I should like first to
congratulate you most warmly, Sir, on your election as
President. The Assembly could not have made a wiser
choice. I wish you all good fortune and success in your
mission.
In a few months we shall commemorate the fiftieth
anniversary of the birth of the United Nations. The United
Nations is the fullest expression man has yet achieved of
the age-old desire to escape from war and establish an
enduring peace.
When the United Nations was founded in San
Francisco 50 years ago the threat of nuclear war between
the super-Powers had already begun to cast a shadow
across the world. That shadow has now lifted, and we all
live and sleep more safely as a result. Yet as we approach
the anniversary we are all more conscious of the suffering
and destruction that still disfigure parts of almost every
continent in the world. The threats to international peace
and security are more diffuse and perhaps less serious than
they were, but not less real and not less tragic for those
caught up in them.
To some extent, disappointment comes out of
exaggerated expectation. There is still a tendency to think
of the United Nations as if it were some great palace of
world order which descended splendidly from heaven 50
years ago. If that were our view, then every broken pane
of glass in that palace, every door, every pillar fouled or
damaged would be a disgrace and a scandal.
But, of course, in reality world order does not descend
from heaven at the moment when a Charter is signed. It is
not like that at all. World order is built painfully,
gradually, brick by brick. Sometimes the wind and the
weather destroy what has already been built. But the
builders cannot afford to be discouraged - and we are all
builders. They have to repair; they have to rebuild; they
have to hope that gradually in what they build the
advances will outnumber the retreats.
There have been recent advances that have been
dramatic - beyond expectation. No one who was present
at the Union Buildings in Pretoria this May could fail to
be moved at the birth of the new South Africa. The
goodwill and the cheerful determination of all South
Africans on that occasion were a marvelous refutation, it
seemed to me, of the cynicism that so often weakens our
work.
And we have seen the same as the peace process
gathers strength in the Middle East.
In part of my own country, we may - and I fervently
hope we shall - see killings cease, see fears slowly
dissolve, as a result of the process started by the British
and Irish Governments in the Downing Street Declaration
on Northern Ireland.
In Europe - in Cyprus, in the former Yugoslavia, in
Georgia -the United Nations has helped at least to contain
if not yet to resolve deep-rooted conflicts. The world’s
most intractable problems continue to be laid at your
door, Mr. Secretary-General, like infants laid at the door
of some medieval monastery. It is not surprising that, for
all the efforts of 77,000 men and women serving in
United Nations peace-keeping operations in the field, our
Organization has had failures as well as successes to its
name.
As is common in our society of mass media, the
headlines have been dominated by the reversals, and some
of them have indeed been tragic. In Rwanda the efforts
of the United Nations failed to avert genocide. In
Somalia it looks as if our efforts have been effectively
spurned by a people whose need for help seemed, and
seems, self-evident.
A word about Bosnia. There has in recent months,
mercifully, been more peace in Bosnia. It is a fragile,
uncertain, inconclusive, often interrupted peace, but it is
still better than what went before. We necessarily discuss
Bosnia all the time. The debate in particular in this
building about the United Nations arms embargo has at
times seemed to rage more fiercely than the fighting on
the ground. Certainly the diplomatic efforts have been
frustrating. And I can understand those who believe that
reverting to a fight, even a fight to the death, would be
5

preferable to the tangle of negotiations and compromise that
sometimes seems to stretch ahead for ever.
Nevertheless, I do not agree with that opinion. We
should value, we should build on, the advances that have
been made, we should value the lives that have been saved
by the reduction in fighting on the ground. We can now
see perhaps more clearly that the United Nations Protection
Force (UNPROFOR) has been essential in protecting
civilians and in preventing the Bosnian Serb army from
making further advances. Who here can believe that
Gorazde, or Srebrenica or Zepa would still be in the hands
of the Bosnian Government if it were not for the bravery
and commitment of UNPROFOR troops?
UNPROFOR can operate only if it is able to keep
lines open to all the parties to the fighting. It could not
continue if leading members of the United Nations were
rearming one side; UNPROFOR would then be identified
as a party to the war. It is not mandated or equipped for
that purpose. Our Secretary-General has endorsed that
view, and the Commander of United Nations forces in
Bosnia has rightly said "We have not come here to fight a
war from inside white painted vehicles".
So I welcome the decision of which we heard
yesterday from the Bosnian President, the decision to accept
that now is not the moment to lift the arms embargo. And
that Bosnian decision allows UNPROFOR to continue its
mission. We have said before that if the Bosnian Serbs do
not join the peace process and agree the map presented by
the Contact Group, then our present approach may become
exhausted. Lifting the arms embargo may become
unavoidable, as we said at Geneva in July, and in those
circumstances UNPROFOR would have to withdraw. But
it would not be a good policy. Indeed, it would be a policy
of despair, a policy that, as in Shakespeare’s King Lear,
"Bids the wind blow the earth into the sea,
"...
"That things might change or cease". (King Lear, Act
III, scene i, l. 5)
A real solution to the conflict, as always, lies with
those who are doing the fighting. We from outside must
continue to show all the parties that the way forward is
political agreement and not more military action. There is
a settlement plan, the settlement plan of the Contact Group,
on the table. Those who refuse it, those who continue the
warfare, must be isolated, must be put under sustained -
indeed, increased - pressure. Those who cooperate with the
international peace plan effectively, in deeds and not just
in words, should have that cooperation recognized.
I need to say a few words in response to the remarks
made yesterday by the distinguished President of
Argentina concerning the dispute over the Falkland
Islands. President Menem was right - and I am glad that
he mentioned it - when he referred to the increasing
cooperation between the United Kingdom and Argentina
in several areas. Indeed, this cooperation nowadays
characterizes our bilateral relationship. And we certainly
hope, sincerely hope, that the progress that we have
achieved together will not be reversed.
We are quite clear about British sovereignty over the
Falkland Islands and the other British dependencies in the
South Atlantic, so we were concerned at the recent
incorporation into the constitution of Argentina of the
new clause to which President Menem referred. It seems
to us that in these Falkland Islands, as in Northern
Ireland, we must heed the wishes of the people
concerned. Indeed, any other course for us or for the
United Nations would be inconceivable. This body has
heard those wishes of the Islanders expressed, most
recently by their elected representatives who visited the
United Nations for the debate in the Committee of 24 last
July.
So we have a difference. But despite this difference,
we have joined a dialogue with the Argentine
Government on fisheries and petroleum development. We
look forward to resuming discussions in the near future
with the Argentine authorities on a new agreement on
fishing and on the development of possible hydrocarbon
resources in the South Atlantic continental shelf. We are
also discussing the welcome Argentine offer to remove
mines from the Falklands. It seems to me that that is the
rational and logical path to the wider progress of which
the President of Argentina spoke.
I return to this Organization. It is often the target of
criticism because it cannot solve every problem laid at its
door. We all know that there is scope for improving the
performance of the United Nations here in New York
and, more critically, where the United Nations and its
agencies are in action on the ground. The steps taken so
far are a beginning, but only a beginning.
Machinery cannot run on thin air. The United
Nations can only run on the fuel that we, its Member
States, supply to it. So where it has failed, we must not
pretend that the failure lies with the system. It lies with
6

us. The failure of the United Nations is our failure, and so
it is for us to take action. For example, the sufferings of
the Rwandan refugees will not be helped by Member
States’ holding their heads in their hands. Their hands
should be ready to provide from their pockets what is
needed to remedy such suffering.
Preventive diplomacy is the ideal. But it often will
not be enough. We have to be prepared for the demand for
peace-keepers to continue. There are practical ways in
which we can respond better to that demand: first, by
ensuring that we learn the lessons from our experiences in
peace-keeping; secondly, by taking practical steps to
improve our capacity to keep the peace, especially in
Africa; and, thirdly, by reforming our financing system.
I should like to say a brief word about peace-keeping.
It is often impossible to predict at the outset of a mission
what demands or dangers United Nations troops will
encounter. Within limits, they must be ready to improvise.
But allowing their role to drift from peace-keeping to taking
sides in a war carries high risks to the troops themselves,
to the political process they support, and to the ability of
the United Nations to put in peace-keepers elsewhere. It
undermines the willingness of Member States to contribute
troops. So in making their decision to contribute to a
United Nations operation countries need to be confident that
their troops will be supporting peace and not becoming a
party to war.
Rwanda put this to the test, and we were found
wanting for a response for the time being. The issue was
not really whether the United Nations should have sent an
intervention force to stop the fighting - which it clearly
could not - but whether it could find the means, the men
and the equipment, for a force to protect the civilian
population. That, tragically, took far too long.
That is the latest lesson we need to learn from. It is
not now, it seems to me, a question of will, because there
is a far greater readiness than there used to be to
contemplate intervention on the ground to mitigate or
prevent humanitarian disaster. It is not so much the will,
the intellectual willingness; it is the resources, the know-
how, the ability to respond swiftly, which are still not
enough.
You, Mr. Secretary-General, have pointed this out over
and over again, and I should like to pay tribute to the
patience and persistence with which you have rammed
home this lesson and sought not merely to tell us the truths
about it but to persuade us into practical action and remedy.
I agree with what you have said on many occasions. We
need to work hard and fast to overcome obstacles which
are essentially practical.
We British will continue to contribute practically.
We have 4,000 British men and women in blue berets,
from Georgia to Rwanda, something which would have
been thought inconceivable even 10 years ago. We have
the seconded British experts at United Nations
Headquarters. The speed with which the Department of
Peace-keeping Operations has adapted to cope with ever-
increasing demand has been impressive. The
development of the professional military staff at United
Nations Headquarters has been particularly welcome. So
has the trend to bring more seconded staff in alongside
United Nations personnel. But it will be vital also to help
to strengthen our ability to respond quickly in areas where
it remains weak. Africa, in the light of experience,
should be a priority.
Africa’s need for peace-keepers is plain to see:
nearly 40 per cent of all United Nations peace-keepers are
deployed in Africa. Africa needs peace. There can be no
doubt of that, because it is only in peace that Africans
will succeed in finding their own solutions to their
problems. The remarkable events in South Africa earlier
this year showed that.
The efforts of the Organization of African Unity
(OAU) to develop a coherent approach to the prevention
of conflict are welcome. They deserve our full support.
But the OAU has warned that its resources are not
enough. I believe that the United Nations must respond.
By setting up a coherent structure of support systems,
running from early warning and preventive diplomacy
right through to humanitarian and peace-keeping
deployment on the ground, we can make sure that the
skills and resources can be put into action as soon as the
need arises, and not months later.
What does that mean? It means, first, an early
warning system. Not all conflicts can be foreseen. Some
are triggered by assassination or a coup d’état or other
sudden events. More often, surely, we can see trouble
brewing: competition for land and resources, ethnic or
religious rivalry, the gradual breakdown of law and order,
ill-judged responses by central governments. We need a
mechanism to pull together information and analysis of
events like these, to take a regular forward look at
potential troublespots and decide whether preventive
diplomacy needs to be triggered.
7

Then, secondly, it means a capacity to react, that is to
say, to intervene diplomatically before warfare breaks out.
We do not have that capacity now. Britain and France - we
announced this last year - have offered help, making
available experienced diplomats and offering equipment and
support. There needs to be an institutional framework. In
Europe we have the Conference on Security and
Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), which operates to agreed
principles and has intervened, for example, in Ukraine,
Moldova and the Baltic States to try to help parties to
resolve disputes before there is recourse to fighting. The
OAU has its own experience of pre-emptive action, and it
would clearly need to be the focal point of an enhanced
effort in Africa. I am proposing that the United Nations
should help the OAU and African countries to share this
expertise and establish agreed mechanisms for preventive
diplomacy in Africa.
But, thirdly, that will not always be enough. Peace-
keeping skills will continue to be in demand. We must
build up the necessary capabilities in Africa. Many African
countries already make a major contribution to peace-
keeping - Ghana, Egypt, Botswana, Zimbabwe and Zambia,
to mention just some. But we all know the United Nations
has not been able to deploy in Africa with the necessary
speed and effectiveness.
I therefore propose that, under the auspices of the
United Nations, a number of military staff colleges existing
in Africa should become peace-keeping skills centres; that
is to say, they should give training in doctrines and
disciplines of peace-keeping, and in mediation and conflict
resolution.
The physical capacity also needs to be strengthened if
intervention is to be rapid when it is needed. That requires
United Nations logistics basing centres, like those already
existing in Europe, to store equipment and ensure that it is
quickly available, with rapid mobile logistics teams,
earmarked by Member States, to help to maintain that
equipment in good running order and to give training and
on-the-spot maintenance support. Again, the lesson of
Rwanda is clear. These centres will also need headquarters
staff to identify and remedy logistic weaknesses, give
advice on maps or communications and advise existing and
potential troop contributors.
These are not proposals for enormous new machinery.
We need a framework within which existing resources,
capability and know-how can be mobilized. We will
strongly support such an effort. It needs further
discussion - above all, among and with African countries.
We would welcome such discussion soon, here in New
York, to develop these ideas, other people’s ideas and
take some practical decisions quickly.
Finally, money. As you, Mr. Secretary-General,
remind us, as you are bound to remind us, the United
Nations at the moment works miracles with what we do
not pay it. It simply cannot keep running on exhausted
credit. It must be able to pay its peace-keepers, for
example. We will not be able to build up the operations
of the United Nations unless we act now to put the
finances of the United Nations on a sound and sustainable
footing for the long term.
No radical change in principles is needed, but we do
need a sensible updating of the way in which assessments
are calculated. The existing system was adopted in 1973.
Much has changed. No one now would propose that
States with above average per capita incomes should
enjoy an 80 per cent discount on their peace-keeping
contributions. No one now would suggest that discounts
for all the newly independent Member States should be
absorbed by five countries in an open-ended arrangement.
But that is the system. It means that some countries are
paying too much and others too little. It means that we
now need to put these anomalies right. Moving to a
system based on relative capacity to pay, with automatic
adjustment for changing circumstances, would not mean
very much change for most countries, but it would mean
a fair, equitable basis on which the long-term viability
and therefore vitality of the United Nations could be
assured.
A word about the Security Council. Reform is on
the agenda - that is quite right - and I believe it is in the
interests of the United Nations to sort out the question of
enlargement in good time. We would like the momentum
of discussion to be maintained.
Next year’s fiftieth anniversary is a good milestone
for the debate. We will work hard for a good outcome,
both on enlargement and on transparency, where recent
informal arrangements to improve consultation on peace-
keeping between the Secretariat, the Security Council and
troop contributors should be further developed.
We should ensure that the Council is representative,
while avoiding an enlargement so great that it puts at risk
the effectiveness of the Council. If consensus can be
reached, then clearly there are countries that, by virtue of
their global interests and their contribution to international
8

security and United Nations operations, should be invited to
accept the responsibilities of permanent membership.
I have concentrated today on how we deal with crises
and defuse tensions. But, of course, those are only some of
the challenges that our Organization faces. Drug trafficking
and associated international crime are other threats to our
security and well-being. We need to give new energy and
encouragement to all those who are involved in developing
cooperation against those threats. I mention this because I
feel that we must give particular support to the United
Nations International Drug Control Programme. This is the
programme that has the responsibility for leading all the
world’s efforts in this field. Once again, the United
Nations is the best resource we have for tackling a menace
that threatens the whole world.
In conclusion, we can say confidently that the United
Nations is indispensable. It is not a perfect glass palace,
but it is the best building we have, even though the winds
still blow cruelly through its gaps and its defects. We all,
therefore, have a duty to repair, make good, build afresh.
Next year we will look back rightly on the
achievements, and the list of achievements is long. But it
will remind us, and we will remind ourselves, of what has
not yet been achieved. And I hope that will stir us to show
the same vision, the same strength of purpose as the
founders of the United Nations, with, I hope, results of
equal value for the next 50 years.


Allow me first of all, Sir, to congratulate you
warmly on your noteworthy election as President of the
General Assembly at its forty-ninth session. Your presence,
dear brother, at the head of the Assembly is clear proof of
the commitment of your country, Côte d’Ivoire, to the
defence of international ideals and the promotion of
multilateral diplomacy. Furthermore, your personal
competence and the rich diplomatic experience you have
acquired over the years are a guarantee of the success of
our deliberations. My country, Guinea-Bissau, which holds
one of the vice-presidencies, wishes to assure you of its
total availability and fullest cooperation.
Our thanks and congratulations also go to your
illustrious predecessor, Mr. Samuel Insanally, for the
wisdom with which he guided the work of the forty-eighth
session.
We would also like to express our congratulations to
the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, and to
pay him a tribute for his tireless activity in the midst of
so many dramatic events.
The general debate of the forty-ninth session reflects
the logic of the post-cold-war period, in which the burden
of blocs, ideological confrontations and threats of nuclear
has been lightened, thus creating favourable conditions for
a new type of relationship between nations and peoples.
The political and socio-economic changes that have
taken place on the international scene undoubtedly will
have repercussions on the structure and functioning of the
United Nations.
Created 49 years ago, the United Nations has long
lived in the context of the bipolarization of blocs and of
ideologies. Today more than ever, our Organization is
called upon to face the challenges of international politics
in a different way.
The positive trend emerging on the international
level thanks to joint efforts by many parties to preserve
this trend is nonetheless being thwarted by various
hotbeds of tension and conflict in different regions of the
world.
Guinea-Bissau, aware of this fact and of its harmful
consequences, is firmly committed to the promotion of a
new international conscience, based on respect for human
values.

The United Nations, in order to better respond to the
requirements of our times, must take these new challenges
into account and thus undertake the necessary reforms.
The universally hailed end of bipolarization in
international relations has brought about a rebirth of hope
for a new era of peace. Alas, the world is still the theatre
of tragic and unforeseeable events.
The African continent is one of the regions of the
world that is most affected. Drought and desertification,
which bring disorder to that continent, diminish its
productive capacity and provoke famine, is now being
compounded by fratricidal wars.
It is no accident that in the course of recent years
more than half of the peace-keeping operations of the
United Nations have taken place, unfortunately, in Africa.
In Angola, the people continue to be victims of
suffering and atrocities. Guinea-Bissau once again urges
the parties to the conflict to fully respect the relevant
Security Council resolutions and hopes that the Lusaka talks
will produce results.
In Mozambique, significant progress has been
achieved in the efforts to establish a lasting peace. We
repeat our congratulations to the Government and to the
Resistência Nacional Moçambicana, and urge them to
persevere along this road, which should lead to the holding
of multiparty elections in the coming days.
In Liberia, the situation remains virtually unchanged,
despite numerous agreements concluded between the parties
concerned. If it continues, this state of affairs may imperil
the stability of the subregion.
The situation in Rwanda and in Somalia continues to
be of serious concern to my country. We urge all of the
parties concerned to end hostilities in favor of dialogue for
the achievement of national reconciliation. My Government
welcomes the international community’s unified actions on
behalf of these two countries, in particular "Operation
Turquoise," undertaken by France.
With regard to the situation in Western Sahara, my
country’s delegation welcomes the progress achieved and
supports the efforts of the Secretary-General.
Similarly, Guinea-Bissau is of the opinion that the
conflicts in the former Yugoslavia must be resolved through
peaceful negotiations.
The end of apartheid and the holding of the first free
and democratic election in South Africa have turned a
page in the history of that country, which is called upon
to play an important role in Africa and in the world.
The peace agreement signed between Israel and the
Palestine Liberation Organization, which provides for
mutual recognition by the two parties, and the agreement
between Israel and Jordan represent important steps
toward the creation of lasting peace in the region.
Concerning the question of East Timor, we support
the continuation of all initiatives undertaken under the
auspices of the Secretary-General with a view to bringing
about a just and equitable solution.
Regarding Cuba, my country encourages dialogue
between the United States and that country to find a
solution to the question of the embargo, the repercussions
of which have a major impact on the population.
In the case of Haiti, we are pleased to note that after
many efforts by the United Nations and the Organization
of American States, the fundamental rights of the Haitian
people have finally been re-established and democracy
restored with the return of the constitutionally elected
President, Jean-Bertrand Aristide. It is appropriate here
to pay tribute to the decisive role played by the United
States in the implementation of Security Council
resolution 940 (1994).
Respect for human rights is a factor for peace and a
guarantee of international stability. The full exercise of
individual rights presupposes the existence of objective
conditions of economic and social organization based on
justice and equity.
The international community must promote more just
and constructive cooperation between States to combat the
perverse effects of poverty and improve material
conditions in the most needy countries and among the
most handicapped populations.
We are pleased at the results achieved by the World
Conference on Human Rights and hope that the
resolutions and decisions agreed upon there will
contribute to the protection and strengthening of human
rights.
Like many preceding speakers, I wish to emphasize,
on behalf of Guinea-Bissau, that it is our firm conviction
that the Republic of China in Taiwan should regain its
2

place in the United Nations, on the basis of the principles
of parallel representation of divided countries. As a full-
fledged Member of the United Nations, the Republic of
China in Taiwan, with its 20,000,000 inhabitants and its
highly advanced stage of economic and technological
development, could play a preponderant role on the
international scene. We hope that at its next session, which
will coincide with the celebration of the fiftieth anniversary
of the founding of our world Organization, the General
Assembly will decide to put this item on its agenda.
Guinea-Bissau has just carried out multiparty
legislative and presidential elections, which were considered
just and transparent by our people and by international
observers. These elections, which showed the good
citizenship and maturity of the people of Guinea-Bissau,
took place in a climate of exemplary civilian peace. Our
country is firmly committed to the preservation and the
deepening of pluralistic democracy, a condition sine qua
non for any type of lasting development.
As emphasized by His Excellency João Bernardo
Vieira, President of our Republic, at his inauguration on 29
September this year, there were no losers in the elections in
Guinea-Bissau. All the people of Guinea-Bissau and our
country’s national unity, stability and development were
winners.
At this new stage in the history of our country we are
of course counting on our people’s determination, but also
on the international community’s support.
We welcome the success of the Uruguay Round and
the prospects for international trade that were opened up
with the signing of the Marrakesh Agreement and the
establishment of the World Trade Organization. We
believe that the achievement of the objectives after more
than eight years of negotiations, resulting in the Declaration
of Marrakesh, should have beneficial consequences for the
developing countries, thus enabling trade to play its
efficient role as a motor for development.
We believe that it is urgent to revise the current
economic order, which strongly penalizes the developing
countries. Indeed, these countries, and those of Africa in
particular, are faced with the problems of the outflow of
capital and the deterioration of the terms of trade, which
seriously compromise the economic and social development
of the countries of the South. This extremely painful
situation is a significant cause of the developing countries’
external indebtedness.
The external debt of the developing countries in
general and of the African countries in particular remains
an unbearable burden for their economies and a major
obstacle to their development.
Guinea-Bissau, with the support of its principal
economic partners, is continuing its efforts to find an
appropriate and lasting solution to the debt problem,
which has serious consequences for its socio-economic
development.
We consider that the Organization should devote
special attention to the United Nations New Agenda for
the Development of Agrica in the 1990s in order to speed
up the process of the socio-economic transformation of
the continent. Similarly, we support the rapid
implementation of the "Agenda for Development".
The problem of desertification represents a major
concern for the Government of Guinea-Bissau, a country
which, because it is located in the Sudano-Sahelian
region, is faced with persistent irregularities in rainfall, as
well as massive invasions of insects that destroy
agricultural production. In this context, our country
supports the signing of an international convention to
combat desertification in those countries experiencing
serious drought and/or desertification, particularly in
Africa.
The social and economic development activities of
the United Nations are in our view aimed in particular at
the most vulnerable groups - women, children, young
people, the aged and the handicapped. The situation in
which the majority of people in the developing world are
now living deserves special attention from our
Organization.
In fact, the solution of the problem lies in a better
development of North-South cooperation. If there is to be
progress in the developing countries, health and education
systems must be upgraded, and machinery must be
established to eradicate hunger and poverty and improve
living conditions in the world.
We repeat our support for the convening of the
World Summit for Social Development in 1995 and of the
Fourth World Conference on Women, as well as the
Preparatory Conference in Dakar and Habitat II.
The international community is capable of meeting
the challenges facing it and of resolving complex
problems. Our Organization has many, sometimes
3

difficult, tasks to accomplish. It is our sincere wish that the
process of restructuring the United Nations system, so
necessary for the revitalization of the Organization, can be
completed, so that the hopes that prevailed at the founding
of the United Nations will be seen in a new light when we
celebrate the forthcoming fiftieth anniversary of the United
Nations.


Please allow me to
congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the exalted
office of President of the General Assembly. Your
distinguished career and your experience in international
affairs, together with your outstanding personal qualities,
assure us of wise and skilled leadership at the forty-ninth
session of the General Assembly.
As we approach the fiftieth year of the life of our
Organization, let us look back to the first principles of its
existence. Let us see how we can apply those principles
to the dynamic realities of our time and, to the extent that
human discernment will allow, to the uncertain
circumstances of the next half century.
Emerging from the unspeakable horror and devastation
of untrammelled global conflict, the international
community brought forth the United Nations as an
instrument, above all, for preventing conflict and keeping
the peace. This mission was to be carried out, if possible,
through the encouragement of the peaceful settlement of
disputes by the contending parties themselves or, if
necessary, through the interposition of armed force by the
United Nations.
As with any human institution, the United Nations
record in this regard has been mixed. We find that the
United Nations has been effective in keeping the peace in
those cases in which both the parties to the disputes and the
major Powers involved have turned — or have been
compelled to turn — to the international community to
separate the contending forces and allow them a respite
from war. This we have seen in such places as Cyprus,
Angola, Mozambique, Liberia and certain parts of the
Middle East, including Lebanon.
In recent years, a singular success was achieved in my
own part of the world when in Cambodia, upon the resolve
of the international community and the Cambodian parties
themselves, the United Nations not only enforced the peace
but also managed the transition to a regime of peace and
national reconciliation.
Contending with matters of war and peace has
engaged the greater portion of the attention and
preoccupation of the United Nations and of the international
community. However, our founding fathers recognized
from the very beginning that it is not enough to head off
crises and intervene in conflicts, but that the roots of war
and peace lie in the human condition and the human mind.
It is thus there, at their roots, that mankind must deal with
questions of war and peace.
As we look back at this half-century, we see with
extraordinary clarity that the enduring triumphs of the
international community have come not with the imposition
of outside force but when the deepest concerns of the
nations and peoples involved are addressed and resolved.
In the past year, two such triumphs brightened, like twin
comets, the history of the human community, forcefully
demonstrating yet again this essential reality. These
triumphant achievements came in precisely those two areas
that had most deeply engaged the United Nations for the
greater part of its existence — South Africa and the
Middle East.
In South Africa, national peace and reconciliation in
a regime of democracy emerged victorious after decades
of struggle, led by the United Nations, against apartheid
and on behalf of human dignity, racial equality, majority
rule and political pluralism. This happened only after
most of the political forces in the country recognized
these universal values as essential to the survival of the
South African nation.
In the Middle East, the dramatic breakthrough
worked out by Israel and the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO) has opened the doors of hope for an
end to the Arab-Israeli conflict. This was made possible
by the tenacious insistence of the international
community, mainly through the United Nations, on the
right of the Palestinian people to govern themselves and
on the right of all States in the region to a secure
existence within internationally recognized boundaries. It
finally occurred because the leaders of Israel and the PLO
and other Arab leaders recognized the essential nature of
these rights.
Sadly, savage conflicts continue to ravage lives in
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Somalia, Rwanda and other
areas experiencing similar tragedies, mainly because
people of influence among the various ethnic groups,
tribes and clans have not accepted the fundamental truth
of their common humanity.
For a long time, the United Nations has advanced
the proposition that economic development — raising the
income of a nation as a whole — was vital to peace and
stability in the world. The United Nations is certainly
right to emphasize this important reality. In many cases,
extreme poverty has led to despair and to a sense of
outrage over the perceived injustice of living in penury
and deprivation in a world of affluence and profligate
consumption, of being inadequately compensated for the
use by others of one’s nation’s human and natural
resources, and of being doomed to a chronic inability to
shake off an unpayable debt to foreign creditors.
Fortunately, many developing nations — and the
Philippines is proud to take its place among them — have
made hard political decisions and adopted economic
policies favourable to dynamic and sustained economic
growth.
19

These are thus hopeful times for economic growth, at
least for those countries in a position to take advantage of
a more liberal international trading regime. However, as
many countries, and the United Nations itself, have
realized, economic development by itself is not enough.
Raising the overall income of a nation is not enough. A
larger gross national product does not necessarily mean a
better life for the individual citizen. A bigger economy by
itself does not satisfy the individual person’s aspiration to
human fulfilment.
Indeed, economic growth cannot be sustained for long
unless the individual citizen and the individual community
have a stake in that growth and unless they are mobilized
and empowered to take active part in the process of
development. Economic growth would be meaningless to
the individual who does not share in its benefits or whose
community is destroyed by it. Development is empty for
persons who are deprived of their individual rights and
freedoms. A society cannot find fulfilment in growth, and
indeed the development process itself is severely hampered,
if it does not take adequate care of its vulnerable groups:
women, children, ethnic minorities, the handicapped, the
homeless. Development cannot be sustained unless the
nurturing qualities of the natural environment are conserved
for future generations.
Care for citizens’ fulfilment as human beings, for their
community and for society cannot wait. It cannot wait for
total peace to be achieved or for a certain level of
development to be attained. All these — peace,
development, and the quality of society and of human
life — must proceed simultaneously.
We in the Philippines have learned this lesson the hard
way and are now applying it faithfully. We have secured
peace and national reconciliation through a peace process
that includes having sincere discussions with dissident
elements and extending a generous amnesty to them. We
have granted a substantial degree of autonomy and self-rule
to our ethnic minorities, particularly the Muslim
community. We have devolved extensive authority,
responsibility and resources on local governments and
communities, and we have restored the system of
democratic pluralism, through which the people and their
groups can thrash out their grievances and advance their
interests in peace and with civility.
At the same time, we have pursued a purposeful
programme of economic development through the
liberalization of the conditions governing trade, investments,
and banking and finance, and through the privatization of
Government enterprises. We have provided infrastructure
facilities and generous incentives for domestic and foreign
investors. These, together with the restoration of political
stability, have placed us back on the road to economic
recovery and self-sustaining growth.
Simultaneously, we have adopted a social agenda
through a broad national consensus. In accordance with
that agenda we have endeavoured to improve the quality
of life of our people, not only because such an
improvement is their inherent right, and not only because
the ultimate purpose of development, in our view, is the
welfare of the individual and his community, but also
because we know that the best way to spur economic
development is to afford the people a stake in it and
because we recognize that the people are an economy’s
most vital resource.
We are thus jealously safeguarding the individual
Filipino’s fundamental rights and freedoms. Part of this
effort is the importance that we place on human-rights
education for all, including the armed forces and the
police, a mission that is mandated by a unique provision
in our Constitution.
We are expanding the empowerment of our people
and their communities, particularly of the most vulnerable
groups. We have devoted attention and resources to the
concerns of women, including women workers, and of
children, particularly those of the poor. We have
protected the rights and culture of our ethnic minorities.
And we have allocated substantial resources to health and
education for the development of our people as our most
valuable asset.
We in the Philippines believe that this simultaneous
and balanced approach to peace, development and the
quality of individual lives must be applied in the
international community as well as within nations, in the
family of man as well as in national societies.
The expansion of the global economy is important
for peace in the world and the progress of nations, but it
is not enough. Each country must have a stake in this
expansion and an enlarged share of it.
Even this is not enough. The international
community must go beyond nations in its ministrations.
It must devote greater attention to care and respect for
people and to the recognition of the inherent equality of
all human beings — regardless of gender, of age, of race,
of religion, of language, of culture or of nationality.
20

We must all remember that the sources of conflict do
not lie only in disputes over territory or resources. As we
know only too well, they arise also, and it seems
increasingly, from intolerance of other people’s beliefs and
cultures and from the less than human treatment of people
from other lands.
Mankind has made progress in advancing the truth that
there are certain things that transcend national boundaries
and are the common heritage, the common concern and the
common responsibility of all nations and of mankind as a
whole. Among these are the environment and the oceans
and their resources.
There is something else that transcends national
boundaries and summons global responsibility, something
that is of infinitely greater worth than even the environment
or the oceans. I am speaking of the world’s most
vulnerable human groups. I speak specifically of migrant
workers, refugees, children, the aged and the disabled, and
the special concerns of the world’s women.
The transnational migration of workers is an
increasingly prominent phenomenon of international life in
our time. This is the result of supply and demand for
workers seeking equilibrium. Migrant workers, however,
are more than a commodity to be traded in the international
market-place. They have the same dignity and rights as
any of us in this Hall. Moreover, they make a vital
contribution to the economies and societies of the countries
in which they live and work.
And yet, many countries, including developing
countries, treat migrant workers as being less than the
human beings that they are. At best, these workers are left
unprotected by the law governing labour and employment.
The international community, the United Nations, cannot
allow the abuse of these vulnerable and valuable members
of the human family to continue.
We urge member States to ratify or accede to the
International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of
All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families as an
expression of their recognition of the common humanity
that they share with migrants and their families.
The Secretary-General might form a group to submit
recommendations to the Assembly at our next session on
improving coordination of the various efforts of the United
Nations on behalf of migrant workers. And I call upon the
High Commissioner for Human Rights to make the rights
of migrant workers one of his priority concerns.
I reiterate the call for a global conference on
international migration and development, which was
supported by many delegations at the recent International
Conference on Population and Development, held in
Cairo.
Natural and man-made disasters have created
large-scale flows of refugees around the world. While the
distinction between refugees and economic migrants has
to be resolutely made, genuine refugees must be given all
the protection that international conventions call for.
Children, by their very nature, have a claim to
mankind’s protection and care. That claim is special in
the case of street children, children coerced into drug
addiction, refugee children and children in the areas of
armed conflict or natural disasters. National societies and
the international community must ensure that such
children are provided with adequate food, medical care,
shelter and education. We may need to draw up a
convention dealing with the sale of children, child
prostitution, child pornography and the nefarious trade in
body parts of children.
The rights, education and empowerment of women
around the world are of special importance to the United
Nations and to the world, as they have everything to do
with some of mankind’s most vital concerns — the health
and education of children, the advancement of the
economy, the preservation of the environment and the
management of the country’s and the world’s population.
We in the Philippines look forward to the Fourth
World Conference on Women, and call for the inclusion
in its platform of action of measures for the protection
and advancement of women’s rights, particularly of
women in positions of great vulnerability, including
women migrant workers, women refugees, and minority
women. We also call upon the Ninth United Nations
Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment
of Offenders to take steps towards making gender-based
violence a crime, especially violence against women
migrant workers and the victims of the traffic in women.
Underlying the need to safeguard the welfare of
these vulnerable groups is the fundamental issue of
human rights, the issue of respect for all people and their
rights, the issue of their inherent equality as human
beings. The United Nations has adopted numerous
international instruments on human rights, beginning with
the Universal Declaration. The Philippines is party to 21
of these.
21

The United Nations must renew its commitment to
foster compliance with these solemn covenants, always with
respect for the sovereignty of nations. Since the concept of
the inherent rights and equality of human persons resides in
the minds of people, United Nations efforts in this regard
must begin with education. As our Constitution proclaims,
human-rights education is itself a human right.
Our delegation reaffirms its full support for a proposal
introduced last year for the declaration of a United Nations
decade on human rights education. At the same time, the
United Nations human rights machinery must be
strengthened, particularly the new office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights and the Centre for Human
Rights.
Even as we refocus our concerns on basic human
needs, we should not lose sight of the continuing, and even
increased, importance of peace-keeping in the mandate of
the United Nations. We must, however, make sure that the
peace-keeping function does not divert resources from
economic and social development, is not used by the major
Powers simply to pursue their respective agendas, and is
carried out in a transparent and democratic manner.
The Philippines fully supports an approach to
international peace and security that is based on securing
friendly relations among peoples of different political,
cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds, respect for
international law, and the peaceful settlement of disputes.
We believe that the maintenance of international peace and
security should not rest primarily on the use or threat of
sanctions, armed force, or other coercive measures. Nor
should peace-keeping operations, important as they are, take
the place of the political settlement of disputes.
In light of this, and because of the growing number
and complexity of United Nations peace-keeping operations,
we in the United Nations have to agree on a set of guiding
principles for the establishment and conduct of such
operations. Such a set of guidelines would not only
contribute to the effectiveness of the peace-keeping
operations but also broaden the base of active support for
them. The maintenance of international peace and security
is a collective responsibility. The United Nations must
ensure the international nature of all peace-keeping
operations if it is to maintain their credibility.
It is in this spirit that we approach the live question of
the reform of the Security Council. It is ironic that, in the
midst of the rapid spread of democracy within nations in
recent years and the expanding membership of the United
Nations, the Security Council remains unrepresentative in
its size and in the geographic distribution of its
membership and undemocratic in its decision-making and
working methods.
Clearly, while the composition and methods of the
Security Council must reflect the realities of political and
economic power, we have to redress the imbalance in its
composition and increase the participation of the general
membership and other United Nations organs in its
decision-making, if we are to enhance its effectiveness
and its accountability. This would involve both enlarging
the Council’s membership and reforming its methods and
procedures.
Specifically, we believe that the Council’s
membership should be better balanced in terms of
geographic distribution and increased representation of the
developing countries. At the same time, the Security
Council has to improve the transparency of its working
methods and decision-making processes, which, in turn,
would enhance its working relationship with the general
membership and the other principal organs of the United
Nations, especially the General Assembly. We look
forward to early action on this aspiration by the working
group of the General Assembly dealing with the
expansion of the Security Council and related matters.
The General Assembly, for its part, must revitalize
itself if it is to carry out its functions and discharge its
responsibilities under the Charter, including those
pertaining to the maintenance of international peace and
security in which it must assert its role as the only
principal organ with universal membership. In the past
two years, the General Assembly adopted two resolutions
to this effect. Let us begin implementing their key
provisions.
Revitalization of the United Nations is demanded by
the new circumstances and challenges of today’s dynamic
world. Let us, at the very least, do our very best to
uphold and strengthen the principle of universality in our
Organization.
It is in the interest of revitalizing the United Nations
that the effective management of the Organization
assumes enormous importance. The Philippine delegation
welcomes the creation by the General Assembly of the
Office of Internal Oversight Services. We suggest,
however, that the Assembly consider the possible
establishment of an independent advisory group to
oversee the work and receive the reports of this Office.
22

This would provide the checks and balances so necessary
in a large organization such as the United Nations.
As the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations
approaches, we must ensure that the balance is maintained
among the principal concerns of the Organization — the
maintenance of peace and security, the promotion of
economic progress and the advancement of social
development.
Because it has lagged behind the first two of the
preoccupations of the United Nations, I suggest that we
now pay closer attention and turn our efforts more to the
third of our Organization’s principal concerns — the social
component of the basic needs of the human community and
the human person.
As we approach this important milestone of the
Organization, it is altogether fitting that we focus the work
of the United Nations on the human person and society,
whose interest and welfare, after all, are the ultimate reason
for the existence of the United Nations and the final
objective of its works.


 Let me express my great
pleasure at seeing Mr. Amara Essy presiding over our
deliberations. I am confident that, given his experience and
skills, this session will contribute to the further
enhancement of the role of the United Nations. Let me
also thank the Secretary-General for the thoughtful and
thorough review of the world situation, given in his annual
report - this in addition, of course, to our thanks for his
tireless work for the good of the Organization.
I would like to follow the point made by our Dutch
colleague regarding the increased responsibility of
individual Member States for the success of this institution,
let me say that the end of the cold war has been a source
of and a sound reason for satisfaction throughout the entire
world community. A series of "velvet revolutions" in
Central Europe, the dissolution of the USSR and
remarkable events in South Africa and the Middle East
have shaken the entire post-war geopolitical pattern of
"negative stability" - frozen enmity. As expected, the end
of the East-West confrontation and the disappearance of
competing blocs has proved beneficial to international
relations. The planet has become a safer place. Yet the
euphoria is fading, giving way to a sober evaluation of
events. Indeed, have all the "Berlin Walls" or "Iron
Curtains" been dismantled - especially economic barriers
that separate countries on a global or regional scale? Is the
"peace dividend" actually being paid? Has the North-South
development gap ceased to widen and to undermine the
newly acquired, still fragile global stability?
The old bipolar, confrontational world has gone. We
are not divided anymore. But we are not united either. In
fact, many problems, dormant or concealed until now, have
surfaced with startling force: ethnic conflicts, nationalisms,
religious intolerance. The "cold war" may very well be
replaced by a "cold peace" or, even worse, by "hot chaos".
Global cooperation will not come by itself. The
United Nations is best placed to lead its Members in an
effort to achieve it. However, are the nations ready for it?
Is the United Nations properly equipped to cope with the
task?
The question that should be asked first is not what
the United Nations could do for us, but what we - the
Member States - should do to unite the nations. A
contest between the two super-Powers no longer dictates
the course of history. The international scene, both
political and economic, has become pluralist, with
medium-sized and small countries emerging as
increasingly important actors. Previously, the role of
these countries was, at best, that of a go-between or
observer, rather than an active participant. Now they are
becoming partners in the multi-country discourse.
Multilateralism is becoming more important than ever.
Multilateral arrangements in various domains provide both
insurance of equal treatment and an opportunity to take
part, to contribute. Multilateralism increases the freedom
of action of individual States and the degree of their
responsibility.
Let me set forth briefly the way in which Poland, a
medium-sized country, perceives its role and duty - I
stress duty - as a partner in the international effort to
bring about global cooperation, to build a united world.
First, we develop friendly relations with neighbours.
The best testimony in this regard is found in the treaties
we have concluded with all our seven neighbours. We
regard those treaties as a great common accomplishment
by Poles, Belarusians, Czechs, Germans, Lithuanians,
Russians, Slovaks and Ukrainians. It was not always easy
to reach an agreement: hard diplomatic work,
imagination and willingness to compromise were required,
to say the least. But the result was very much worth the
effort. The treaties constitute a solid block of durable
rules based on international law, in a region of major
importance for the security of the continent and the world
at large.
Secondly, we are active in developing regional
cooperation. The Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia and
Poland have formed a non-binding structure known as the
Visegrad group. It is not an organization; it has no
permanent bodies, not even a secretariat - a true rarity for
any international venture. The group did, however,
manage to work out a Central European Free Trade
Agreement (CEFTA).
Poland is also a partner in the Central European
Initiative and the Council of the Baltic Sea States.
Furthermore, we have recently reached out to our eastern
neighbours with a number of proposals to enhance
regional links.
24

Thirdly, we are impatiently and insistently striving to
become members of institutions whose membership has
been determined by the logic of the divided world. We all
agree they must not remain exclusive. It is "one Europe,
one world" that lies behind Poland’s efforts to join the
European Union, the Western European Union and the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). It was in this
context that Poland responded with determination and
confidence to the Partnership for Peace programme. By
virtue of its history, size and vital interests, Poland wants
to enter NATO not as a front-line State but, rather, as a
country furthering cooperation. We do not want to create
new divisions. On the contrary, we are striving to
overcome the remnants of the past divisions which are still
with us. It was also in this context that Poland entered into
the association agreement with the European Union, and it
is in this context that Poland is actively preparing for
membership. It is our strong desire to take part in the
process of integrating Europe so that it becomes more
secure, cooperative and hospitable; and to participate in an
effort to overcome the irrationalities of history - rivalry,
imperial divisions and nationalistic stereotypes.
Fourthly, Poland is a strong believer and a dedicated
participant in interregional and global actions. We are in
the forefront in promoting cooperation within the
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE).
The CSCE is not only the symbol of the necessary bonds
of security but also a forum for practical cooperation across
three continents. We support the CSCE as a regional
arrangement within Chapter VIII of the United Nations
Charter.
Poland is a time-tested participant in United Nations
peace-keeping operations. Over 2,000 of our troops are
there to uphold the ideas in the Charter, whenever called to
duty by the Security Council.
Poland, finally, is also active in other areas of
international cooperation: in the economic, social, cultural,
educational and health fields as well as in the promotion of
human rights and fundamental freedoms as stipulated by
Article 13 of the Charter.
Medium- and small-sized States are potentially a great
asset of the United Nations; it has not so far been
sufficiently recognized, let alone utilized. States such as
Poland can play a stabilizing role and exert an important
beneficial influence on developments in their immediate and
more distant neighbourhood, and tangibly contribute to
global stability and security. In particular, they can be
expected to become nuclei of regional integration as they
should not be suspected of seeking to dominate or to
impose their will on others.
To act locally - that is, regionally - is practical and
effective. Medium-sized countries in consensus with
smaller States can, indeed, make a difference. However,
we should not allow a loose constellation of separate
villages to emerge. We need a global, united village.
Therefore, we need a framework for subregional, regional
and interregional cooperation and discipline to ensure
coherence. This is of course the raison d’être of the
United Nations. We are trying today to improve its
operations. Let me here draw attention to two specific
issues.
First, the fundamental task for the United Nations is
to maintain international peace and security. The role of
the Security Council has been in recent years broadened
by more frequent recourse to action under Chapter VII of
the Charter. On the one hand, that allows for a fresh look
at the security role of the United Nations, particularly in
the context of countries which do not enjoy sound
security guarantees. On the other hand, one cannot
remain indifferent to the Council’s decisions in cases
where sovereignty, democracy and human rights are
violated, or access to humanitarian assistance is hindered.
For this reason, Poland consistently makes an effort to
respond to the Council’s calls for action, be it in the
former Yugoslavia, Rwanda or, most recently, Haiti.
Poland shares the view that the increase in the
membership of the United Nations justifies the
enlargement of the Council. There are different
suggestions and ideas as to how this might best be done.
The principal criterion continues, for us, to be
preservation of the effectiveness of the Council.
Enlargement should be accomplished on a consensus basis
and as a package. The interests of all United Nations
regional groups need to be respected in the process. A
seat on the Council, permanent or not, cannot be
considered a matter of prestige. Indeed, it implies
increased responsibility and the ability to discharge it.
The Council’s decisions involving peace-keeping and
peace-enforcement measures, from sanctions to recourse
to force, give rise to various risks and sacrifices by third
countries. They include potential risk to the lives and
health of the troops and financial losses for which so far,
despite the provisions of Article 50, there is no adequate
compensation.
25

The security of the peace-keepers is of the utmost
importance. Work undertaken on a convention on the
safety of United Nations peace-keeping personnel should be
completed at the earliest date. There is also a need for
active dialogue between members of the Security Council,
the Secretary-General and troop-contributing States. Such
dialogue should be a standard practice in the case of
decisions which may affect the security of these troops.
Poland shares the view that: first, all United Nations
activities in the four fields - preventive diplomacy,
peace-keeping, peacemaking and post-conflict
peace-building - must be fully mandated and better planned,
organized and financed; secondly, regional organizations
should make a more significant contribution in the areas of
preventive diplomacy and peace-keeping, but one fully
consistent with the United Nations Charter; and, thirdly, a
specific mandate is to be sought when peace-keeping troops
need to use force beyond the requirements of self-defence.
Disarmament is yet another dimension of a global
effort to strengthen international peace and security.
Mankind is no longer held hostage to nuclear confrontation;
the nuclear arms race has been halted and, it is hoped,
reversed. Post-cold-war cooperation between erstwhile
adversaries has resulted in important nuclear disarmament
accords. Poland is playing an active part in the ongoing
multilateral negotiations at the Conference on Disarmament
in Geneva for a comprehensive nuclear test-ban treaty.
Internationally verifiable, universally adhered to and
effective, such a treaty would put in place yet another
barrier to the spread of nuclear arms, which is in the vital
security interests of each and every member of the family
of nations. These interests would also be served by a
non-discriminatory, multilateral and internationally and
effectively verifiable treaty banning the production of fissile
material for nuclear weapons and other explosive devices.
The window of opportunity is wide open. It must not be
ignored. We warmly welcome the renewed interest and
initiative on nuclear disarmament submitted yesterday to
this Assembly by President Clinton and President Yeltsin.
We believe that further reinforcement of the
non-proliferation regime is imperative. We are alarmed by
recent reports of illicit trafficking in nuclear materials
across frontiers. This is a threat to international security
and also a danger to innocent bystanders exposed to
radiation. It also casts doubts on the efficiency and
sufficiency of existing legal provisions and procedures. A
thorough review of such provisions and procedures seems
timely.
The overriding national security interests of States
would be served in particular by the universalization of
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT). We welcome the recent accessions to the NPT,
especially by some of our newly independent neighbours.
We fervently hope that Ukraine will soon follow suit. In
this connection, I wish to recall that Poland firmly
supports the unconditional and indefinite extension of the
NPT. The forthcoming Conference to review the
operation of the NPT and to decide on its extension
should strengthen the regime. It will benefit the entire
international community. Coming as an aftermath to both
Hiroshima and Chernobyl, it would be the most fitting
step to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the nuclear age.
With the signing of the chemical weapons
Convention, there is a prospect of finally eliminating
another category of weapons of mass destruction. Poland
is actively involved in the work of the Preparatory
Commission for the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons, and its ratification procedure is well
advanced.
In conclusion, I would say this: more power to the
regions; more authority to the Security Council; more
initiative and involvement on the part of medium-sized
countries. These are, in our view, the cornerstones and
objectives of the reform of the United Nations.
Allow me now to address an issue to which Poland
and a number of other countries attach particular
importance. I am referring to the provisions of Article
107 and to parts of Article 53 of the Charter of the
United Nations. I doubt that there is any delegation here
that would not agree that they have become obsolete - a
dead letter.
For almost 50 years these provisions have not been
officially invoked. Indeed, the States covered by this
so-called "enemy clause" have become not only an
inseparable part of the democratic world but also a crucial
element of the United Nations system. It is impossible to
imagine how the Organization and its system could
function without their political, economic and financial
commitment.
Poland, the victim of the Nazi aggression that started
the Second World War, considers it its moral duty to take
a lead in closing this chapter of history for all time. We
believe that the time has come to part with transitional
clauses born of the war, concerning States which were
26

then, 50 years ago, enemies, but which have now become
partners in our common work for the United Nations.
I formally propose the removal from the Charter of the
United Nations of the clauses referring to "enemy States".
A political decision by the General Assembly on this
matter could be taken at this session. While, of course,
other modalities may be considered, the Assembly could,
for instance, request the Special Committee on the
Charter of the United Nations to submit to it at its fiftieth
session a proposal for an appropriate legal solution that
would not amount to a substantive revision of the Charter.
Let me express the hope that this initiative will meet
with the unanimous support of the Member States.


First, let me offer you,
on behalf of the Government and people of Sri Lanka,
warm congratulations to the President on his election to the
presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-ninth
session. We wish him an eminently successful tenure of
that high office.
Sri Lanka would also wish to express its gratitude to
Ambassador Samuel Insanally of Guyana for his
exceptionally creative conduct of the work of the crucial
forty-eighth session. Our good wishes extend also to His
Excellency Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, Secretary-General
of this Organization, who must contend with increasingly
challenging tasks at a time when the United Nations is
undergoing major transformation.
In Sri Lanka, the winds of change are blowing. In
our country, we stand on the threshold of a new era of
tolerance and peace, ending dissension. In August this
year, the Peoples’ Alliance was voted into office, after 17
years in opposition, in a parliamentary general election
that was internationally acclaimed as both free and fair.
At this election - Sri Lanka’s ninth since independence -
the people voted overwhelmingly, reaffirming their faith
in parliamentary democracy, in fundamental freedoms and
in the rule of law. Of the registered electorate, 76.2 per
cent cast their vote, thus maintaining Sri Lanka’s long
tradition of high political consciousness and model
election procedures.
What happened on 16 August in my country was
more than the routine exercise of the ballot to change a
government. In an election atmosphere in which
conflicting views were given full rein, the Sri Lanka voter
remained mature, calm and solidly entrenched in our
cultural and democratic values. The result of the poll was
therefore a victory for moderation, tolerance and unity.
In my first speech one month ago in our newly elected
Parliament, I, as a representative of the minority Tamil
community, made a statement that I shall now repeat
here, in this supreme parliament of the peoples of the
world:
"Let it never be said, if it could ever have been said,
that the Sinhala people are racists. They are not.
They are absolutely not, and I think this election has
demonstrated so handsomely that that particular
argument can be laid to rest for ever."
Under the leadership of the new Prime Minister,
Mrs. Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, a peaceful
transition of power has been effected, defying the cynical
predictions of some. Our nation’s rich and diverse
cultural heritage, steeped in the great religions of the
world and buttressed by a unique foundation of five legal
23

systems, has made this triumph of democratic expression
possible.
Sri Lanka’s new Government reflects the multi-ethnic,
multi-religious fabric of its society. In Parliament, the
Government has the support of a number of political
parties, including those of the Tamil and Muslim
communities. It is, therefore, well poised to bring an end
to the conflict in the north-east part of the country through
political negotiations, as mandated by the people. Prime
Minister Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, in her first address to
the nation on assuming office, stated:
"We extend a hand of friendship to the people of the
north-east and hope that their leaders would take it in
the same spirit that we have extended it."
The relaxation of the ban on certain essential items
going to conflict areas and the reciprocal release of
policemen held by the secessionist movement are hopeful
signs of peace in our land. The all-island state of
emergency has been lifted and reintroduced only in the
conflict areas. Our Government will pursue with
determination its quest for peace in our land - a just and
stable peace, acceptable to all our people - undeterred by
any set-backs that might be encountered in pursuit of its
goal.
I seek the indulgence of this Assembly for having
dwelt on recent developments in my country at some
length. I did so because, at a time when in some parts of
the world the ugly tide of intolerance is rising, we in Sri
Lanka are proud that we have witnessed a vindication of
the values of tolerance and principled conduct over the
forces of narrow sectarianism and opportunism. Our recent
experience might fortify the efforts to banish prejudice and
rancour among other peoples elsewhere.
On the international scene, there have been shining
examples of prolonged and bitter confrontation being
dispelled through dialogue and negotiation. Thus, we
welcome wholeheartedly the end of apartheid and the
establishment of a united, democratic and non-racial South
Africa under the inspired, and inspiring, leadership of
President Mandela.
We also welcome the positive developments in
Palestine subsequent to the recent agreements between the
Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel, and between
Jordan and Israel, while expressing our concern over those
issues that still remain unsettled.
On the other hand, to our deep regret Bosnia and
Herzegovina is still mired in bloodshed and violence and
the humanitarian crisis in Rwanda has not abated. We
reiterate our hope that the intense suffering and
dislocation in those countries can be halted through
negotiated settlement between the parties concerned and
politically disinterested efforts by the international
community.
Sri Lanka’s strong and positive identification with
the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries began in
Belgrade in 1961, when Mrs. Sirimavo Bandaranaike was
Prime Minister. She was Head of Government when Sri
Lanka hosted the historic summit of the non-aligned
countries in 1976. Our membership of this Movement,
then as now, derives from our deep conviction that its
principles empower the dispossessed of this world, giving
them dignity and hope for justice. The collapse of the
bipolarism imposed on the post-Second-World-War
international scene is thus no reason for non-alignment to
lie passive.
At the Non-Aligned Ministerial Conference in Cairo
we were proud to welcome South Africa as the one
hundred and tenth member of the Movement. It is
significant that this great nation emerging from the long,
dark night of apartheid has chosen to adopt the principles
of non-alignment. Cynics have predicted that the
Movement will sooner or later join the rubble of the
Berlin Wall. In our view, the end of the cold war does
not negate the rationale of non-alignment. On the
contrary, it vindicates the fundamental non-aligned
principle that military confrontation can never promote
security, stability nor peace among nations. Principles are
indestructible: people who believe in them are
indomitable.
There seemed a unique opportunity at the end of the
cold war for the world to achieve its long pursued
objective of general and complete disarmament under
effective verification, especially in the crucial area of
nuclear weapons. However, competing efforts by some
to maintain a monopoly on nuclear weapons and by
others to break it frustrate our quest for nuclear
disarmament.
Sri Lanka is deeply conscious of the serious
responsibility we undertake in presiding over the 1995 on
the Non-Proliferation Treaty Conference. It is imperative
that our advance towards a nuclear-weapon-free world
make substantial progress. To that end, work in the
Conference on Disarmament towards a comprehensive
24

test-ban treaty is encouraging, though we must remain
vigilant over any attempts to delay the conclusion of the
treaty. In other areas of disarmament, Sri Lanka recently
ratified the chemical weapons Convention, which we hope
will come into force next year.
As we see the end of the nuclear arms race, we do not
want to have it replaced by regional arms races, whether to
acquire nuclear-weapon capability or to achieve greater
sophistication in conventional weapons. The United
Nations arms Register is but a step on a long road towards
transparency and confidence building, eliminating the arms
bazaar, with its links to terrorism, drug trafficking and
money-laundering.
Throughout the course of the Third United Nations
Conference on the Law of the Sea, which spanned a
decade, Sri Lanka played a constructive and creative role.
The pioneering role played by the late Ambassador
Hamilton Shirley Amerasinghe of Sri Lanka, President of
the Law of the Sea Conference and a former President of
this Assembly, is part of the history of this unique
endeavour.
Sri Lanka has ratified the United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea, which has now entered into force,
and has signed the Agreement relating to implementation of
Part Xl of the Convention. This represents our continuing
commitment to the creation of a new legal regime of the
oceans. Sri Lanka looks forward to participating in the
historic inaugural session of the International Sea-Bed
Authority in Jamaica.
The Ad Hoc Committee on the Indian Ocean, taking
into account emerging realities, has developed a fresh basis
for a pragmatic, forward-looking approach to peace,
security and stability in the Indian Ocean area. We call
upon the countries concerned, particularly the permanent
Members of the Security Council and other major maritime
users of the Indian Ocean, to enter into a serious and
productive dialogue for a new partnership in the context of
the Committee.
As the Law of the Sea Convention enters into force,
greater support needs to be extended to regional initiatives,
such as the Indian Ocean Marine Affairs Cooperation
(IOMAC), promoting cooperation between the developed
and developing countries.
As the United Nations approaches its fiftieth
anniversary, there is increasing, and more extensive, resort
to multilateral action through the Organization. The
Security Council is finally playing the role - and
sometimes goes beyond the role - originally envisaged for
it under the Charter. Yet we must continue to reiterate
that foresight and careful assessment are vital in the
preparation for any Council intervention, and that such
action should be pursued only with the consent and
cooperation of the States concerned.
Furthermore, it is important to emphasize that the
Security Council acts on behalf of the general
membership of the United Nations. Unless its actions are
based on the widest possible support, Council decisions
will not be universally respected nor be truly effective.
In this context, Sri Lanka is of the view that Council
membership should be increased to provide for wider
representation, including representation of developing
countries. Sri Lanka was honoured to co-chair the
Working Group on the revitalization of the work of the
General Assembly, including the strengthening of the
nexus between the Assembly and the Security Council.
We believe the approach we have taken to enhance
transparency and encourage democratic practices is one
which is shared by the vast majority of developing
countries. We feel this process should be moved forward.
It was in this context that in 1993 Sri Lanka
announced its candidature for the 1996-1997 non-
permanent Asian seat in the Security Council, which by
practice of orderly rotation is due to the South Asian
sub-region.
Sri Lanka is particularly conscious of its identity as
a small State, vulnerable to the ebb and flow of
international tides, both political and economic. Yet we
have not hesitated to take principled stands when we
must. Nor will we shirk our responsibility to act in
solidarity with other developing countries. We share their
problems and concerns.
Sri Lanka is geopolitically and culturally an Asian
country. We rejoice over the fact that our continent, after
centuries of dependence, is once more resurgent,
politically stable and economically vibrant. This has been
achieved largely through self-reliance, indigenous
entrepreneurship and the Asian value systems. As we
move at the global level to greater interdependence and
interaction, Sri Lanka will remain firmly focused on the
Asian experience and its Asian context. We will spare no
effort to develop and strengthen our ties with our Asian
neighbours. An express commitment to pursue the
interests we share with the family of Asian nations will
25

be a new, strong thrust in the foreign policy of our
Government.
It is in that same spirit that we participated in the
launching of the South Asian Association for Regional
Cooperation (SAARC). We are encouraged by the positive
developments in SAARC as it journeys into the twenty-first
century, propelled by two important trends in the region:
democratization and the adoption of market-friendly
economic policies. Understanding among the peoples of
the region is increasing. Contacts between professional
bodies in the region have rapidly gathered momentum.
As a region severely affected by poverty, we in South
Asia have already taken steps to share our experiences and
work out common approaches including the SAARC
commitment to eradicate poverty by the year 2002.
Absolute poverty, hunger, disease and illiteracy stalk
one fifth of the world’s population. We trust that the 1995
World Social Summit and the Agenda for Development will
effectively address these issues and mobilize essential
resources to back commitments to eradicate poverty,
provide employment and promote social cohesion before the
end of this century.
Our development experience has taught us the
importance of alleviating the poverty of the poorest and of
maintaining social equity with economic growth. Sri
Lanka’s favourable social indicators are the result of a
consistent bipartisan commitment over the years to the
maintenance of a high level of social expenditure. A
number of income-transfer measures are in place. These
are indispensable to protection of the vulnerable segments
of the population during a period of structural adjustment
aimed at accelerating economic growth.
My Prime Minister has made a clear statement on
economic policy, in which he indicates the Government’s
firm resolve to build a strong national economy within a
market framework, with the principal engine of growth
expected to be the private sector, both domestic and
foreign.
We are particularly mindful of the need to pay
attention to our youth. In 1995, when we shall celebrate
the tenth anniversary of the International Youth Year, it
would be timely to focus on the achievements of the decade
and on further imperatives to advance the prospects for
youth. The former Prime Minister of Sri Lanka took the
initiative, at the Commonwealth summit in Cyprus, to focus
special attention on youth issues. Subsequently, the non-
aligned countries, at the ministerial meeting held in Cairo,
supported the proposal to convene, at the highest political
level, a special plenary meeting of this Assembly devoted
to youth affairs, as part of the fiftieth anniversary
celebrations.
I must also stress my Government’s commitment to
the provision of a transparent system for the promotion
and protection of human rights in the context of a truly
vital democracy. During our recent election campaign we
promised our people that we would, as a matter of the
highest priority, take steps to establish where necessary,
and strengthen where possible, a legislative framework to
promote and protect the full enjoyment of human rights.
Within five weeks of assuming office we have prepared,
for submission to Parliament, legislation to give effect to
the Convention against torture. Before the end of this
year, legislation will be introduced for the establishment
of a national human rights commission. This commission
will have judicial and investigative powers and will be
totally independent of the executive.
In addition, I have appointed, from among persons
active in work for human rights through independent,
non-governmental organizations, six outstanding national
experts with international credentials to assist me with
their knowledge and views. They serve in an individual
capacity and on an honorary basis. Their appointment in
no way precludes them from continuing to engage in their
public campaigning for human rights, including comment
on or criticism of governmental performance in this area.
Their appointment is further evidence of my
Government’s firm commitment to the conduct of open
and transparent government.
At the international level, we are of the view that
human rights should not become an arena for North-South
confrontation and that no country should be singled out
for hostile attention on grounds other than genuine
concern for the human rights of its citizens. The scrutiny
of a country’s human-rights record must be guided by
principles of impartiality and objectivity. Such scrutiny
must be motivated by a spirit of genuine concern,
dialogue and cooperation. In this connection, we wish to
felicitate the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights, Ambassador Ayala Lasso, on his efforts
to foster a cooperative, rather than a coercive, framework
for the promotion of human rights world wide.
Sri Lanka is disappointed that, on the international
economic scene, developing countries continue to suffer
from inadequate access to trade and technology, from low
26

commodity prices and from excessive debt burdens.
Financial flows for development have severely contracted.
The economic disparities between the developed and the
developing worlds continue to widen.
The Charter of the United Nations rests on two main
pillars: the maintenance of international peace and security,
and international cooperation for socio-economic
development. The United Nations must therefore at all
times proceed with equal commitment on both these
fronts - politico-security and socio-economic development.
Nor must it be forgotten that economic inequalities and
underdevelopment are at the root of phenomena such as
massive refugee flows and even ethnic and other conflicts.
We reiterate the non-aligned countries’ call for
renewal of the North-South dialogue on the basis of mutual
interests and interdependence. In this era of global
transition, the need for a favourable international
environment is imperative. Many developing countries are
embarking upon structural-adjustment programmes, at
considerable cost, yet these policies will be successful only
to the extent that there is a genuine commitment to free-
trade policies at the international level without extraneous
conditionalities.
Today - 26 September - Sri Lanka commemorates the
thirty-fifth anniversary of the death of Mr. S. W. R. D.
Bandaranaike, former Prime Minister of Sri Lanka. He was
succeeded by Madam Sirimavo Bandaranaike, the world’s
first woman Prime Minister. Now - thirty-eight years later
- their daughter, Ms. Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga,
has become Prime Minister. What is remarkable is that
each of them was elected to office by the free vote of the
people in keenly fought elections. Each of them succeeded,
by wholly democratic means, in unseating a strong
Government. In 1956, in this Hall, Prime Minister S. W.
R. D. Bandaranaike referred to the unconquered,
unconquerable human spirit as the "one golden thread"
passing through the "dark fabric of human history". He
said:
"I look upon the United Nations as the one
machine available to mankind today through
which it can express this unconquerable spirit of
man in its efforts to achieve ... peace, friendship
and collaboration". (Official Records of the
General Assembly, Eleventh Session, 590th
meeting, p. 235, para. 41)
That remains our view of the United Nations today.
We collectively articulate a global social contract
between the Governments and the peoples of this world
whom we represent. The success of a global social
contract rests on how individual States keep the people’s
faith through good governance, the maintenance of human
rights, equity and justice, and the provision of
opportunities to enhance the quality of life. In Sri
Lanka’s national context this involves political pluralism
and makes of politics the discharge of a public trust
where decision-making is open, transparent and based on
the widest possible extent of acceptance. Everyone in
public life is accountable for his or her actions. My
Prime Minister expressed it in these words:
"This is a beautiful but difficult dream, which we
shall strive to realize."
It is this vision that must concomitantly inspire the
conduct of relations between States. Only then will the
United Nations truly be "a centre for harmonizing the
actions of nations".