At the 22nd session of the summit Conference of Heads of State or Government of Africa, held in Addis Ababa last July, my colleagues and brothers entrusted to me the weighty responsibility of presiding over the Organization of African unity. It is in that capacity as well as on behalf of the People's Republic of the Congo that I now address this Assembly.
The special opportunity provided by this forum of the United Nations prompts me first to pay a particular tribute to our world Organization, whose efforts in the service of Mankind and particularly of Africa reflect in a significant manner the hopes vested in it by our peoples.
I should like also, Sir, to extend to you my congratulations on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at the forty-first session. I am persuaded that thanks to your personal qualities and your wealth of professional experience this session's work will proceed fruitfully and successfully. I assure you of the constant support of Africa in discharging your heavy responsibilities.
My gratitude goes similarly to your predecessor as President, Ambassador de Pinies, who so tactfully guided the work of the General Assembly
during the fortieth session.
I should like also to pay a warm tribute to the Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, who throughout his term of office has been able to effect reconciliation and rapprochement and to lead the Organization in a climate characterized by what has come to be called a crisis of multilateralism, while at the same time never failing to give African problems all the importance they
deserve and to recognize their urgency.
I would recall that the Organization of African Unity has always adhered loyally to the ideals of the United Nations, whose efforts to promote peace and development it has always supported. Indeed, the ideals of the two organizations to a certain extent overlap. This is borne out by the African States' great appreciation of the role played and the actions taken by the United Nations system.
In our opinion, this work, often carried out in difficult circumstances, deserves the sustained attention of all States, which should make more funds available to the world Organization so that it can carry out properly the tasks defined in the Charter. It wishes to do so, as shown by the excellent report of the Secretary-General; the only thing lacking is the ability to translate into concrete action the consensus that so frequently emerges among us.
In an international political system of increasing complexity, one feature of which is the growth of contradictory influences, it is more than every necessary to affirm that the United Nations is an irreplaceable instrument in the service of man, peoples and States.
As a counter to the spirit of destruction, injustice, the instinct to dominate and the impoverishment and enslavement of peoples, the United Nations is an important political enterprise which brings its full influence to bear on the conscience of present and future generations.
The United Nations has provided Member States with a forum for consultation where positive responses have been given to the many problems confronting our people, regardless of the differences between our countries and peoples, in terms of structure, levels of development and political and economic choices.
Whether dealing with the problems of collective security, dialog between the rich and poor countries, the economic and social crisis or the problem of peace and disarmament, the world Organization has always been able to encourage thinking that is directed to finding a better approach to those problems, and to define clearly the appropriate lines of action, which have now resulted in a series of measures that we must implement both individually and collectively.
Over a period of 41 years the United Nations system has become an indispensable institution, and we hope for its success and further strengthening. In a world divided by bitter antagonisms, where solidarity is breaking down and where interdependence, the need for which is so clear to everyone, is yet being thwarted by national selfishness, how can we not earnestly hope for the strengthening of the sole framework, the only institution, where men of different ways of thinking, from all countries, can still sit side by side, using their own particular genius and special characteristics to establish and then strengthen the necessary dialog between nations and cultures?
The Organization must certainly be kept in being. Consequently we are deeply concerned by the crisis of multilateralism. We believe that that crisis in which the Organization now finds itself, and which is the subject of an in-depth analysis by the Secretary-General in his annual report, as well as by the Group of 18 intergovernmental experts, can not be regarded merely as a financial crisis. It touches upon the very philosophy of international relations in our tine, and the degree of credibility given to the multilateral system, which has been patiently built up over 40 years. We therefore say yes to reform, if its purpose is to strengthen this valuable instrument, because a choice "between a world with the United Nations and a world without it would simply be a choice between the future, promising solidarity, mutual understanding and peace on the one hand and, the past, meaning mistrust and the use of force as a means of settling disputes, on the other.
Obviously improvements are necessary and desirable to ensure more rationalization, with a view to greater efficiency and work that is more closely geared to the noble aims of the San Francisco Charter. But the necessary changes should not lead to justification of the Organization's very existence being called into question.
How can we guarantee international peace and security, which are essential for the survival of nations and the development of the poorest countries, if the role of the United Nations and its prerogatives are diminished?
In this very Hall we proclaimed 1986 the International Year of Peace. That initiative was a clear reflection of the deep concern that the deterioration of the international climate has caused us.
The deployment in certain parts of the world of arsenals of weapons of great range and precision has contributed to the creation of doubts in men's minds and a state of anxiety among peace-loving and justice-loving peoples, and it has thus slowed the momentum of the United Nations in introducing a system of collective security.
However, hopes can be based on the setting up of channels for consultation to bring about a constructive dialog in the world. In that connection, the bold initiatives taken by the United Nations, including an appeal for general and complete disarmament, are praiseworthy and deserve to be encouraged. Similarly, we should encourage the two main nuclear Powers, the Soviet Union and the United States, to continue a dialog that is vital for the whole of mankind.
Hence we wish to make a solemn appeal here to the super-Powers and the medium-sized Powers to make a genuine and sincere effort to bring the disarmament negotiations to a successful conclusion. In that regard, we particularly welcome the most recent agreements reached at Stockholm as a first step towards mutual trust between those on whom mankind's very survival depends.
Nevertheless, the peace to which the peoples of the whole world so earnestly aspire should not represent merely an absence of war or a dialog between the major Powers alone. Peace also means our societies and economies being able to ensure for each human being the increasing satisfaction of his fundamental needs.
It follows that mankind can enjoy a comprehensive and lasting peace only when the whole planet can enjoy the benefits of economic and social development, when all peoples can freely decide their own future, and when in each of our nations we have broken down the artificial barriers relating to race, religion and all other grounds for discrimination.
Unfortunately, this session is being held against a backdrop of economic and political crisis which hardly gives grounds for optimism - at least about the immediate future. This general crisis, which is so deep-rooted and far-reaching in its effects, has tragically affected the countries of the third world, and particularly those of Africa.
The recent United Nations surveys of the social situation in the world in 1985 and the world economy in 1986 have indicated that as far as international economic relations are concerned there has been an increase in protectionism and a lade of any genuine transfer of technologies and resources, to developing countries; there has been a breakdown in North-South negotiations, and there has been very severe pressure on commodity prices.
The consequences of these policies on the countries of the third world have been growing balance-of-payment deficits and increased indebtedness, bringing most of our countries to the brink of bankruptcy.
We have also noted that since the decade which terminated in 1980 a growing number of countries in the third world have been obliged to negotiate with international institutions and conclude agreements which in many cases have led to draconian measures involving substantial or even multiple currency devaluations, almost insupportable budgetary cuts, the elimination of currency subsidies for mass consumption goods, and the removal of protective measures relating to terms of foreign trade and external payments. In brief, there has been a whole range of very painful measures which in many cases have had no lasting effect.
These steps, designed to restore basic macro-economic equilibrium, have in many cases had very severe social consequences and have sometimes produced effects which have been very damaging to general development aims.
Pour months ago, there was a special session of the General Assembly cm the Critical Economic Situation in Africa, convened at United Nations Headquarters. This was the first time in the history of the Organization that such a session was held to consider the economic problems pertaining to a specific region. It was also the first time that the African continent officially brought its problems before the international community.
The special session gave us an opportunity to have a detailed discussion of the breadth and scope of the economic crisis which at present besets the African continent. It also made it possible to discuss appropriate ways of remedying the situation. The session adopted the United Nations Program of Action for Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1990. That decision symbolizes the firm political support which the international community is giving to Africa as part of the African Priority Program for Economic Recovery 1986-1990, and its commitment to improving the international economic climate in order to help Africa in its adjustment and development efforts.
I should like to reiterate that we, the peoples of Africa, are resolved to take every step required, both nationally and internationally, to bring about economic recovery, and growth and development in Africa, and to achieve the long-term development targets laid down in the Lagos Plan of Action.
Africa agreed to make all these efforts at a time when the international climate was unfavorable and when multilateral co-operation was at its lowest level.
Indeed, there have been substantial losses in its commodity markets because of the deterioration in the terms of trade, and it has been obliged to spend up to 50 per cent of its export earnings to pay the interest on its debts, at a time when public aid for development continues to decrease, Africa thus has become the
continent of negative transfers, because it is the victim of a growing imbalance which is caused by the continuing unfavorable trade situation.
The greatest challenge which must now be faced is the implementation of the above-mentioned United Nations Program of Action. The special session gave rise to an encouraging consensus when it adopted that Program of Action, but the unanimous support for the Program was not immediately accompanied by any specific offer of finance. It therefore is quite clear that the international community must make special efforts if it intends to mobilize and implement the African
Program of Action.
The whole international community, the donor countries, international and
non-governmental organizations and United Nations agencies, will all have to act in concert with the African countries, both individually and collectively, in order to mobilize the necessary resources.
In order to facilitate follow up in the implementation of these decisions, the Conference of Heads of State or Government of the Organization of African Unity (0A0) has already set up a standing steering committee. This committee is to draw up the practical ways and means for the execution of the Program of Action, in consultation with the United Nations system and other multinational and multilateral organizations, or agencies that provide financing. In addition to the standing steering committee, we decided to provide follow-up machinery at the regional and sub-regional levels. The decisions taken in the context of the priority Program can thus be carried out and incorporated in the development plans and the Programs of action adopted at the national level. At this point we should like to appeal to all countries to create similar machinery in order to make it easier to channel the necessary aid to bring Africa out of its economic recession.
It is equally important that the international community be aware of the detrimental effects of Africa's external debt which, because of the critical economic and financial situation which prevails in that continent is deserving of special treatment. That is why the 22nd Summit of the Heads of State and Government of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), has instructed me to continue my efforts to have an international conference held to deal with that particularly distressing problem. Once again, we shall be relying on the solidarity of the whole international community.
As I have just emphasized, the states members of the OAU have committed Africa to a very bold effort for economic recovery in the light of the current crisis. They are fully aware that in order to develop their nations, in order to exploit and to make full use of the tremendous wealth which exists in the continent, it is important to have high caliber human resources. That is why they have stressed the need to implement integrated Programs dealing with pure science and human and social sciences, education and literacy, the cultural industries, handicrafts, the development of tourism, and cultural co-operation.
In this connection, it should be recalled that it is since the statement of Monrovia, in July 1979, that the Heads of State and Government of Africa have publicly expressed their desire to place science and technology at the service of development. The priority Program for the economic recovery of Africa clearly stresses the fact that no country has achieved an economic breakthrough without the creation of a minimum basis for science and technology.
Africa is aware of the vital nature of what is at stake, namely mastery of both sciences and adopted techniques as well as state of the art technology which are the real key to tomorrow's world. Africa does not wish to and cannot fail in that undertaking. Even now, to indicate its interest in that endeavor, Africa, at the 22nd Summit of the OMJ took the decision to organize the first Congress of African scientists in Brazzaville, in the People's Republic of the Congo, next June.
I should like to take this opportunity to invite all institutions which might be interested to become closely associated with this venture.
Africa is also aware that a people which creates nothing is doomed to perish and that it is quite correct to assert with the philosopher that "Time is invention, otherwise it is nothing." It is precisely to encourage our young people to study science and technology with all the security that provides for the future that the OMJ has decided to institute a prize for scientific renaissance, the Sheikh Anta DIOP prize, which is named after a great African research worker whose role in affirming the cultural identity of Africa was a determining one.
In the field of the environment, practically everything has already been said on the deterioration of the natural environment in Africa, its causes, and the remedies required. Here, I should simply like to welcome the efforts of the international community and the valuable assistance it has provided to those African countries which have fallen victims to drought, desertification and other natural catastrophes.
Africa, for its part, is determined to achieve food self-sufficiency between now and the year 2000, in accordance with the relevant resolution of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FSO). Therefore, we request massive and decisive support on the part of the international community to enable Africa to ensure its security and autonomy in the natter of food.
At a recent meeting in Yamoussoukro In the Cote d'Ivoire, the African Ministers of Agriculture adopted a strategy to bring about food self-sufficiency and defined a consistent agricultural development programs for the next 25 years.
What we must do today is to move on from the stage of emergency aid to structural assistance, which will make it possible for in-depth action to be pursued, a sort of action which frees people from the nightmare of famine and poverty.
Apart from the economic challenges which it has to face the African continent is also beset by a situation of ongoing war, which has been imposed upon it by the minority racist regime of Pretoria. That problem is a matter of major concern to our Organization.
More than a quarter century after this Assembly adopted its Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, in resolution 1514 (XV) of December 1960, Africa is still seeking to free itself from the last bastion of colonialism.
The question of Namibia has not yet been resolved despite United Nations resolutions and international pressure. The meetings, held recently in Vienna and New York on this serious problem nevertheless clearly indicate our firm resolve to put an end to the illegal occupation of that Territory, a Territory occupied by a regime which, relying on its strength and on support from outside, defies the international community. We must therefore state, loud and clear, that for us the only sound basis for a final settlement of this problem is Security Council resolution 435 (1978), and that there can be no room for any sort of diversionary tactics.
The problem is essentially one of decolonization and nothing else. The linkage which has been artificially established with the domestic situation in Angola cannot alter this truth.
The tense situation that prevails today in South Africa itself is due to the arrogance of the apartheid regime, which continues to defy the international community by maintaining an odious and anachronistic system with complete impunity. It is up to the General Assembly, which has declared the system of apartheid to be a crime against humanity, to shoulder its responsibilities in full.
We must act in accordance with our conscience and with the measures we adopt here. I do not believe that in this Hall there are any representatives of any States who support racism. That being the case, if we are all fundamentally anti-racist, what are we waiting for, both individually and collectively, before we
abolish this system which is rejected by each and every one of our societies?
Those who maintain that the use of force should be prohibited even in the case of those struggling against apartheid are people to whom we would say that there is one minimum requirement: the application, under Chapter VII of the Charter, of global and mandatory sanctions, which would help at least to eradicate apartheid
peacefully if the entire international community were to abide by them. The oppressed people of South Africa and the front-line countries have themselves agreed to suffer the effects of such sanctions if this is the price to be paid for their dignity. Furthermore, have they not said that there is no suffering worse than that which is inflicted upon them by their masters and oppressors in Pretoria?
That is why it is urgent for the international community to find definitive solutions to the questions of Namibia and South Africa, while at the same time giving more resolute support to the heroic struggle of these peoples, under the leadership of the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), the African National Congress (ANC) and the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), by contributing substantially to the funds set up for southern Africa, particularly that recently created in the context of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, by effectively implementing the resolution adopted by the General Assembly at its recent special session on the question of Namibia, and the special declaration on southern Africa adopted at the eighth summit conference of the non-aligned countries.
Africa is also deeply disquieted by the problem of Western Sahara. Here, we should express our gratification at the close co-operation that exists between the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Organization of African unity on this matter. I would like to tell Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar that we are quite ready to seek, with him, ways of bringing the two parties to the conflict to a settlement that will safeguard the rights of the Sahraoui people and bring peace and co-operation in the subregion.
As regards Chad, there is an urgent need for a sincere and definitive reconciliation among all the inhabitants of Chad so that, without any foreign interference whatsoever, this country may be able to regain its peace, national unity and territorial integrity.
I could not conclude my remarks without referring to the on-going tensions in other parts of the world. On the basis of the attachment of African peoples themselves to peace and understanding, may I voice the hope that reason and wisdom will prevail over any other considerations. My country, the People's Republic of the Congo, has made good-neighborliness one of the corner-stones of its foreign policy. It was probably this fact that won for it the votes of all of Africa at the most recent summit meeting of the Organization of African Unity. That is the reason why, wherever conflicts arise, whether they be absurd or justified, we say that there is nothing like negotiation and consultation, for military victories are the most perilous inasmuch as they sometimes incur rancor and are therefore ephemeral.
That is why, in the Middle East, we advocate a just and lasting peace, together with mutual respect for the sovereignty of all States in the region, the restoration of those territories that have been taken by force, and the recognition of the right of the Palestinian people to a homeland.
On this burning issue of the present day, I would like to expatiate a little and to recall that it was in December 1972 that the People's Republic of the Congo, learning a lesson from the persistent tension in that region, decided to break off its diplomatic relations with Israel. A year later, following the October war in 1973, the Organization of African Unity decided to break off relations with the Jewish State out of solidarity with the Arab peoples and the struggle of the Palestinian people, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).
Since that date, the situation has hardly changed; hence the Organization of African Unity has not changed its position. Our support for that just cause is therefore still fully in force. The People's Republic of the Congo, in keeping with its foreign policy and pursuant to the decisions of the OAD, through we reiterates that it will maintain that correct attitude until such time as Israel changes its policies. There can be no possible ambiguity in regard to this matter.
In regard to the Gulf conflict, we should like to make an urgent appeal to our Iraqi and Iranian brothers to put an end to an endless war, damaging to their own interests.
The same concern leads us to hope that the peace-lowing Afghan and Khmer peoples will very soon recover peace and unity.
Nor can we forget that the Korean peninsula is also aspiring to peace, which necessarily involves an open and frank dialog between the two fraternal divided States. The peaceful reunification of Korea remains an essential objective to be achieved.
In Central America, we support the initiatives of the countries in the region to bring about an atmosphere of peace and mutual trust guaranteeing peaceful coexistence.
Here I should like to reiterate the right of every State freely to choose the regime it prefers without any foreign interference.
We have just seen that the world is faced with significant challenges which, in the case of Africa, have become real tragedies. Africa remains convinced that those challenges cannot be met in a world in upheaval, a world which is divided and beset by fear and where inequity prevails.
That is why the Organization of African Unity is working for peace, harmony and the establishment of a new international economic order that is more just and more equitable.
Africa expects the international community not to remain silent and powerless in the face of such basic and legitimate concerns. It reiterates its solidarity with the rest of the world in the task of restoring to the United Nations the dynamism it requires to carry out and to preserve its noble objectives.
Hence our message is one of peace, solidarity and hope.


Mr. President, this is a most gratifying moment for my delegation and personally for me to see you preside over this Assembly. May I express in this connection our profound satisfaction and pride. I have not the slightest doubt that your wisdom and skill and your long and varied experience in diplomacy would enable you to guide our deliberations to a successful conclusion. I offer my sincere thanks to all our friends who have reposed their confidence in you by unanimously electing you to this high office.
It is an honor and privilege for me and my delegation to participate in the forty-first regular session of the United Nations General Assembly. I bring you the warm greetings of the people and the Government of Bangladesh. I join my other colleagues, in conveying our gratitude to your illustrious predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Jaime de Pinies for his skillful and efficient conduct of our work during the last Assembly. We were impressed by his vast knowledge, prudent counsel, and informed guidance.We commend the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for his untiring efforts in upholding the principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter. His report, which we have studied with great interest, will make an important contribution to our work.
The United Nations, as a unique edifice of peace and justice, symbolizes our collective wisdom. Born out of the ashes and ruins of the Second World War, its Charter impels us to speak against hunger, malnutrition and disease, to speak for human rights and freedom, and, above all, to speak of peace and security. It seeks to order international relations based on a set of principles and to establish a new concept of international morality which prevents force from dictating the issues in a conflict between nations. Most of all, it makes for a single global village composed of a multitude of nations, enclosed in blissful interdependence, which is shared both by the powerful and the weak, the rich and the poor. It has stood the test of time, as we recall our celebration last year of the fortieth anniversary, in recognition, perhaps, of our 40 years of freedom from a cataclysmic global conflict. It has also stood the test of acceptance with its membership being virtually universal. Whatever doubt that one may have about the efficacy of the United Nations it has far less to do with its role per se in international relations, than to do with the attitude of those in doubt. It is not so much a crisis of confidence in the United Nations; rather it is a crisis of political will
To us, the United Nations remains the conscience-keeper of humanity. We have a constitutional commitment to the principles and purposes of the Charter. Our record so far in the United Nations bears witness to this commitment. Our policy speaks for balance, moderation and strict adherence to this principle. It is self-evident that conflict is dysfunctional, while co-operation among nations leads to mutual enrichment. Our interaction on the international plane is reflective of this perception of ours.
In a regional context, we have been making relentless efforts to promote peace and stability in South Asia through the creation of a climate of goodwill, trust and understanding. We had initiated in 1980 a proposal to create a framework for co-operation in our region. Sincerity and earnestness of approach of the countries of the region have led to a fruition of this initiative. The first ever summit-level meeting of the seven South Asian countries, namely, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, was held in our capital, Dhaka, last December. The Summit formally launched the South Asian Association of Regional Cooperation (SAARC), which is an institution geared to the promotion of functional co-operation in a number of specific areas identified for the purpose. SAARC represents the region's testimony to the principle of good-neighborliness. It is our earnest hope that the present level of co-operation will continue to be strengthened and diversified for our common benefit.
A paramount purpose of the United Nations is the maintenance of peace and security. Continued accumulation of sophisticated weaponry threatens to render this goal unattainable. We are convinced that disarmament is a moral imperative in the nuclear age. We have consistently advocated meaningful negotiations between those States that have acquired the capability to procure weapons of mass destruction. It is our hope that such negotiations would continue so as to advance the cause of disarmament in an effective manner in the greater interest of global peace.
We have consistently advocated that the financial and other resources of extraordinary magnitude that are being devoted to the acquisition of armaments should be redirected towards the elimination of global poverty. It is with deep regret that we note that the international conference on disarmament and development, which could have made advances possible in this direction, will not be held this year.
The oldest and perhaps one of the most important questions before the United Nations has been the crisis in the Middle East. As of today, there has hardly been any breakthrough in the form of an initiation of a genuine peace process, despite there being a number of significant endeavors to this end. It is self-evident that the Palestinian question is at the core of the problem. The land which has always been the homeland of the Palestinians is now occupied by a people alien to them. Israel was implanted in the heart of the Arab world, uprooting the Palestinians from their native land. Therefore, so long as the inalienable rights of this people are not restored, no lasting peace can possibly be achieved in the region. Acceptance of this simple truth is a sine qua non for any peace that is meant to endure.
It is our firm conviction that the problem in the Middle East can only be solved on the basis of a comprehensive plan which must be contingent upon total and unconditional withdrawal of all Israeli forces from all Palestinian and Arab territories, including the holy city of Al-Quds Al-Sharif, and the Palestinian people exercising their right to national self-determination.
Such a peace plan was embodied in the set of principles agreed to by Arab leaders at the twelfth Arab summit held at Fez in 1982. These principles complement the resolutions of the United Nations concerning the question of Palestine. The Palestine Liberation Organization being the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, initiation of any peace process has to take place with their full participation on an equal footing with all other parties. Our support for the Palestinian cause has always been unswerving and unequivocal. We have always condemned the continued Israeli occupation of Palestinian and Arab territories. We shall always stand by our Palestinian brethren in their just struggle.
South Africa is up in flames and we continue to witness the most flagrant disregard of civilized human norms and values. This reprehensible policy of apartheid pursued by the racist Pretoria regime must totally be eliminated. At a time when heroic protest of the South African people is being met with an unprecedented degree of harassment, intimidation and persecution, the world cannot afford to sin by inaction. The plaintive cry for freedom that emanates from that unfortunate land can no longer go unheeded. The evil that is apartheid must be dismantled, and now.
I reiterate the firm commitment of my country to the cause of the oppressed people of South Africa. We strongly endorse that comprehensive mandatory sanctions, as provided in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, must be applied to South Africa without any further delay.
It is over 20 years since the Mandate of South Africa over Namibia was terminated by the United Nations. Yet the Pretoria regime continues to maintain its stranglehold over the Territory and its people in blatant defiance of numerous resolutions and decisions of the United Nations. It is for us to consider how this barbarous regimes could spurn the international opinion and pursue unchallenged its evil policies. It is essentially a moral issue, that is, whether to resist such an evil force or to sustain or even tolerate it, directly or by proxy.
We pay tribute to the heroic people of Namibia for their courage and determination. Theirs is a struggle which remains and will remain, ever forceful, undaunted, and relentless. We also salute the leadership of the South West Africa People's organization (SHAPO), the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people, for providing unwavering leadership to the people of Namibia. Let me record once more our unswerving solidarity with the struggling people of Namibia in their just struggle for freedom, liberty and human dignity. Bangladesh, through its membership of the Council for Namibia, will continue, as always, to play an active role in the promotion of Namibian independence.
We firmly believe that the only acceptable basis of a lasting settlement of the question is the United Nations plan, as contained in Security Council resolutions 385 (1976) and 435 (1978). The International Conference for the Immediate Independence of Namibia, held in Vienna last July, had also expressed, in the most categorical terms possible, the conviction that the United Nations plan constitutes the only internationally accepted basis for the settlement of the question. The fourteenth special session of the United Nations General Assembly on the question of Namibia has endorsed the Program of Action on Namibia formulated by the Conference. It is, therefore, imperative that efforts should be redoubled to implement the Program of Action so that the independence of Namibia could be ushered in within a definite time-frame.
We are concerned over the continuation of a fratricidal war between Iraq and Iran causing death, destruction and untold sufferings. It has threatened the univ.y of the Islamic world which Muslims everywhere hold dear to their hearts. We take this opportunity, as a member of the Islamic Peace Committee, the issue yet another appeal to these two brotherly Islamic countries to respond positively to the various peace initiatives. For our part, we shall continue our endeavors to put an end to this tragic conflict. The ongoing efforts, both within the framework of the United Nations and without, need to be intensified and a co-ordinated action be undertaken. The efforts of the Secretary-General in this respect are laudable. We would like to assure him of our continued co-operation.
Our principled position on the Afghanistan and Kampuchean issues are based on our unfailing commitment to the principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and those of the Non-Aligned Movement. These principles categorically reject use of force, or the threat of its use, and armed intervention or interference by one State in the internal affairs of another. Peace and confidence in these regions can only be restored if all parties to the conflict adhere to the International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States, particularly the principle of the right of peoples to freely choose their own form of political, social and economic systems. It is in this context that we have consistently urged the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Afghanistan and Kampuchea so that the peoples of those countries are free to determine their own destinies.
We are dismayed and concerned at the lack of progress in the inter-communal talks between the Turkish and the Greek-Cypriot communities in Cyprus. Bangladesh supports the independence, territorial integrity, sovereignty and the non-aligned status of Cyprus. Any lasting solution to the problem must take into account the legitimate aspirations of both the communities. We have called upon them, therefore, to engage in meaningful discussions in order to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution that would enable them to live in honor and dignity within the framework of a federated Cyprus. In this connection, ray delegation will continue to extend its fullest support and co-operation to the Secretary-General in his mission of good offices in reaching a negotiated solution to the problem.
The situation in Central America continues to be tense and volatile. ' We are concerned over the apparent lack of progress in diffusing tension in the region. A process of constructive dialog amongst the parties had indeed been set in motion about four years ago by the Contadora Group of countries with a view to creating an atmosphere of trust, reconciliation and peaceful coexistence. The Contadora process provides the much-needed framework for peace and co-operation among the countries of the region so as to avert further deepening of tension and recourse to military solution to problems. It laid emphasis on the spirit of negotiation in a regional context in a bid to isolate the issues from extraneous political influence. The draft Contadora Act on Peace and Co-operation in Central America, being based on shared perception and mutual accommodation in a regional context, has been the fruit of a series of intensive negotiations among all the parties concerned. It has been acclaimed as the single most important initiative aimed at bringing in peace in the region. It should, therefore, be allowed to take a decisive course with the full support of this Assembly.
Bangladesh is of the view that the creation of zones of peace and nuclear-weapon-free zones in various parts of the world will contribute to global and regional security and stability. As a littoral State, therefore, we attach great importance to the creation of a zone of peace in the Indian Ocean region. We support the early convening of the United Nations Conference on the Indian Ocean in Colombo and, to this end, we participate actively in the deliberations of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Indian Ocean.
On the economic front, global developments over the past year have been serious enough to give rise to widespread concern, both with regard to its management and future. The growth in world output fell by one third last year as
compared to the previous year and the growth of world trade was a meager one third of 1984. The sharp rebound in 1983-84 of the largest economy entered a critical phase by last year. Its performance slowed down significantly and its record budget deficit continued to grow. So did the performance of a number of other important economies. By the middle of 1985, sustainability of the growth process its if became a matter of deep concern. While the largest economy lagged in performance, no new growth poles emerged. Rather, the opposite happened. Deflationary policies pursued by a number of important developed countries constrained the overall development climate.
The slow-down in the growth has been costly and came at a particularly difficult time for the developing countries, most of which never really recovered from the recession of the early 1980s. The 1986 trade and development report of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) observed:
"Large parts of the developing countries are still registering regression rather than advance, with falling levels of per capita output and consumption as well as depressed levels of investment. In many of these countries unemployment is high, living standards are declining and social services are being cut, often at the expense of health and education."
The combined per capita income of the developing countries, excluding two major countries among them, declined for the fifth consecutive year in 1985 and fewer than 49 countries, with a population of 700 million, most of which are among the least developed, experienced zero or negative growth rate of their real gross national product (G'jP) per capita in 1985. If the present trend continues the per capita GDP of the developing countries in 1990 will be barely above the 1980 level.
A critical concern in this situation faced by the developing countries has been the ever-weakening price for their primary commodities, on which the vast majority of them, particularly in the least developed ones, are overwhelmingly dependent. The low commodity prices have been extremely damaging to their export earnings and to their growth. At the same time, the deflationary environment has brought about a resurgence of protectionism, on the one hand, and progressive erosion of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) principles and of the arrangements preferential to the developing countries, on the other. The impulses of growth in 1984 had encouraged many of us last year to hope that this would develop into a momentum. Unfortunately, such expectations were nullified by the negative features as manifested in persistently depressed commodity prices, historically high real rates of interest, and crippling debt service payments. To compound it all, there has been reverse transfer of resources, from the developing to the developed countries, since 1983. At the same time, private foreign direct investment in developing countries fell significantly. This reverse flow of resources threaten to cripple not only the development, but the future prospect of the developing countries as well, unfortunately, there has not been any significant attempt to relieve the decline in private flows by official flows of resources. The International Development Association (IDA), on which the low-income and the least developed countries depend heavily, saw a sharp reduction in its seventh replenishment, even in nominal terms. The level of the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) replenishment also offered no consolation.
Have we ever considered the magnitude and the depth of human sufferings, or of the lost potentials, as a result of these unwelcome developments? Have we ever given a thought to the fact that the adjustment measures which more and more developing countries are being forced to undertake are also undermining their growth and development? The situation in the least developed countries, two thirds of which are in Africa, remains particularly desperate as they continue to be afflicted by stagnation or decline in income ana growth. They are the hardest hit by weak commodity prices, and their vulnerability to external factors remains overwhelming. Their socio-economic and basic infrastructure remain virtually rudimentary or non-existent, under severe difficulties, they had to incur more debts. The total outstanding external debt of all the least developed countries increased from $3.3 billion in 1974 to some $30 billion a decade later. The impact of this debt is far more severe than its absolute size indicates. Their difficulties are further compounded by their inability to attract investment from private sources. The serious inadequacy of resource flows to those countries is illustrated from the fact that their average per capita resource inflow was only $26.3 as compared to $30.2 for all developing countries. Given the vulnerability of these countries, concessional and grant elements in resource flows to these countries remain highly important. I regret to observe in this context that in some cases, for instance in my country, Bangladesh, concessional and grant elements of external assistance have recently shown a decreasing trend.
This is an untenable situation. For the sake of global peace and progress, concerted efforts must be undertaken to redress the difficulties and to promote development. It is in this context that my delegation fully supports the Committee for Development Planning recommendations for doubling the flow of development finance to the developing countries. We believe that it is an imperative precondition for reactivating those countries. It is also vital to secure the eighth replenishment of IDA at a significantly higher level - The donor commitments made in the context of both the mid-term global review of the Substantial New Program of Action and the recently concluded united Nations special session on the critical economic situation in Africa must be fully implemented within agreed time-frame. The World Bank lending should be increased to the range of $45 billion to $50 billion in 1986-1988 and the negotiations for a general capital increase the World Bank should be effectively pursued without delay. At the same time, the lending capacity of the regional development banks should be enhanced.
It is no less important that a favorable situation must be created for increased trade from the developing to the developed countries. In this regard, immediate action should be taken for stand-still and roll-back of protectionist barriers to trade. My delegation welcomes the agreement reached in Punta del Este and hopes that further liberalization and gradual elimination of all trade barriers by developed countries will be the over-riding objective of the new round of multilateral trade negotiations. The Seventh United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD VII) should be approached constructively, particularly for finding effective and fair solutions to the commodity problems.
My delegation believes that in the complex and difficult economic situation that confronts our global community today, nothing is more important than to establish an international consensus for global development. This calls for seriousness of intent to pursue consensus agreements established by this body and in other multilateral forums. My delegation recalls with regret that the consensus
resolution 34/138 on the launching of the global negotiations still awaits an effective follow-up. We must also be able to discuss seriously substantive proposals from all sides. My delegation continues to hope that the proposal of the developing countries for an international conference on money and finance for development will elicit a serious response from our partners in the developed world. We are encouraged by the greater awareness now that without the necessary reforms and readjustments in the international monetary, financial and trade fields, the foundations for global development during the remaining years of this decade and in the next decade will not be laid. Above all, multilateralism must be strengthened. For only in multilateral forums, through constructive and meaningful dialog, can we establish a global consensus for peace, prosperity and development.
All of us gathered here are aware that the United Nations is confronted today with a financial crisis of a proportion hitherto unseen. To my mind, the crisis that the United Nations faces today is symptomatic of a deeper malaise emanating from an erosion of faith in the concept of multilaterism. As regards the disagreement among some Member States with regard to the budgetary.process, I believe this can be resolved with a modicum of political will and commitment. The Secretary-General has already taken some helpful initiatives to meet the immediate liquidity problem. As to the medium and long-term aspects of the problem, the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts have made a number of substantive proposals. These proposals deserve our serious consideration, in the light of the principles and objectives of the Charter. We all look upon you, Mr. President, to guide us in resolving this crisis.
The concept of the global village is no more a cliche. Rather it is a reality
in this increasingly interdependent world. Peace and co-operation among nations are no longer mere aspirations; these are dire necessities fundamental to our future. What we seek is an atmosphere of global amity and understanding which can ensure equality and freedom, peace and prosperity for us all. It is, therefore, imperative that the spirit of multilateral co-operation be regenerated. The united Nations provides us with a forum and framework to do so. Let us now display our capacity to work together without subordinating ourselves to the dictates of our national interests and compulsions. Long live the United Nations!


 It was the unanimous decision of the States Members of the United Nations to proclaim 1986 the International Year of Peace. That decision has inspired millions of people. Witness to this is borne by the Soviet plan to free the world from nuclear and other means of mass destruction by the year 2000, the Soviet Union's unilateral - and several times extended -renunciation of nuclear tests, the proposals of the Warsaw Treaty States for atomic and conventional disarmament, with adequate verification, the proposals put forward
in Mexico by six Heads of State or Government and the latest initiatives taken by the non-aligned countries, at Harare. All meet with the full approval and support of the Government and people of the German Democratic Republic. The socialist German State joins hands with all for the sake of peace.
Living up to its historic responsibility and aware of the dangers to which mankind is presently exposed, the German Democratic Republic is consistently engaged in the world-wide peace movement. As the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany and Chairman of the Council of State of the German Democratic Republic, Erich Honecker, declared last spring at the Eleventh Congress of the Socialist Unity Party of Germany, the socialist order in the German Democratic Republic is a guarantee that
"through its policy of co-operation and businesslike dialog aimed at tangible results, the German Democratic Republic will continue to work for the normalization of the international situation and a return to detente". Today's world is far from being a world of peace; a turn-about to greater security has not yet occurred. On the contrary, the arms race has reached a point where it threatens to get out of control. The hopes which the peoples placed on the results of the Geneva summit between the Soviet Union and the United States of America have not yet been realized.
The atom has changed the world; as Albert Einstein once demanded, it must ultimately change the human mind. Wars, earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, epidemics and other disasters still take their toll. But only nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction have brought mankind to the brink of self-annihilation.
Nuclear weapons rule out thinking or acting art out-dated patterns, with old concepts of war, military superiority and deterrence, today's world has become too fragile to sustain a policy of strength. Security can no longer be achieved in confrontation, it can be achieved only through co-operation. Jointly with the
other States of the Warsaw Treaty, the German Democratic Republic holds the view
that only an all-embracing system of international security can provide for a
durable and stable peace. These who would not agree that peoples would have been
spared untold suffering if in the 1930s proposals had been implemented to prevent
war and establish a system of collective security?
The proposal submitted by the socialist States to put just those issues on the
agenda of the General Assembly at its forty-first session, is therefore fully in
line with the goal set forth in the Charter:
"To maintain international peace and security, and to that end to take
effective collective measures ...".
An all-embracing system of international security would mean the following: all regions of the earth should be included, since a nuclear conflict would spare none of them? all spheres of State-to-State relations should be covered, since security today is far from being limited to things purely military, good political, economic, scientific and cultural relations based on sovereign equality are apt to encourage confidence and invigorate peace, and vice versa; all States, irrespective of their social order, size, alignment or non-alignment, should participate. This is the aim of the United Nations Charter which, born from historical experience, and for the very reason of preserving peace, has placed the legal equality of States above their factual inequality.
The United Nations should, as stated in the letter from the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of socialist States addressed to the United Nations Secretary-General, take up the challenge of our times and adopt a fundamental document that would spell out the basic principles of the establishment of a comprehensive system of international security and provide guidance for the practical work of endowing that system with material, political, legal, moral and psychological guarantees.
Not least, the German Democratic Republic would like to point to the experience gained in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe process. The Helsinki Final Act, that code of peaceful co-operation, now as before provides a stimulus to relations of peaceful coexistence beyond the region. At the Stockholm Conference it was possible to stipulate in concrete terms military confidence-building as an essential new step towards the required comprehensive renunciation of force. This is a triumph of common sense and realism as well as an expression of the mighty quest of people for making peace more secure. For the German Democratic Republic the Stockholm accord is an encouragement to continue and multiply its efforts for the cause of peace, security and detente in Europe and the world at large.
The German Democratic Republic supports all efforts aimed at a relaxation of the strained international situation. Through its resolution entitled "Need for result-oriented political dialog to improve the international situation", which the German Democratic Republic will submit to the forty-first session of the United Nations General Assembly, it intends to contribute to: the political dialog and negotiations being conducted with a sense of responsibility and a desire for results that promote peace, international co-operation and accommodation of interests, and to the strengthening of the United Nations as a forum of collective efforts designed to promote arms limitation and disarmament, to develop equal international economic relations, to eliminate all forms of racism, apartheid and terrorism, and to settle other urgent world problems.
The German Democratic Republic appeals to the United Nations Security Council to meet as soon as possible on a high, or preferably the highest, level to decide on measures to deal with the basic problems of safeguarding peace. Such a move would promote security and confidence, and quite certainly would help to restore predictability to international relations.
For the German Democratic Republic, situated in the heart of Europe on the dividing line between the two most powerful military coalitions, it is particularly vital that all States act on their responsibility arising from their obligation to ma in ta in peace and that they assist in diminishing and finally removing the material means of war. And this is the ultimate key to the resolution of other global and regional problems - economic, social and humanitarian.
In the International Year of Peace the allied socialist States have submitted an integrated Program for gradual disarmament in both the nuclear and conventional fields, including effective verification. The Program covers all types of armaments and envisages global and regional solutions, including partial
ones, so that faster or better progress could be made. Respect for the equality and equal security of all would continue to be the basic principle.
Relations between the Soviet Onion and the United States are and remain crucial for world affairs. The German Democratic Republic would welcome the further pursuit of the political dialog begun in Geneva.
A summit meeting with results - that is what States and peoples desire and need. The pr in ci pies agreed between the Soviet Oh ion and the United States in Geneva on 21 November 1985, mainly, to prevent any war between them, not to seek to achieve military superiority, that a nuclear war must never be fought because it can never be won, and to continue their political dialog - provide sound bases for the improvement of Soviet-American relations and, consequently, the international situation.
The Soviet Union is offering a specific, verifiable program of disarmament. It has unilaterally forgone nuclear testing for more than a year now. By contrast, the other great nuclear Power conducts nuclear tests time and again. The German Democratic Republic associates itself with the view of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, whom I should like to wish the best of success in his endeavor, namely, that an agreement on the conclusion of a treaty on the complete and general prohibition of nuclear tests would be a clear signal of a willingness to confront the nuclear challenge. The General Assembly should demand with all due emphasis that the unilateral moratorium be turned into action by all nuclear-weapon States in order speedily to achieve a treaty on the complete prohibition of nuclear testing.
The offer made by the six statesmen in the recent Declaration from their summit in Mexico to help ensure adequate verification deserves high appreciation.
Plans to carry the arras race into outer space run counter to all this. The
history of mankind, notably that of the two world wars, disproves the assertion that new weapon systems, whatever their form, could serve to avert wars. The credo of "peace through strength" has always stood for the attempt of a few profiteers to manipulate nations for war. Today, in view of the existence of nuclear weapons that threaten all life, acting according to that credo means death to all. Since no side will allow the other to gain military superiority, common sense and realism call for disarmament and nothing but disarmament.
In that regard, deployment of weapons in outer space is the obstacle to the cessation of the arms race on earth. Even eloquent advocates of arms in space cannot demonstrate convincingly how the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) objective of making nuclear weapons superfluous in the first place can be attained if they have to admit, at the same time, that nuclear weapons and further nuclear tests are prerequisites for SDI. would it not be simpler, safer and more logical to renounce "Star Wars" and any type of nuclear weapons from the outset?
We in the German Democratic Republic expect the Soviet-American negotiations to lead to accords on ways of preventing an arms race in outer space. The German Democratic Republic supports relevant multilateral negotiations at the Geneva Conference on Disarmament. Peace cm earth and in space is the goal.
It has been made painfully clear by accidents or human errors - such as, in connection with space travel, the Challenger disaster, with regard to nuclear power production, the Chernobyl accident and the Harrisburg accident in 1979, and, in the chemical industry, the accidents in Bophal and Seveso - that man must never lose control of what he has created. The secure future of our planet and the advances in science and technology make it essential to ensure that the weapons devised by man must never be used.
General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev warned that the detonation of even the smallest nuclear warhead would release radiation of an intensity three times greater than did the Chernobyl accident. One need not be an expert to realize that the explosion of a fragment of the nuclear-weapon stockpiles would spell certain self-destruction for mankind. Even at the present level of weaponry, it will take the highest-level scientific achievements - indeed, all of human genius - to devise ways and means of liquidating the existing weapons of mass destruction without risk to mankind. Every new weapon makes that challenge even more difficult.
The German Democratic Republic fully supports the proposals of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for the establishment of a world space organization and an international.regime for the safe use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes and the control of that energy.
Like the great majority of States, the German Democratic Republic is of the view that verification must not serve as a pretext for blocking concrete disarmament steps. It is not verification of the arms build-up that is needed, however; verification must be a constituent part of all arms limitation and disarmament.
With each passing day, the peoples are realizing more clearly from experience direct link between super-armament and underdevelopment and, consequently, between
disarmament and social progress. The magnitude of the material and intellectual resources squandered for armament purposes is indeed unparalleled. If that trend were to be checked, immense sums would become available for combating underdevelopment, hunger and poverty. The German Democratic Republic deplores the fact that the International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, which was to have addressed those vital issues, was not convened as planned.
Where debt is concerned, the developing countries have a heavy burden to carry, brought about by an accumulation of political, economic and social problems. The German Democratic Republic supports and will continue to support an early and equitable settlement of that problem, as well as the practical proposals submitted by the Group of 77 at the fortieth session of the General Assembly.
As a European State, the German Democratic Republic has an overriding interest in cutting down the weapons stockpiles heaped up on the continent and in preventing the creation of new ones. No European can feel safer with the missiles deployed. Even before the deployment of those weapons, Erich Honecker, Head of State of the German Democratic Republic, urged: "Stop that devilish stuff." Further, the German Democratic Republic regards as most timely the creation of a corridor free of battlefield nuclear weapons along the border between the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries and the Warsaw Treaty countries - a task to which the Swedish statesman the late Olof Palme devoted his life.
Europe is the continent with the highest concentration of warfare capabilities. It is the region where the two major alliances and social systems are confronting each other, and it is particularly vulnerable. There, not even the smallest flare-up must be allowed, for that would be the beginning of mankind's end. The establishment in Europe of a zone free of chemical weapons would be
conducive to regional security and to the early conclusion of a world-wide ban on chemical weapons. For that purpose, the Governments of the German Democratic Republic and the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic have proposed to the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany the principles and main guidelines for negotiations between those three States on the establishment of a such a zone. Other states have also indicated their interest. Regional and global solutions are certainly not mutually exclusive. There is no reason why we should not seek the one while not abandoning the other.
The German Democratic Republic attaches immense importance to the Vienna follow-up meeting to the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe in promoting propitious State-to-State co-operation. What the world needs is an environment in which peaceful work can succeed. As was underlined in the joint statement issued by the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Socialist Unity Party and Chairman of the Council of State of the German Democratic Republic, Erich Honecker, and the Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, Helmut Kohl, on 12 March 1985, the inviolability of frontiers and respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all States in Europe within their present borders is a fundamental pre-condition of peace. Those principles must not be shaken.
This also implies desisting from taking part in new arms build-ups. To do otherwise would be in no way consistent with the general obligation to promote peace. That obligation includes for the two German States a duty to develop their mutual relations in such way as to serve detente and disarmament.
The German Democratic Republic acts in conformity with its highest policy precept, which is to do everything to ensure that no further war, but only peace, shall ever emanate from German soil.
European post-war developments have corroborated the fact that unqualified respect for the existence of two German States, sovereign and independent of one another, and normal relations between them on the basis of international law are crucial conditions of peace on the continent.
In a world in which the security and survival of mankind can only be ensured through co-operation, a just and lasting settlement of international conflicts cannot be postponed. The German Democratic Republic supports the convening of an international Middle East conference, with the participation of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), as well as the establishment of a preparatory committee composed of the five permanent members of the Security Council, as proposed by the Soviet Union.
Aggressive onslaughts in pursuit of State terrorism highlight the need to stabilize the situation in the Mediterranean and ensure respect for the right of all States and peoples to develop their society and way of life without any interference.
The German Democratic Republic invariably supports Cyprus in its just struggle for national independence and territorial integrity.
The inhuman regime of apartheid must be eliminated once and for all and Namibia must immediately be granted independence. South Africa's policy is no longer merely an obstacle to the development of the African peoples: it has become an acute danger to world peace.
The situation in Central America is alarming. Policies of terror, outside intervention, dollar injections for contras, all prevent the peoples of the region from exercising their right to self-determination. The German Democratic Republic demands an instant end to the undeclared war against Nicaragua and to support for the counter-revolutionary gangs. It pays a sincere tribute to Nicaragua's prudent
policy and welcomes the endeavors of the Contadora Group and its Support Group to bring about a peaceful settlement of the conflict.
The German Democratic Republic strongly endorses the efforts to bring about a political solution of the situation that has emerged around Afghanistan.
Our country is sympathetic towards the proposals of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea for an improvement of the situation on the Korean peninsula, including plans to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone there.
The proposals made by the States of Indochina in July of this year require a constructive response in the interest of peace in South-East Asia.
The German Democratic Republic favors economic relations that are based on equality and free of discrimination. It pleads for utilization of the possibilities of the world Organization as regards an international economic order that would guarantee all States equal economic security. It would be timely to prepare, within the framework of the United Nations, a global Program on international co-operation in the fields of science and technology.
During the International Year of Peace, the fact that the right to peace is the determinant human right deserves special mention.
The twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the two human rights Covenants should be an occasion to conduct human rights activities more extensively, in keeping with the United Nations Charter. Both past experience and current requirements indicate the need for intensified action against systematic mass violations of human rights and neo-fascist tendencies.
The year 1986 should witness a new departure in the coexistence of States and peoples. It should be a year of efforts to contain the arms race and gradually to settle international conflicts. Experience shows that the United Nations has been and can be successful only to the extent that its Member States are ready to act along those lines.
To banish the threat of a nuclear inferno once and for all, to replace the terrifying vision of Star Wars by a well-founded prospect of lasting peace on earth - these are challenges that still call for greater and, above all, common efforts.
From this rostrum the German Democratic Republic reaffirms its will to do everything, within the United Nations and in all its international activities, that will help preserve mankind's life in peace.