - to cite one example - were to return to their national frontiers and Viet Nam were to live peacefully with its neighbours, it could easily become a dynamic and prosperous nation. Instead, its people ate today suffering considerable economic misery and deprivation, leading to the severe outflow of economic migrants ; who have put a heavy burden on the rest of South-East Asia. The choice is clear: do we want to go the way of Europe or the way of Indo-China?
Although we commend the growing integration of developed economies, we are mindful of the dangers it could pose for the global economy. One fundamental reason why the global economy has enjoyed relatively steady and constant growth rates has been the creation of an open and fair trading system under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which has been in force since 1 January 1948. If the new economic giants of North America, Western Europe and Japan were to try to build economic fortresses that divided up the global economy they could well increase the vast gap between the rich and the poor nations. Members of the United Nations should be vigilant and ready to defend the open global economic system. It would be ironic and tragic if the economic integration designed to remove national economic barriers ended up by creating even more formidable economic barriers which shut most developing countries our of the global economic system.
These are some of the major challenges that we shall face in the years to come. The United Nations has adjusted well to the new political currents sweeping across the globe today. It needs to pay equal attention to some of the major tidal changes that are forthcoming. If this General Assembly session could begin to focus its attention on some of these issues, it might well make a historic contribution.


On behalf of the people and the Government of the Republic of Cuba, and on my own behalf, I should like at the outset to express our warmest congratulations to you, Mr. President, on your election to the presidency of the forty-third session of the General Assembly.
I am all the more pleased by your election,, first, because you represent a sister Latin American nation that has repeatedly demonstrated its devotion to sovereignty and independence, a nation to which we are united by historical bonds of understanding and fraternity and secondly, because of our close, long-standing friendship, which will be further strengthened by this session of our world Organization.
We are certain that on this occasion you will once again demonstrate your high qualities as a statesman, and for its part the Cuban delegation commits itself to making every effort for the success of this forty-third session and the attainment of world peace and the development of all peoples of the world.
Last year, in this very forum, we said that, the great prevailing difficulties notwithstanding, we were living in a time of encouraging expectations, because the triumphalism ascendancy of the Reagan Administration had been checked and was on the wane. The activity of major international organizations had been strengthened, and a climate favourable to negotiations prevailed in Europe, Central America, southern Africa, Afghanistan and South-East Asia.
The facts of history and the efforts of the forces that cherish peace and progress have driven the obscurantist tendencies in international relations into total bankruptcy. Such tendencies seemed to be driving us to the brink of insanity and holocaust at the beginning of this decade. Such ideas, which had argued that a nuclear war was winnable and which advocated the theory of military superiority as a means of ensuring equilibrium and peace, are already losing ground.
There is a growing rejection of measures - such as the so-called strategic defence initiative - that could lead to an arms race and enhance the possibilities of the total destruction of our planet. A new and effective form of international relations is evolving, one based on dialogue, understanding and the negotiated settlement of conflicts that for years have hung over the world and been bringing our nations ever neater to the brink of a cataclysm of incalculable proportions.
The adoption of significant disarmament agreements between the two main nuclear Powers is not only a contribution to the attainment of world peace and international security for present and future generations; it enables us to envisage the release, within a reasonable time, of significant resources for the development of all nations and to help overcome the effects of the world economic crisis now threatening.
The efforts of the Soviet Union and other peace-loving progressive forces are beginning to bear fruit. Thus, we warmly welcome the Moscow meeting between General Secretary Gorbachev and President Reagan; we welcome the agreements reached there and the way in which they are being implemented. We believe this represents a major step towards disarmament, but it must be developed and supplemented. At Reykjavik, Comrade Mikhail Gorbachev proposed working on a draft agreement to reduce strategic weapons by no less than 50 per cent and to eliminate them completely before the end of this century; that proposal is still pending.
Although it is clear that we are moving towards a process of change, much remains to be done and positions that should be abandoned are still being taken. An example of this was the third special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, which took place this year. Renewed efforts by non-aligned, socialist and neutral nations to achieve agreements compatible with the new times that seem to be emerging in the field of disarmament tan into the international stance of those who stubbornly refuse to countenance the Assembly taking anything beyond general decisions. Such an irresponsible attitude must be condemned.
However, if the changes we are trying to bring about in international relations in our quest for full justice and equity do not go beyond disarmament measures, if they are not aimed at promoting the urgent solution of the problems afflicting the economies of the third world and the establishment of a new international economic order, then those changes - despite the glimmers of hope we discern - will be incomplete. Tb understand my country's position, it suffices to remember the words spoken recently at Quito, Ecuador, by President Fidel Castro: "But the world's problems are not only problems of nuclear weapons and the threats of nuclear war that have unfortunately existed; there still remain other terrible problems for millions of people in the world, such as underdevelopment, poverty  hunger, and lack of education and health".
While the prospect of nuclear war and the resulting destruction and death is dreadful, the lives lived by billions of people on Earth are no less dreadful. The preservation of human life has been our incentive to strive for nuclear disarmament and for general and complete disarmament, and the preservation of human life must also be a driving force in the quest not only for disarmament measures but also for effective solutions to the problems caused by underdevelopment and poverty. For while nuclear war could potentially claim millions of innocent victims, it is no less certain that underdevelopment and poverty claim thousands of innocent victims every day. Suffice it to recall that every three days the number of children who die in the third world is greater than that of all those who died in the genocidal nuclear bombing of Hiroshima at the end of the Second World War.
Under the present circumstances, according to data from the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), one in four children is suffering from malnutrition; four in five children in rural areas do not have access to running water or adequate sanitary facilities two in five children between the ages of six and 11 do not go to school; and four in five children have no access to modern medical care. These facts must cry out to our conscience.
On Monday, 26 September, President Reagan said farewell to us. But before he addressed us we had already said farewell to his policy of confrontation and war; more than saying farewell, we had defeated it. The international community said no to attempts to drive the world towards nuclear holocaust and stated its determination to move towards peace, disarmament, independence and development.
President Reagan devoted several paragraphs of his statement to Cuba, in which he confirmed his well-known ignorance of the facts of today's world, of their historical background and even of the most basic geographical facts. For that reason we shall not reply to his statement so much as correct it, setting out the facts as they truly are and calling for respect for the truth.
President Reagan tried to distort the results of the meeting of the Commission on Human Rights held last March at Geneva to fit his own desires, though at that meeting he was defeated thanks to member countries' respect for the purposes of the Commission.
Cuba is proud of its record in the field of human rights, and after defeating those Yankee manoeuvres we invited a delegation from the Commission on Human Rights to visit out country and observe the human rights situation there.
The situation today is very different from that of 30 years ago, when we were under United States neo-colonial domination and when the Yankee ambassador served as a pro-Consul who handed down orders to the sitting Presidents. Now, illiteracy has disappeared; life expectancy has risen from 55 to 74 years; infant mortality has declined from 60 to 13 deaths per thousand live births; the epidemic diseases that once claimed the largest number of victims have been eradicated; poliomyelitis, tuberculosis, and other such diseases have been wiped out. Where we had 20,000 university students we now have more than 300,000. Where we had 30 per cent unemployment, all Cubans of working age exercise their right to work.
There remain counter-revolutionaries imprisoned in Cuba. That is only natural, because the 30 years since the triumph of our revolution have been years of our people's victorious struggle against the constant aggression of successive United States Governments, especially that of the Reagan Administration. Fortunately, those in the employ of Cuba's enemies - agents of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and other services - have failed in their attempts and have been sent to prison. In prison they receive humane treatment and their human rights are respected. There has never been an instance of torture or mistreatment; not a single prisoner has disappeared.
President Reagan also ignored the facts when he spoke of the situation in southern Africa. He persisted in his failed policy of support for the hateful apartheid regime; he tried to equate the South African invader troops with the Cuban internationalist combatants who went to Angola 13 years ago at the behest of the Angolan people to drive back the racist invader troops. But President Reagan does not even seem to read the newspapers. How else are we to understand his insistence that the agreement on the full withdrawal of foreign troops from Angola should apply first of all to Cuban troops? South African troops have already withdrawn from Angola, after suffering defeat at Cuito Cuanavale.

The withdrawal of South African troops from Namibia is an obligation deriving from resolution 4 35 (1978) and is being called for by the international community. The Cuban internationalist combatants will withdraw, as has been stated, pursuant to a decision taken by Angola and Cuba.
Constructive engagement has been useful in prolonging the existence of the hateful apartheid regime, extending by 10 years South Africa's illegal occupation of Namibia. However, it was unable to prevent the failure of the invasion launched by the South African racists against the People's Republic of Angola. In southern Africa in 1988 we have witnessed significant developments which give rise to hope that we shall see achieved some of the objectives pursued by the countries in the region will be achieved - namely, the independence of Namibia on the basis of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), adopted by the Council exactly 10 years ago, and the provision of safeguards for the borders of the People's Republic of Angola.
Within the framework of the quadripartite talks, which involve the joint delegation of the People's Republic of Angola and the Republic of Cuba, the delegation of the Republic of South Africa and the delegation of the United States, acting as mediator, several meetings have been held in which the problems in the region have been dealt with in extensive discussions and principles have been established for the political settlement of the problems affecting the region.
In this context, in Brazzaville, following the seventh round of quadripartite talks a communiqué was issued informing the Secretary-General of the United Nations that, beginning on 1 November, effect would be given to Security Council resolution 435 (1978), on the independence of Namibia. It is a fortunate coincidence that this is occurring exactly 10 years after the adoption of resolution 435 (1978). We trust that very shortly Namibia will become independent and take its seat as. the 160th Member State of the United Nations.
In this context we reaffirm once again the existence o4 indestructible links between Cuba and the People's Republic of Angola, its Government and its people. They have been strengthened by the bloodshed by Cubans and Angolans in the struggle for the freedom and sovereignty of that sister nation. Cuba is not seeking a military victory. Cuba has no intention or desire to humiliate anyone. It is inspired simply by the desire to make its modest contribution to the preservation of Angola's independence, to the progress of the negotiations on Namibia and to the attainment of peace and security in that part of Africa. Consequently, Cuba is prepared to continue these consultations and looks forward to a successful conclusion, although it is aware of the obstacles and difficulties that still have to be overcome and the time and effort that this will entail.
We reaffirm our unwavering solidarity with the Namibian patriots, led by the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), and the South African patriots, represented by the African National Congress (ANC). We support their resolute struggle against oppression. The security of the other front-line States should similarly be guaranteed, thus checking the aggressive behaviour of the South African regime.
Particular attention should be paid to the position of Mr. Nelson Mandela, whose release from a prison in South Africa has become a matter of universal concern. Prom this rostrum we congratulate him on his seventieth birthday and reaffirm the steadfast support of the Government and people of Cuba for him and his cause, which, with the whole of mankind, we share.
The negotiating process which began recently with a view to ending the Iran-Iraq war is also showing encouraging signs, notwithstanding the difficulties involved That war, which should never have broken out, must come to an end, not merely because of the benefits to both peoples that would result from peace and national reconstruction, both peoples, but also because this would be in the interests of non-aligned unity and world peace. Furthermore, stopping the war between the two nations would put an end to the imperialist presence in the Gulf, which must also be uprooted. Those naval forces are not acting as guarantors of peace; rather they are a source of tension and a threat to the independence of the States in the region.
In Central America there were hopes that peace would be reached under the Esquipulas agreements and the Sapoa talks. Such prospects, however, have run into the stubbornness and arrogance of the imperialists. The renewed efforts of the Government of Nicaragua, the Contadora Group and its Support Group in the search for a just and honourable peace in the region deserve recognition.
More than a year has passed since these peace initiatives were launched by the five Central American Presidents. They have not yet borne fruit, however, owing to the manoeuvres of those forces interested in impeding their implementation and pursuing a policy of aggression, destabilisation and blockade against the Government of Nicaragua. The situation in Central America calls for prudence, wisdom and firm support from the international community in order to prevent a further escalation of the dirty war directed against Nicaragua, to achieve a negotiated political solution to that regional conflict and to ensure the economic reconstruction of the region. We should also support the peace efforts being made by the Contadora Group and its Support Group. We must reject every attempt to exclude them from the negotiating process. Furthermore, a process of negotiating should be ensured for El Salvador and Guatemala, with the indispensable participation of those who were compelled to resort to armed struggle to achieve what they were denied by law and democracy.
Cuba reaffirms its full solidarity with the Government and people of Nicaragua and reaffirms Nicaragua  sovereign right to decide its own destiny free from any form of interference.
We welcome with healthy Latin American and Caribbean pride the honourable example set by the Panamanian people, which has rejected and defeated all the imperialist acts of aggression, blockades and threats directed against it, thereby demonstrating the enormous strength of a people united in defence of its sovereignty and independence.
We cannot fail to welcome also the significant agreements reached in Geneva with regard to Afghanistan, which are a source of satisfaction to us. The new situation which that Asian nation currently faces calls for renewed and continuing endeavours by all the parties and by the international community as a whole to bring about the speedy implementation of agreements, to ensure respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Afghanistan and to enable all obstacles to the attainment of peace in that region to be overcome. Cuba fully supports the Republic of Afghanistan in the difficult process of national reconciliation.
We welcome the negotiating efforts being made by the States of Indo-China in order to achieve the long-desired peace in South-East Asia, the constructive and flexible dialogue among the countries of the region and the initiative taken by the Chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement in his efforts to contribute to a negotiated solution. In this context, we reiterate our full support for the policy of national reconciliation formulated by the People's Republic of Kampuchea. These developments represent a source of hope in a climate fraught with dramatic potential.
The ministerial Conference of non-aligned countries met in Nicosia, the beautiful, warm capital of Cyprus, just a few days ago. The successful discussions at that Conference, the fraternal, constructive atmosphere during the talks and the presence of almost all member States of the Movement, with delegations mostly led by their Foreign Ministers, was unequivocal proof of the progress made by our Movement and evidence of its growing unity and capacity for action.
In Cyprus we reiterated our call for struggle for peace and development. We welcomed the progress made in the negotiations on disarmament and at the same time warned that acts of aggression were still persisted and that solidarity and encouragement should be given to the peoples of the world in their struggles.
We agreed to meet next year in Belgrade - where the first non-aligned summit was held in 1961 - for the ninth summit conference of Heads of State or Government in order to strengthen further the decisive role we should play in the defence of peace and the furtherance of development.
Last year we reaffirmed that the United Nations should contribute with all its influence to the attainment of peace and the political resolution of conflicts and disputes among nations. Today we are witnessing a resurgence of the United Nations contribution, and very particularly that of its Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Pérez de Cuellar. He has been responsible for much in the way of resolving many of these regional conflicts. We have noted with satisfaction that the achievements of the United Nations this year have helped put an end to the theories proclaiming the death of multilateralism and the ineffectiveness of the United Nations. The United Nations has done this by meeting its obligations under the Charter.
The situation in Latin America and the Caribbean is both promising and potentially dangerous. It is promising because of the sustained progress made in the political and social realms in our continent, because of the growing awareness of shared problems and because of the growing unity in a spirit of pluralism that has not been impeded by the natural differences of ideology, wealth or territorial extension among the countries in our region. The future of this continent will be bright if Latin America and the Caribbean succeed in exercising unity and cohesion, if we are able to take advantage of the legacy left us by our predecessors, that is. Bolivar, San Martin, 0'Higgins, Sucre, Juarez and Marti; if we succeed in identifying our common problems and in finding shared solutions; in short, if we are able to undertake a real endeavour at integration, in diversity, taking advantage of all those features that bring us closer together rather than resorting to those that divide us.
The informal dialogue of foreign ministers of Latin American and Caribbean countries held recently in Caracas represented encouraging evidence of a growing and necessary unity and of the urgent need for integration and co-operation. It showed that our united voice is strong and to be heard wherever integrationist tendencies are on the rise.
Cuba will do everything in its power to contribute to this process of Latin American and Caribbean unity, co-operation and integration.
Democracy has progressed in Latin America and the Caribbean. Dictatorial regimes are more isolated than ever, rejected by both their own peoples and the Latin American and Caribbean community. We are confident that 7e shall be able to manage our future collectively for the benefit of our peoples.
However, we also said that Latin America is faced with a potentially dangerous situation, as hazardous as that facing the other countries of the third world. The international economic crisis has produced intolerable repercussions. It has stirred up an unbridled and spiralling decline in the living standards of our peoples with the progressive erosion of our economies, the worsening of injustice and unequal relations with the industrialized countries of the West. Furthermore, in recent years the arms race and its almost geometric growth have made the prospects of development even more uncertain and an ever greater amount of resources has been used that could otherwise have been employed to alleviate the effects of the crisis.
The difficult path we have had to trace in the 14 years since the adoption of the Declaration and the Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order by the General Assembly at its sixth special session has become increasingly uncertain. This has shown the serious nature of the problems we face and the need for urgent solutions.
The phenomena which have traditionally affected international economic relations, in particular those involving the developed capitalist countries, on the one hand, and the third world, on the other, continue to worsen and to make the plight of billions of human beings unprecedentedly hopeless. Protectionism, the difficulties encountered by third world countries in the export of commodities and in getting access to markets, together with the unequal terms of trade, the dumping and the external debt constitute scourges which have plunged a large number of countries into an economic crisis, a "crisis for existence", the solution of which requires a major restructuring of the world economy and of its operating procedures.
This is one of the great paradoxes of our time. While we are witnessing encouraging signs of progress in international political relations, progress in terms of disarmament and a tendency to resolve many local conflicts, at the same time the economic plight of the underdeveloped countries is becoming increasingly worse. While the major capitalist countries Powers agree to hold negotiations on matters pertaining to war and peace, they still refuse to hold comprehensive negotiations to resolve the roost pressing economic problems of the contemporary world.
Do they not realize that, no matter how much they pursue security, security will be incomplete as long as an economic gap continues to exist between one group of nations and another, and indeed continues to widen?
A new international economic order continues to be our goal. In recent years we have repeatedly heard views questioning its validity in present circumstances. We do not agree with such views. How could one seriously and responsibly argue that an instrument that has never been implemented has ceased to be valid? Is it that the conditions that have brought it about have already disappeared?
Of all the phenomena to which we have referred, the spiralling external debt of our countries has had the most serious impact and may potentially be the most dangerous for the political, economic and social stability of vast sectors of the world.
We have recognized over and over again that the external debt of third world countries is a political issue and should be approached as such and that all the parties involved - debtors, creditors, banks and financial institutions - should pool their efforts.
We need to find a speedy solution to this problem. We have recognized a number of factors which link such a solution to the search for answers to other problems affecting third world economies. However, a debt that exceeds 31 trillion is not something to be simply recognized or dealt with in terms of theoretical assumptions. Our countries have been concerned for far too long with poverty, hunger, illiteracy, inadequate health services and the desire for equality and justice.
The recent fourteenth Latin American Council of the Latin American Economic System decided to convene a regional conference on external debt. Everyone agrees on the fact that it is unpayable and uncollectable. We need to develop a comprehensive strategy for tackling the debt problem; we need to take a new approach. Several years ago President Fidel Castro proposed a formula with which this General Assembly is very familiar. We strongly believe in the accuracy and force of his argument and, indeed, it has been borne out by events of recent years.
We are entering a new decade. We should work for a new millennium of peace and coexistence in the 1990s, with a new and positive form of international relations as opposed to the attitudes and policies that prevailed in the 1980s. Aggression must give way to good-neighbourliness among nations. The use of force should be replaced by consultations and dialogue. Policies of coercion should yield to negotiations for the protection of mutual interests. Unequal terms of trade should give way to a just and equitable international commerce. The obsolete mechanism based on Bretton Woods should yield to a new international monetary system which would eliminate overt or covert exploitation.
The process which is now beginning for the United Nations Fourth Development Decade could offer a suitable framework for these objectives. Those who illegally possess the world's wealth currently "have the floor". They are the ones that have to demonstrate wisdom and genuine concern for the fate of the world; otherwise, it will fall into a state of collapse fraught with unforeseeable consequences.
In this connection, we welcome the endeavours of the South Commission and, particularly, the results of its meeting in Mexico. We believe that such institutions may be very useful in raising world consciousness about the need for development and providing new ideas for solving the most pressing problems of the third world. We are particularly pleased to see that this Commission is presided over by Mr. Julius Nyerere, an outstanding contemporary political figure and one of the eminent leaders of African independence.
We note with satisfaction that the Conference on the Indian Ocean will be convened in 1995. We should build our collective determination so that by the time the Conference starts that region will have been freed from military pressures and will have become a zone of peace. We believe that the new course we are beginning to see developing in international relations may represent a decisive contribution to the attainment of a climate conducive to the demilitarization of the region.
We reaffirm our support for the sister republics of Korea and express our solidarity with their aspirations for reunification and for the total withdrawal of United States occupation forces from the southern peninsula. We trust that we shall shortly have the delegation of a united Korea in the United Nations.
We also express our support for the legitimate desires of Cyprus, a non-aligned country to which we are linked by ties of close friendship. We call for preservation of its independence, sovereignty, national unity, territorial integrity and non-aligned status. We also welcome the talks between representatives of the Greek Cypriot and the Turkish Cypriot communities. We support the convening of an international conference on Cyprus under the auspices of the United Nations.
In the present international circumstances, we should increase our efforts to put an end to the wandering life of the Palestinian people, who are subjected to unparalleled outrages on their native land. The response of the Palestinian people to Zionist abuse has been a national popular uprising which since its beginning last December has marked the start of a new phase in the long struggle waged by the Palestinian people against foreign colonization and domination.
We reaffirm our support for the holding of an international peace conference on the Middle East with equal participation by all parties to the conflict, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. We reaffirm our conviction that there can be no solution to the conflict in the Middle East without a solution to the Palestinian question and without recognition of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including the establishment of their own State.
We support the just cause of the people of Lebanon in their just struggle for national unity, respect for their territorial integrity and for preservation of their non-aligned status. We support the call for the withdrawal of Moroccan troops and administration from the territory of Western Sahara and for the establishment of an independent and sovereign Sahraoui state.
We continue to support Bolivia's just claim for direct and practical access to the sea, a right supported by the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. We support Argentina's claim of sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands. We reiterate our solidarity with Madagascar and its claims over the Malagasy islands of Glorieuses, Juan de Nova, Europa and Bassas da India. We also support the aspirations of Comoros to regain sovereignty over Mayotte.
Other vestiges of colonialism also remain in Guam, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, East Timor, Gibraltar, New Caledonia, Anguilla, Pitcairn, Montserrat, the British Virgin Islands, the United States Virgin Islands, the Turks and Caicos Islands and elsewhere. We cannot disregard the attempts to prevent the independence and sovereignty of so-called Micronesia.
Cuba is still suffering from illegal occupation of its territory by the United States naval base in Guantanamo, which remains there against the wishes of our people and Government, in violation of the most basic norms of international law. However, the day will come when we shall exercise sovereignty throughout our territory. Since the end of the last century, Puerto Rico has remained under the yoke of the most powerful colonial system of our century. It is the steadfast duty of the Cuban revolution, which liberated its own people from shackles, to contribute to the independence of Puerto Rico, as Jose Marti stated when he founded the Cuban Revolutionary Party almost 100 years ago, and prevent Puerto Rican soil from being used for the launching of continued aggression against other States of the region.
The General Assembly is duty-bound to continue to endeavour to promote the exercise of the inalienable right of peoples to self-determination; to independence; to sovereignty over their natural resources; to free economic and social development to defence of their traditions, languages and cultural identities; and to demand the removal of military bases from their sea and their soil.
The world is now facing the dilemma of peace or war. We have no tight to disregard the appeals of our peoples. We must be prepared to live in peace. We must create the machinery that will enhance and strengthen confidence and security among nations, as well as peaceful coexistence and productivity.
We must lay the foundations for the relationships of the future so that the generations of the next millennium will feel proud of the heritage left to them by their predecessors. That is our goal.