We are proud that Foreign Minister Dante Caputo of Argentina is presiding over the General Assembly- Argentina and Ecuador are States linked by brotherly ties in the past and by solidarity in the present. Apart from his great qualities as a statesman, he firmly believes in democracy and his presence here leading our debate is therefore a guarantee of success. .ł
Through the Secretary-General, we wish to reaffirm our adherence to and support for the world Organization. It seems that at long last the value and t usefulness of this visionary instrument of mankind are being understood.
A few weeks ago we Ecuadorians elected a new government. We see this election as an important step in our effort to consolidate democracy. The Government proclaims social justice with freedom, and on this its first attendance at the highest international gathering, it wishes to express its determined support for the principles and commitments of the international community. A legal order was established in San Francisco which is a guarantee for all nations, to the extent that all of us respect it and to the extent that all of us contribute to strengthening it. Our attitude and our foreign policy are consonant with that purpose. They were clearly defined by President Rodrigo Borja on his assumption of office. They are aimed at closer ties of friendship and co-operation with all the countries of the world. We shall seek peace, security and development in our foreign endeavours. Without peace there is no freedom nor can there be development. Without security and without development we cannot speak of co-operation or of international social justice.
We firmly believe, therefore, in the need to defend peace wherever it may be threatened. We have faith in the spirit of understanding and solidarity which is giving new hope to mankind.
We believe in the possibility of building a community of nations which in their domestic and international life will give practical and real effect to the vocation of free men·
We believe in the freedoms. We uphold them and advocate them as the framework and basis of all human rights. We link these rights to the possibilities and requirements of well-being and respect for man as an individual and for peoples as nations.
Our conviction leads us to seek fervently the development of our people: an integrated development which goes beyond mere growth and provides opportunities for all, justice with freedom and harmonious coexistence.
We feel confident that we can thus advance the national effort, appropriately uniting all interests. We are aware of the magnitude of our shortcomings and of the seriousness and urgency of the problems. We know that we must make a gigantic national effort. In order to do so we are counting on resolute action from all sectors of the country and we shall ensure respect and security for their legitimate activities. We are counting also on co-operation from international bodies and friendly countries which we invite to join in the crusade we are launching to create the well-being our people demand.
The world we all want, therefore, is a world of peace, solidarity, justice and freedom. In that spirit, we advocate a climate of harmony and of trust in our relations and in those of all countries, so that our borders and all borders will be places to meet in friendship and co-operation and not places of misunderstanding and incidents. That is why we firmly support processes to disarm morally, to reduce military spending and to end the nuclear race; that is why we strongly support the Latin American processes of integration; and that is why we advocate a peaceful solution to conflicts and disputes which poison relations among peoples, forcing them to divert resources to defence by reducing investment in urgently needed development projects.
The stockpiling of weapons does not lead to greater security. Armed peace is not safe peace. It never was, nor will it ever be. World peace is indissolubly linked to general and complete disarmament. We welcome the fact, therefore, that the United States and the Soviet Union have concluded a treaty on the elimination of short- and intermediate-range nuclear missiles, it is important that the first true disarmament measure has been adopted, but new commitments in the same direction must also be adopted and resources that today are devoted to the construction of means of mass destruction must be released in order to meet urgent social needs in the third world.
It has also become imperative to ban immediately chemical weapons, nuclear-weapon tests, the use of outer space for warlike purposes and the illegal and covert transfer of conventional weapons. The enormous sums spent on the arms race are ethically wrong and morally condemnable. The process of disarmament and arms limitation is closely linked with the duty of States to resolve their international disputes by peaceful means, in accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, with equity and with the norms and principles of international law. Ecuador has traditionally complied with these cardinal rules of international relations. That is why we welcome the fact that the negotiating process which led to the signing of the Geneva accords on Afghanistan has initiated what we hope will be a step towards a different world, in which war, solutions based on force, indirect confrontation and mutual mistrust will be eliminated. It would appear that, thanks to the efforts of the United Nations and of the Secretary-General, in the Persian Gulf, in southern Africa, in Kampuchea, in Western Sahara and Cyprus we are reaching the stage of the triumph of diplomacy over intolerance, the victory of reason over force, the supremacy of dialogue and ideas over the lethal confrontation of the cannons.
We hope that this halo of hope will also surround the Middle East and Central America. We are particularly concerned about the conflict in the Central American region. We call upon all the parties involved to show the political will needed to implement and set in motion the formulas for a settlement which were so painstakingly drawn up and which are rightly based on respect for the sovereignty of States on the right freely to elect a certain form of government without foreign interference; on the exercise of true expressions of democracy, pluralism, social justice, individual freedoms and human rights.
Ecuador supports the various initiatives and constructive proposals for a solution to the serious Central American crisis. In particular, we stress the need to preserve and carry forward the important negotiating process that has corns from the valuable initiatives of President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica and that is enshrined in the Esquipulas II agreement. He took great care to recognize the particular interests and situations of all the parties involved in the conflict. At this critical moment it has once again become urgent and necessary to remove immediately the obstacles which have arisen in the implementation of the Arias plan. Perhaps it can be reactivated by the holding of meetings between the parties in order to examine certain items or groups of items in a practical manner and with political foresight.
We most recall, furthermore, that the international community owes a debt to Central America. After the political settlement, an intensive development programme must be implemented with a high degree of international co-operation. Unfortunately, the positive aspects which can be discerned on the international political scene are not matched in economic, financial and monetary relations. We shall not have a harmonious and stable international order unless we devise an equitable international system which consolidates the best aspects of external trade, reverses the unfavourable terms of exchange, provides just and remunerative payment for the goods we export, facilitates the transfer of science and technology and contributes to a positive net flow of capital for development. The North-South dialogue is deadlocked. That is unacceptable, and the dialogue must therefore be resumed.
For Latin America the 1980s have been a period of economic stagnation and deterioration of the standard of living of its inhabitant. The consensus at present is that external debt and the manner in which it has been handled are perhaps the main element of the crisis afflicting the region today. However, the external debt of the countries is not an isolated event which arose spontaneously during the previous decade. To a great extent it is a result of the unjust international economic order, which is detrimental to the poorest countries and has limited the possibility of financing the growth of their economies.
Therefore, the overcoming of the crisis in Latin America, which has lasted for almost a decade, depends, on the one hand, on the establishment of more just international economic relations and, on the other, on an understanding between debtors and creditors. For many years now the developing countries have called for acceptance of the conditions needed to achieve stable development of international economic activity for the benefit of both industrialized countries and developing countries.
We wish to reaffirm here that Ecuador recognizes the legitimacy of the debt incurred and will see to it that its commitments are honoured, without requiring, to that end, greater sacrifices from a people that has already suffered for almost seven years. We advocate an attitude favouring dialogue and not confrontation. I reiterate that we cannot continue to lay the full costs upon the debtors alone, ignoring the responsibility incumbent upon those who at one time approached them and offered huge loans without stopping to assess the risks entailed in such operations.
In other words, it is essential and urgent to promote understanding between the parties on the basis of mutual respect, seeking equitable solutions on the basis of which costs are shared for the sake of the resumption of the growth of the economics of the debtor countries. This would of course enable these countries to discharge their obligations more completely.
In this task, it is up to the multilateral credit organizations to increase financial flows to the developing countries - favouring the objective of social well-being and reducing conditionality on the basis of strict economic and financial criteria. In order to achieve this objective, the industrialized countries must honour their commitments with regard to the capitalization of these credit institutions.
These thoughts lead us to a conclusion that should be stated in this pre-eminent political forum. It is time for us to understand fully the close link between improving the standard of living of peoples and consolidating democratic regimes based on principles of freedom and justice.
The Government of Ecuador has chosen a serious, responsible and democratic path in order to overcome the economic crisis and place the country within sight of development. We have drawn up plans to stimulate the activities of all Ecuadorians and ensure the success of their efforts. We want a society based on respect for the law and inspired by broad solidarity on the basis of justice and with a strong social imprint. In this effort, we welcome international contributions, within rules governed by equity, realism and due regard for national interests, made in such a way that they will serve our purpose of overcoming underdevelopment, creating sources of employment and ensuring the prosperity of our people.
The delegation of Ecuador will indicate the position of my Government on the various agenda items in greater detail at the working sessions of this Assembly. I have mentioned the Government of Ecuador's concern and support for items of great importance such as disarmament and external debt. There are several other items, such as drug trafficking, that hold the special attention of my Government which, along with other Governments of the Americas, has pledged its unshakeable support for the struggle to combat this scourge of mankind.
International co-operation and the political, economic, social and humanitarian work of this Organization are of prime importance to us. Our contribution will always be that of a country which looks with hope towards the changes taking place in the international community, which at the edge of the abyss and of a nuclear holocaust proved itself able to reflect and let the light of reason and common sense prevail. The new spirit that can be discerned in the super-Powers must open doors of understanding and comprehension, with vast possibilities for peace and friendship among peoples. It must also promote fulfilment of the just and heartfelt demands of the third world and those for the establishment of a true international legal order.
'The relaxation of tension has been and must continue to be of invaluable importance for harmonious international coexistence. It is, without doubt, an essential factor in liberating minds from the spirit of confrontation and promoting dialogue and co-operation. The present economic crisis, with its tremendous weight of frustration for poor countries, has begun to awaken the world's conscience and its repercussions are becoming apparent in all countries. The United Nations has already shown its ability to adapt to new circumstances; the winds of change must lead to more adjustments and new approaches which will enable us all to respond to the new requirements of the time and of the peoples.
In this spirit and with this conviction, Ecuador pledges its support for the efforts required of us all to make this the world we want to pass on to our children.


I should like to congratulate Ambassador Dante Caputo of Argentina on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly. I am convinced that under his guidance, the Assembly will achieve results that will further enhance the authority of the United Nations.
I wish also to acknowledge the outstanding presidency of his predecessor, Comrade Peter Florin. Each session of the General Assembly begins with a review of the international situation. At the forty-third session too we have heard every speaker pose the same questions in different ways, namely; what is happening in the world? Are we capable of staving off the nuclear threat and putting an end to conflict? Are we securely embarked on the course of strengthening peace and security?
Although it would be hard to provide a simple answer to those questions, the facts show that there has indeed been progress. The world is changing for the better. We can see the emergence of a qualitatively new situation that does not conform to the usual stereotypes of the balance of power, two camps, the class struggle or other concepts based on strength. What has changed? For the first time in history, we have begun to see that mankind is a single, hole united by its common efforts to survive and continue to develop towards progress and civilization.
Some examples of the changes taking place in the world are the move in Soviet-United States relations from confrontation to dialogue, the greater positive contribution made in world affairs by the Non-Aligned Movement, and the active impact of public opinion on international policy.
These trends are no mere accident. They result from the general course of world events. The deepening of mankind's self-awareness has coincided with the processes of restructuring and renewal taking place in socialist countries. The technological and scientific revolution, the increasing importance of moral and democratic factors in public life, and an overall improvement in the political education of peoples have helped bring about a reassessment of the problems of human coexistence.
The philosophy of a new political thinking has thus arisen. At its core lies the primacy of universal human values over bloc and ideological considerations. That philosophy has inspired a new diplomacy in search of sensible and mutually acceptable solutions to international problems. A broad consensus is developing on the need for a comprehensive approach to security issues, taking into account both the military-political and the economic, humanitarian, ecological and other factors.
In his address to the eightieth conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, which ended three weeks ago in Sofia, the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party and President of the State Council of the People's Republic of Bulgaria, Comrade Zhivkov, stated that
"The new realities require new political action on the part of the people. The threat of ecological catastrophe, economic underdevelopment, widespread disease, the terrible infant-mortality rate and growing illiteracy are global problems that can be resolved only through the common efforts of mankind, with a thorough restructuring of international relations on the basis of a balance of interests."
The international community's desire to break the vicious circle of military rivalry and confrontation and to guarantee security by political means through consolidating the primacy of international law is increasingly reflected in a new understanding of the international role of the United Nations.
Bulgaria has always attached great importance to strengthening the role and effectiveness of the United Nations. Along with other countries, Bulgaria believes the Organization should become a genuine, effective instrument for maintaining international peace and security, developing international co-operation and settling conflicts and crises. We support proposals made here that the working methods and approach of the General Assembly and the Security Council be updated to
make better use of the Organization's peace-keeping potential. Bulgaria will continue to contribute to the noble, all-embracing work of the United Nations.
I take particular note today of the Organization's contribution to the settlement of a number of international disputes, and in particular of the important role played by the esteemed Secretary-General, Mr, Javier Perez de Cuellar.
It is a fact that positive developments can be seen throughout the entire spectrum of world problems, regional disputes and sources of tension. Slowly and somewhat hesitantly foe the present, a situation is emerging which favours the collective search for solutions. It would be wrong to draw general conclusions for the entire world, but there appears to be a clear desire to find national and regional agreement with the assistance of the international community.
The Geneva Agreements en Afghanistan were a milestone in the struggle to improve the international climate. Unswerving compliance with them is the only guarantee of restoring peace in that country and the region. We support the efforts of the Government of the Republic of Afghanistan to overcome that crisis by democratic means.
We were very pleased to hear of the cessation of hostilities between Iran and Iraq. As a State that took part in the drafting and adoption of Security Council resolution 598 (1987), we support the peace process and the mediation work done by the United Nations.
In the Middle East, the essence of the problem there has not yet been resolved. The struggle of the Palestinian people for its freedom and self-determination continues. A positive factor is the almost complete agreement on the need to convene an international conference on the matter,. We believe that it should be held on the basis of existing United Nations resolutions with the participation of all interested parties, including the five permanent members of the Security Council and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole, authentic representative of the Palestine Arabs.
Multilateral dialogue is taking place on questions relating to southern Africa. We hope that the decisions of the Organisation will finally be implemented and that Angola and other States of the region will attain peace, so long awaited, that Namibia will attain its independence and that the apartheid system will be abolished.
Bulgaria sees great potential in the policy of national reconciliation proclaimed by Kampuchea. We are glad to see that prospects are being opened up through the efforts of Viet Nam and other peace-loving States. We welcome the policy of the People's Democratic Republic of Korea to bring about the peaceful democratic unification of the country, to demilitarize the peninsula and to turn it into a nuclear-free zone.
We support the consistent efforts of Nicaragua and other Latin American countries to provide a peaceful solution to the problems of the region through dialogue and strict compliance with the principles of the Charter. We have been following very closely the development of the Cyprus problem. Certain progress is evident in the island, and we hope that, through political means and with United Nations assistance, the source of tension will finally be defused.
Naturally it is impossible to achieve complete harmony between opposing forces and parties, but opponents must re-think contradictions from the standpoint of greater realism. They must agree to sensible compromises, from which all sides stand to gain. Accordingly, we believe that participants in conflicts should more carefully heed the collective wisdom of the world community. It alone has the moral right to judge the norms and rules of international coexistence. In all cases, an abiding condition of the peace process is recognition of every people's right to freedom of choice, without which it is impossible to resolve a conflict or achieve just and lasting peace.
Bulgaria is located in the Balkans, a region with a difficult and complex history. That is why we are sincerely delighted at the steps towards detente and co-operation taken by Balkan States. They are in keeping with the spirit of the time and the aspirations of the Balkan peoples.
The emergence of new thinking in the Balkans was expressed with increasing clarity at the Belgrade meeting of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the Balkan countries, which was held in a constructive and businesslike atmosphere. All of us who participated in that meeting sought to find a common language and stressed common interests, not confrontation or grievances. We commend the holding of that forum and the Balkan process it started.
The Balkans are a priority in Bulgaria's foreign policy. In 1981 we started working out and we are now implementing, a set of measures and initiatives to strengthen good-neighbourliness and improve the overall atmosphere in the region. Despite any vicissitudes of fate, the constant goal of our policy has always been, and will continue to co-operation, peace and security in the Balkans.
Basing ourselves on that goal, we will continue to work together with all Balkan States on a very broad, equitable footing. Our guiding light will be the legitimate interests of states, historical realities and the peace imperatives of our time. We believe that the key link in the joint efforts to promote peace could be to turn the peninsula into a zone free from weapons of mass destruction, which would certainly help to reduce confrontation, mistrust and hostility in the broader gees strategic context as well.
I note with satisfaction that our discussion of urgent issues relating to disarmament today is reflecting the impact of new political thinking. The image of "the enemy" preparing for a nuclear strike or an attack using conventional weapons is gradually being replaced by the image of a normal person sincerely concerned about his or her security. Increasingly, there is a desire to understand one's partner, his way of thinking, his concerns. Without a doubt, not all remnants of the past have been removed, and not all stereotypes have been overcome, but ridding dialogue of futile rhetoric and propagandistic clichés, which has started to happen, is a major prerequisite for the strengthening of mutual understanding. Today, the most important task is the conclusion of an agreement between the Soviet Union and the United States on the reduction by 50 per cent of strategic offensive weapons. This should become a milestone in the achieving of strategic stability as we move towards the twenty-first century, and towards the complete elimination of nuclear arsenals.
Progress is being made on the halting of nuclear tests. A complete ban on chemical weapons will become a reality in the near future. I should like to recall that although the Soviet-United States talks provide the main impetus in the disarmament process, the process, should become multilateral. No one can escape responsibility in this regard. We believe that lowering the level of military confrontation between the Warsaw Treaty and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) which started with the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles will be continued as a result of negotiations to reduce armed forces and conventional armaments in Europe. The July 1988 statement of the Political Consultative Committee of the Warsaw Treaty set the goal of these negotiations as effecting radical reductions in the military potential of the two alliances, achieving a situation on the continent whereby they would have at their disposal the forces and facilities adequate for their defence but insufficient to conduct surprise attacks or to carry out offensive operations. Such reductions should be accompanied by a corresponding reduction in military expenditures. The functions and tasks of these forces should be determined by non-aggressive, defensive military doctrines, the core of which is the principle of reasonable sufficiency.
At the same time, it is clear even to the uninitiated that progress in disarmament in certain areas has been accompanied by a specific shifting of resources to other areas. Naval armaments are still immune to disarmament efforts. The situation urgently requires the adoption of political decisions to reduce naval forces, bearing in mind mutual interests. For several years now, Bulgaria has been calling for the adoption of such a decision and working to that end. As a first step, we think it would be a good idea to discuss and adopt confidence-building measures on the seas and oceans and on maritime routes.
The problems of verification, openness and predictability in the military sphere are acquiring growing significance. A United Nations comprehensive machinery for verification - as suggested by a number of countries, including Bulgaria - would make it possible to exercise proper control not only over arms reductions but also over regional conflicts so that they could be prevented.
Outer space, like Earth, should be free of weapons. Broad international co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer space rather than space-based weapons would help us in building confidence and eliminating the threat of nuclear catastrophe.
A major aspect of the disarmament problem is that it is intrinsically linked with development issues. Reducing military potential would allow the mobilization of the necessary resources to overcome underdevelopment and promote social and economic progress.
The growing awareness of global Interdependence, positive trends in various parts of the world and the normalization of East-West relations have given us grounds to hope for positive changes in international economic relations. The time has come to restructure these relations on a just and democratic basis. The economic situation of the developing countries, and in particular their heavy foreign debt burden, is a serious problem for the entire International community. A just solution of that problem will require the concerted efforts of the world community, bearing in mind the interests of and prevailing conditions in the debtor countries and the basic goals of their socio-economic development. The United Nations can and should make a contribution to resolving this issue.
The establishment of official relations between the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance and the European Economic Community was a major positive event. The development of relations between these two organizations on a mutually advantageous basis will significantly promote peaceful coexistence in Europe and throughout the world. Bulgaria will make its contribution towards developing that co-operation for the security and prosperity of all peoples. The common interests of all States and peoples are clearly reflected in the problem of the protection of the environment. Economic activity carried out without due attention being paid to ecological factors is destroying nature, just as the arms race and military conflicts destroy nature. The world is being suffocated by chemicals, the soil is deteriorating, the climate is changing and the flora and fauna are disappearing. A collective effort by all countries and peoples is required. The effective guaranteeing of international ecological security should become a primary goal in the work of the United Nations, which has already done much to protect the environment. A concrete contribution in this respect has been made by the report of the Brundtland Commission. The ideas it contains are of fundamental Importance In protecting nature and man's environment.
In keeping with its position of principle, Bulgaria supports the working out of broad measures to conserve nature at both regional and subregional levels. We have proposed the conclusion of a treaty for the ecological protection of the Balkan peninsula. We have also suggested the holding in Sofia of an ecological forum within the framework of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe. Active work is going on in Bulgaria on a broad set of practical measures in this area.
The current Issues of peace, security and co-operation are characteristically intertwined in Europe. On the Old Continent, truly non-traditional and Innovative views are struggling against the canons of out-dated thinking. Those who favour the division of Europe into blocs are unrelenting. But at the same time the noble idea of a common European home is emerging, a concept reflecting the historic, cultural, political and economic community of the countries of Europe, the United States and Canada. The dogmas of the past are being slowly overcome. The Vienna meeting of the States of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe will soon be concluded. We hope that it will provide new dynamism to the process of equal and mutually advantageous dialogue in Europe.
The problems in international affairs and their interrelationship are being discussed at a number of international forums. This is a new and hitherto untried methodology, but it is in keeping with the spirit of our times. These discussions are focusing increasingly on social and humanitarian problems.
Forty years ago the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. That was the first step towards the establishment of today's solid legal basis for international co-operation on social and humanitarian problems. At present practically no State is outside the world consensus in this area. That is quite natural, since the human person is a universal value, the centre of evolution and the focal point of attention in domestic and foreign policies. The creation of favourable conditions for a free, dignified and creative life for the individual is not State charity but the State's main obligation, so as to ensure that society and civilization in general will flourish. Bulgaria welcomes the expanding role of the United Nations in the social and humanitarian spheres. We will work for the democratization of international relations and the establishment of moral guarantees of peace and security.
An eminent public figure and humanist, Aurelio Pecci, said that the current stage of evolution requires that people stop merely looking into the future and start building that future. For the sake of objectivity it must be noted that we are just at the beginning of this great demilitarisation and humanisation of international affairs. We realize that a lot remains to be changed in ourselves, too, in order to move towards an irreversibly non-violent world, to build a new global international order under which every country, every people and every person can feel confident about the future. There is no possible alternative.


On behalf of my Government I wish to express to you, Sir, our appreciation and satisfaction at your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-third session. We are sure that your talent and experience, as a politician and as a diplomat, will enable you to make a great contribution to the success of this session. Your election is a recognition of the importance of this factor and, at the same time, a well-deserved tribute to the country you represent. We therefore offer you our very best wishes for success in the difficult task entrusted to you.
We also wish to express our appreciation to your predecessor, Mr. Peter Florin of the German Democratic Republic, for the exemplary and brilliant manner in which he presided over the forty-second session, thus, making a contribution to the strengthening of the United Nations.
To the Secretary-General, Hr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, we pay sincere tribute for everything he has done in the cause of peace and prosperity for all mankind, in spite of the political and economic obstacles and other drawbacks faced by the Organisation today. We are sure that, with help from all of us and support for the diplomatic and political commitment he has always demonstrated, there will be hope for a lessening of tension throughout the world and for the achievement of the  peace that now begins to shimmer in the distance and will ultimately bring great joy to you all. In the international situation there are signs of hope for lessened tension and for the peace so anxiously awaited by all mankind.
The Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (INF Treaty), now ratified, the progress made in the field of disarmament, in the framework of the talks between the United States and the Soviet Union and the Geneva Conference on Disarmament, the search for a negotiated settlement of the different conflicts that have been proliferating around the world - all of these are important landmarks on the way to achieving the fundamental goal of the United Nations, which needs to be pursued both in qualitative and in quantitative terms. We believe that those achievements are part of the solution to the problems that all mankind is facing today.
The radical changes we are witnessing today in the political situation in southern Africa are a consequence of a change in the balance of power, which now favours the peoples of the region engaged in a struggle against the hideous racist regime of South Africa. That is reflected in successive South African military defeats at the hands of the Angolan army and in the intensification of the liberation struggles of the peoples of Namibia and South Africa.
Acknowledgement of those facts, plus the military defeat inflicted on the racist South African forces at Cuito Cuanavale, led the Pretoria Government to sit down at the negotiating table with the Governments of Angola and Cuba, with the mediation of the United States of America, to negotiate implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) and the establishment of peace and security in our country.
The Governments of Angola and Cuba, which have demonstrated a true spirit of integrity and flexibility throughout the talks, brought to the negotiating table a set of principles set out in a negotiating platform presented in 1984 by Comrade President José Eduardo dos Santos to the Secretary-General. As that platform is well known to all, I shall not dwell on it here.
The Government of the People's Republic of Angola has never accepted and will never accept the fictitious link some have sought to establish between the presence of Cuban internationalist troops in our territory and the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978),on the independence of Namibia. It is a prerequisite for the achievement of a just, lasting and honourable peace in southern Africa  that the goals set in the negotiating platform be attained.
Attempts to establish a parallel between the withdrawal of Cuban internationalist troops and the independence of Namibia prove the arrogance and bad faith of a regime that is defying the entire international community, that continues to trample on the most fundamental rights of its own people by imposing the inhuman apartheid system, which is blocking the right of the Namibian people to self-determination and independence, and that pursues a systematic policy of aggression and destabilisation against the front-line States.
I am obliged to reiterate that Cuban internationalist troops are in Angola at the invitation of the Angolan Government, in keeping with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, while South African troops occupy the Territory of Namibia illegally, in violation of the relevant United Nations resolutions.
The Governments of Angola and Cuba, wishing to help resolve the problems of south-western Africa, also brought to the negotiating table a specific timetable for the withdrawal of Cuban internationalist troops from Angola, with a view to facilitating the implementation of Security Council 435 (1978), on the independence of Namibia. But it must be made perfectly clear that this gesture in no way implies de jure or de facto acceptance of the policy of "linkage". It should be understood, rather, as one more contribution by our Governments towards the achievement of peace in Angola and of independence for Namibia.
Angola's firm commitment in this regard and our efforts to initiate a peace process are well known.
Several meetings held in Luanda and Cape Verde were followed by a series of peace talks in London, Cairo, Now York, Geneva and Brazzaville. A protocol was signed in Geneva regulating the withdrawal of South African troops from Angolan territory as provided for in Security Council resolution 602 (1967); there was also agreement on the cessation of hostilities along Angola's southern border, and the installation of border control posts jointly monitored by Angola, Cuba and South Africa. That, along with the designation of 1 November as the date for initiating implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) and the presence of a United Nations technical tea, in Namibia/ are the clear results of the quadripartite talks. This shows how important and necessary it is for us to proceed with dialogue in order ensure peace and security in southern Africa. As President José Eduardo dos Santos pointed out in a recent statement at the Franceville summit
"Our intention is to make the peace process in southern Africa irreversible, and we shall do everything in our power to make that happen."
Should South Africa and its allies persist in their obstinate policy of hindering the peace process by making demands which by their very nature constitute crude interference in the internal affairs of the People's Republic of Angola - demands that we can never accept - history will in due course be the judge of their actions.
The Angolan Government has repeatedly declared that/ under its policy of clemency and national harmonisation/ all Angolans are entitled to free themselves from the domination of foreign interests and to integrate themselves into the society we are in the process of building. That policy, recently reiterated by the President of the People's Republic of Angola, aims at the implementation of a peace process inside Angola, a process that draws on the history and experience of other African countries which have experienced similar situations. Assurances regarding the implementation of such a process after the Brazzaville quadripartite talks were given by the highest Angolan authorities at the Franceville summit on 5 October.
The People's Republic of Angola considers that there has been much progress in the quadripartite talks. But this does not mean we can decrease our vigilance; we must rather increase our solidarity with and our unwavering support for all peoples of the southern African region and all liberation movements struggling against colonialism and apartheid.
It is important to stress that the important consultations held at New York between Angola, Cuba and South Africa, with the mediation of the United States, were essentially exploratory in nature. Contrary to reports in the international media, their purpose was to prepare for the signing of a subsequent formal agreement. There is still a long way to go. At stake are the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of the People's Republic of Angola.
I must mention here the efforts of the People's Republic of the Congo, and particularly of President Denis Sassou Nguesso, towards success in the quadripartite talks.
My Government will never shirk its duty to extend all necessary support to the fraternal people of Namibia in its just struggle for independence, under the leadership of its sole legitimate representative, the South West Africa People's Organisation (SWAPO).
Together with a21 other peace-loving peoples, the Angolan people continue to extend all possible support to the heroic people of South Africa, which, under the leadership of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC) and other patriotic forces, is struggling against the inhuman apartheid system. We take this opportunity to call upon Pretoria's allies to cease forthwith all co-operation with the inhuman regime and to impose the comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa for which the international community at large has been calling for so long.
The development in the Maghreb region give us some reason to hope that, should all parties co-operate fully with the Secretary-General and with the Chairman of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), a just, lasting and politically acceptable settlement of the conflict will be found on the basis of OAU resolution 104 and relevant General Assembly resolutions. We reaffirm our total support for the Sahraoui people and for the POLISARIO Front, and we call upon the parties to the conflict to do all they can to pursue the path of dialogue.
We welcome the agreement signed by Ethiopia and Somalia and regard them as a positive step towards improving relations between those two countries, whose common wish is to live in a climate of peace in order to be able to overcome their underdevelopment and raise the living standards of their respective peoples. We hope that the dialogue that has now been initiated between Ethiopia and Sudan - two countries whose peoples are linked by economic, historical and geographical ties - will lead to the establishment of a climate of confidence and good-neighbourliness.
As Africans, we have justified pride in welcoming the initiation of dialogue between Libya and Chad, two African countries that, under the aegis of the Organisation of African Unity, have been able to prove that it is possible to substitute dialogue for the force of arms in the settlement of regional conflicts.
We once again feel obliged to associate ourselves with all those who have demanded that the Zionist regime of Israel withdraw unconditionally from all Palestinian and other Arab territories which it is illegally occupying and where it is engaging in the most inhuman atrocities against the Arab peoples. We associate ourselves also with the international demand for the convening as soon as possible of an international peace conference under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of the sole end legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO).
A major development to which special reference must be made - because of its importance for peace in the Persian Gulf - is, without any doubt, the cease-fire and the resulting talks now taking place between Iran and Iraq, under the auspices of the Secretary-General, with a view to bringing peace to those two countries that have been fighting each other for eight years now. We call upon these two fraternal countries to pursue the path of dialogue and refrain from any act that may hinder the process now under way.
We welcome the signing of the Geneva agreement· between Pakistan and Afghanistan and hope that this will help to establish a climate of peace and security in the region.
With respect to the Kampuchean question, we believe it imperative to seek a political settlement that can contribute to the establishment of peace and stability in South-West Asia. We appreciate the promising results of the meeting held in July this year in Jakarta, Indonesia, at which the parties to this regional conflict showed optimism about the possibility of settling it. In this connection, we hail the positive attitude of the Vietnamese Government, which, in keeping with the goal of contributing to the establishment of peace in the region, has decided to withdraw before the end of this year a part of its Military contingent stationed in Kampuchea.
We are also continuing to pay special attention to the situation in the Korean peninsula and to the Korean people's efforts to bring about an independent, reunified nation. We once again express our total support for the proposals made by the People's Democratic Republic of Korea that the Korean people be enabled to decide their future without interference or foreign intervention.
To the East Timor people fighting against foreign occupation and for self-determination and independence, under the leadership of their revolutionary FRETILIN, we once again affirm our unwavering support. Furthermore, we take this opportunity to express our appreciation for the stance that the Portuguese Government has been taking in its capacity as the legal administering Power of the Territory of East Timor. In this connection, we call on that Government as well as on the Secretary-General to continue their efforts to find a just and permanent settlement of the question, in the framework of General Assembly resolution 37/30.
Central America remains one of the regions of the earth most affected by instability. There, the policies of intervention, aggression, blackmail and interference in the internal affairs of the States concerned represent a threat to their sovereignty and development and to international peace and security. The People's Republic of Angola believes that this line of conduct is incompatible with a wish to see fewer regional conflicts and to achieve a political settlement of the differences. We therefore cannot agree that these confrontations should be viewed as ideological or as an East-West conflict.
Nicaragua and Panama are clear examples of that situation. They are currently the victims of coercive political and economic measures. We wish to reaffirm the importance and validity of the Esquipulas II peace plan and also the need for compliance by all parties with the Panama Canal Treaty.
We also express again our unwavering support for the Government and fraternal people of Cuba and their legitimate claim to regain the illegally occupied Guantanamo Naval Base from the United States and to be compensated for the material damage resulting from the occupation.
We unequivocally support General Assembly resolutions 41/11 of 27 October 1986 and 42/16 of 10 November 1987, which declare the southern Atlantic a zone of peace and co-operation. We call on the States of the region to contribute to that end by Adopting measures designed to achieve the objectives of the Declaration.
We are all in favour of détente, dialogue and co-operation between States, regardless of their political or ideological differences or their stages of development. We believe also that the acme race, particularly when it involves nuclear weapons, makes the establishment of a programme for general and complete disarmament urgent. The resources used by the armaments industry could be channelled to the developing countries that are the victims of the constantly deteriorating world economic situation.
We are sow approaching the end of yet another decade in which there has been a series of political convulsion in almost every region of the world. That is a source of great concern to the international community as a whole. During this period, some countries have been able to take important steps forward in seeking solutions to the various economic problems they face. However, despite their efforts, the majority of these countries have not succeeded in achieving anything more than a palliative that has not met their expectation for the settlement of certain problems that could really have been solved, to a large extent, with the political will and help of other countries.
As I have just said, we are approaching the end of another decade. At the beginning of this decade we had hoped for better results for mankind as a whole. It is therefore distressing to note that, despite the efforts made, the world economic situation is constantly deteriorating. The current crisis in the world economic system, which is obsolete and unjust, claims its principal victims in the developing countries. It is against that background, therefore, that we believe it to be important, indeed urgent, to establish a new international economic order that is real, fair, equitable and capable of responding to the growing concerns of more than two thirds of the human race.
At the beginning of this decade the United Nations adopted resolution 35/56 establishing a strategy by means of which the developing countries could achieve a growth rate of 7 per cent within the framework of the International Development Strategy. To that end, it was agreed also that the developed countries should contribute 0.7 per cent of their gross national product for the benefit of the developing countries in general, and 1 per cent for the benefit of the least developed countries. Today, eight years have passed and we are still facing a manifest lack of political will on the part of cone developed countries to apply  the principles agreed upon. The consequences of this have been the stagnation in, and the reduction in the growth rates of, the majority of the developing countries.
We believe that the existing gap between our two groups of countries is constantly increasing rather than narrowing, despite the measures taken each year by the majority of those countries to bring about economic recovery. In that connection, we reaffirm our complete support for the recent decisions taken and the positions held by the States members of the Non-Aligned Movement. We are sure that they constitute the basis for future negotiations between the North and the South, taking into account the need for the revitalised, closer and fairer co-operation between the two groups of countries that which we believe is imperative.
We wish to focus for a moment on some questions that are of the greatest concern to us and that, in our opinion, are among the major impediments to the development of our countries. First, I wish to say that the international monetary and financial system will not be able to operate smoothly unless ell countries share the responsibility for the settlement of the problems relating to the malfunctioning of that system's institutions and mechanisms. Otherwise we shall continue to witness en uncontrolled flow of our resources to the developed countries. These resources could be utilised for the economic development of the countries of the South.
There is therefore an urgent need for the restructuring of the present international monetary and financial system so as to render it more viable and capable of securing wider and more just world co-operation. Today a problem of undeniable importance is the inordinate level of the debt of the developing countries, which reached the astronomical figure of $1,200 billion in 1987. We therefore deem it appropriate to appeal to the multilateral financial institutions and the creditor countries to review, together with us, the impracticability of the mechanisms of the international monetary system now in force.
We reaffirm once again the need for an international meeting to be held as soon as possible on the debt of the developing countries, to enable debtors and creditors together to work out a solution to this thorny issue. For the low-growth countries of the African continent, the debt situation has become critical. The continued drop in prices of commodities, the main exports of the African countries, is an insurmountable obstacle to both their participation in the world economy and the effective implementation of the United Nations Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1990, which are essential pre-conditions for real recovery in their economies. We accordingly endorse the position of African Heads of State at the OAU summit meeting in December 1987 on the convening of an international conference on external debt in Africa. The economic crisis has seriously affected the developing countries capacity to take a more active part in international trade. The economies of those countries are concentrated on the export of one or a few commodities or manufactures, and at the same time those products suffer from instability in developed countries and are the victim of protectionist measures on the part of the market-economy countries - measures that are in flagrant violation of the rules and principles of international trade and incompatible with the commitments undertaken by those countries in various international bodies. We must therefore continue to concentrate our efforts on achieving real adjustment in the structure of international trade and implementation of the resolutions of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). The People's Republic of Angola is convinced that the international community can create the condition necessary for this to be close.
The interdependence of States, of which we are totally aware, should lead us to a greater sensitivity concerning the food crisis. We note with deep regret the deterioration in the food and agriculture situation in many developing countries, especially African countries, which are experiencing a serious food deficit. The international community should support more strongly the International Fund for Agricultural Development in order to enable it to embark upon its second decade on a better and more solid financial footing.
The People's Republic of Angola, a developing country which has never experienced a single day of peace since it achieved independence in November 1975, is an integral part of the international community and cannot remain silent with regard to the world in general or the problems of the underdeveloped countries in particular. Its contribution to minimising the countless economic and social problems affecting mankind is still very weak.
We have been making efforts, together with others, to achieve the just peace so badly needed by the heroic Angolan people to solve the economic problems we continue to experience.' In this connection my Government has taken certain measures within the framework of the Economic and Financial Recovery Programme and has been enacting legislation that will make its implementation possible.
I wish to take this opportunity to appeal to the international community to increase its support and programmes of assistance for the People's Republic of Angola with a view to helping repair the damage caused by the war of aggression and destabilisation waged by South Africa. This damage, in material terms - equipment, highways, bridges, roads, railroads and so forth - amounts to more than $12 billion, cost the lives of more than 50,000 people, caused the displacement of 200,000 families and created close to 150,000 refugees.
In conclusion, Mr. President, allow me to reiterate our sincere wishes for your complete success in conducting the proceedings of the forty-third session of the General Assembly and to assure you of the fullest co-operation of the Angolan delegation whenever necessary and at all times.
The struggle continues. Victory is certain.


Mr. President, on behalf of the Italian Government I should like to congratulate you most warmly on your election. We are pleased that this honour should have been conferred on the representative of a country to which we ate bound by long-standing ties of friendship, personified by the presence of a large Italian community in Argentina. Your abilities and your experience will guarantee the successful fulfilment of this mandate, a mandate that has been rendered particularly delicate by developments in international affairs which offer hopes that cannot be allowed to die.
May I also be allowed to express my appreciation to the outgoing President who, in performing the task entrusted to him by the General Assembly last year, met the challenges posed to our Organization during that period with dedication and skill.
Lastly, the Secretary-General has the gratitude of the Italian Government and my personal appreciation. As a worthy heir to the Latin American juridical tradition, he has succeeded in handling with extraordinary political vision, commitment and negotiating skills situations from which others would have emerged the loser. In the efforts he has generously devoted to the pursuit of peace and security, in his quest for negotiated solutions, and in his firm defence of the principles of the Chatter, the Secretary-General has had, and continues to have, the unconditional support of the Italian Government.
The winds of history seem, today, to be blowing in the right direction. This is confirmed by the trust and sincerity of the ongoing dialogue between the United States and the Soviet Union, and the incisive role assumed by the United Nations in regional crises and conflicts. Italy is contributing to these developments the whole-hearted co-operation of a country fully aware of its international responsibilities.
In view of the advances made by the two major Powers in the field of disarmament, we must recognize that many things have changed over the past 12 months. Positive changes have opened up new prospects for stability, particularly in Europe. The Italian Government, acting individually and in the framework of the Atlantic Alliance and the European Community, has made its own contribution to promoting these prospects.
The conclusion of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles has particular significance. Above all, it suggests a new way of dealing with disarmament problems because, for the first time in the history of mankind, massive quantities of weapons are being destroyed, not through wartime military operations but, on the contrary,, as a consequence of negotiations. And here I should like to emphasize that this Treaty, together with the detailed verification procedures it provides for, should serve as a model to be followed and, accordingly, extended to other agreements as soon as possible.
We all cherish the well-founded hope that the agreement on a 50-per-cent cut in the strategic arsenals of the two major Powers will also be formally concluded at an early date. We would call attention both to President Reagan's consistent commitment to promoting the dialogue at the highest level with the Soviet Union and to the dynamic and courageous approach taken by General Secretary Gorbachev, also in his international policies.
It is chiefly in the area of disarmament that the community of nations must play a role if bilateral agreements are to be gradually extended to cover all types of weapons existing on Earth.
Today, in the light of the results achieved, our objective must be to eliminate the risks of a sudden change of course. This is an endeavour incumbent on all nations, and should be self-evident in the case &1 an Organization that believes in the strength of its universality and the need to take the utmost advantage of all possibilities afforded by a more serene international climate.
Unfortunately, the agreements between the two major Powers have not yet been matched by any appreciable results in the various multilateral forums.
The proceedings of the third special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament did not produce any specific conclusion. Of course, we do not underestimate the contribution that emerged from these joint deliberations towards more effective mechanisms for the transparency of military budgets, towards a deeper analysis of the principles governing verification of arms control agreements, and particularly towards increased effectiveness for United Nations initiatives in activities directly or indirectly linked to disarmament.
These deliberative contributions are by no means minor. But our task does not consist solely in stating and illustrating positions; it requires us to work coherently for the realization of the good intentions and the equally receptive attitudes that exist.
At the conference table in Geneva no progress has been recorded for some time in almost any of the areas under discussion, from the cessation of all nuclear-test explosions to the prevention of an arms race in outer space, or from the banning of radiological weapons to the comprehensive programme of disarmament.
Only in the field of chemical weapons are negotiations moving ahead, but even these are moving too slowly. At one time we had hoped they might be completed this year. In fact that was the hope that, together with Foreign Minister Genscher, I personally expressed in Geneva last February. That has not happened, although the use of this terrible instrument of mass destruction is again of current concern to Governments and public opinion.
We do not, of course, underestimate the technical difficulties of applying adequate verification procedures in this field. For that very reason we sponsored an international symposium last May in Rome, attended by eminent scientists. Information and conclusions emerged regarding the possibility of conducting experiments to verify that there are no diversions for military purposes in industrial production processes. We shall bring the results of the proceedings to the attention of Governments.
Regionally, the imbalances in conventional weapons existing in Europe are another dangerous source of insecurity. We must therefore make every effort to secure prompt results that will permit the achievement of greater stability at lower levels of forces and armaments. Here, in the context of the informal Vienna talks on the elaboration of a mandate for future negotiations, there are signs of a significant convergence of views on questions of substance.
We intend to continue to work, in every possible way, towards the speediest possible completion of a satisfactory final document.
I should like at this point to reaffirm the validity of the Helsinki Final Act, an irreplaceable instrument in international relations which has indissolubly linked the United States and Canada to the future of the countries and peoples of the Old World.
In this context let me express the hope that Albania will also play a part in the overall European framework. I would interpret as a positive step in this direction the very recent Albanian decision to resume active participation in the Inter-Parliamentary Union, which will be celebrating its centenary next year.
In a final reference to the topic of disarmament in Europe, I would mention that Italy, as part of a drastic reduction in armaments, is giving priority to the elimination of asymmetries in the most destabilizing offensive-weapon categories. This elimination should be followed by a restructuring of military deployments in a defensive posture.
It will be recalled that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons itself provides that all the signatories, including the nuclear-weapon Powers, should pursue negotiations for the conclusion, as expressly stipulated in article VI, of "a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control". (resolution 2373 (XXII), annex)
The representative of the country currently holding the presidency of the Council of the European Communities has already stated the common position of the member states on the various more delicate aspects of international activities. The statement made by my colleague from Greece has testified to the work done by the Twelve towards harmonizing their respective foreign policies, a harmonization we Italians hope will become increasingly visible and extensive. We are indeed convinced that we must build a more united and mutually supportive Europe capable of progressively asserting, primarily on the basis of the Single European Act, an identity of its own and its own role in shaping a free world responsive to the demands of the various peoples. This identity and this role fully accord with the aims attributed by the Charter of the United Nations to regional arrangements. The United Nations has recently achieved encouraging results in endeavours to resolve some of the most acute and difficult international crises of the past decade. The advances made constitute real successes for the Organization and its Secretary-General, to whose perseverance and skill as a negotiator they ate largely due.
I refer, first of all, to the good offices which led to the Geneva Agreements on Afghanistan.
In the case of Iran and Iraq, a cease-fire was achieved and a direct negotiating process between the parties has finally been launched. We fully support the efforts of the Secretary-General to consolidate, through implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987), the results obtained thus far.
In the Security Council and at the bilateral level,, we shall continue to work for the restoration, between the two countries concerned and in the Gulf, of the conditions of security and stability which are the prerequisite for peace and are indispensable for the commencement of reconstruction.
On the question of Cyprus and in the dispute over Western Sahara, the patient quest for points of contact also seems to hold out prospects of change.
We are thus at a point in history when the United Nations is offered increasing opportunities, either directly — as in the cases I have just mentioned — or indirectly, to consolidate and bring to fruition the agreements reached at the regional level. This is happening in the case of southern Africa, where in Angola and in Namibia the United Nations may be called upon to facilitate and guarantee the withdrawal of foreign troops, the restoration of domestic peace and the completion of one of the last great decolonization processes in history.
The role of our Organization is undoubtedly becoming more incisive. We have seen the increasingly favourable reception accorded to offers of mediation by United Nations bodies and the new opportunities for action that are constantly opening up.
The new possibilities and the prospects I have mentioned are, without doubt, due to the changed climate in relations between the two major Powers and the overall improvement in international relations wrought by that change.
For the first time since 1945 - that is, since the approval of the Charter at San Francisco - the United Nations now finds itself operating within an international context not unlike the one envisioned by the founding countries, a context in which international collaboration, a tendency to engage in dialogue, the negotiated solution of problems, in short multilateralism and the rule of law, should take precedence over arbitrary approaches and the use of force.
The present convergence of positive elements could enable the United Nations to make greater use of all the instruments available under its Charter. Here we have a great opportunity, but also a great question mark. Once the differences between East and West have been reduced and, we hope, eliminated, it remains to be seen whether those uninvolved in that tension, and those who were loud in their denunciation of the inherent threats to international progress and stability, will also shoulder their responsibilities. There must be a broadening of narrow regional outlooks, less rhetoric and a greater focus on action, a feeling of participation in a common design. There is a need for a spirit of dialogue, which we must all patiently seek to make more effective.
The successes I have mentioned would not have been possible without the mediation efforts, I say again of the Secretary-General and his associates, with the contribution of the Security Council - an important context for its function and the problems confronting it, but a limited one, and, I would say, certainly inadequate in the light of the great potential of our Organization.
The time has come to test the potential of all the organs of the United Nations, including the General Assembly. We must overcome the conflicts between groups, which have been a frequent feature of the past few years. This is a necessary development if the system is to pursue the role assigned to it by the Charter, keep pace with developments in international relations, and thus preserve its credibility. One thing is certain. If the dialogue between the United States and the Soviet Union is pursued in depth and results in a strengthening of the cause of peace and the necessary conditions for security, there will no longer be any excuse for those countries or groups of countries that have thus far, more or less deliberately, tried to shirk their historical responsibilities.
Special attention should be given to unresolved conflicts.
The Palestinian uprising in the occupied territories, which began last December, clearly reflects the distress of a population compelled for decades, and without any political prospects, to live in a state of occupation. The disagreements between Arabs and Israelis and the Palestinian problem are back in the limelight, serving as a dramatic and, indeed, a daily reminder to the international community of the existence in a sensitive area of an open wound that requires healing.
We are all aware of the complexity of the problem confronting us. Everyone, including the parties involved, is looking for a way out of the situation, and it is also generally recognized that repressive measures against a movement that is widespread and spontaneous are of no avail. Israel is a member of this Assembly, as it is entitled to be. This must be fully recognized, and so must the corresponding right to security, without offensive charges of racism. Similarly, Palestinians and Israelis, particularly those of the younger generation, must be helped out of the vicious circle of hatred and confrontation and encouraged to enter into dialogue and co-operation that can open up new prospects for development throughout the Middle East.
There is a growing conviction, shared by a very broad section of the community of nations, that an international peace conference, subject to rules and procedures that are imaginative and innovative, could help overcome the problems and obstacles in the way of a global, just and lasting solution to the conflict.
We welcomed the acceptance in principle by the United States of the idea of an international peace conference and we appreciate the aims underlying the personal and generous commitment demonstrated by Secretary of State Shultz in presenting his peace plan.
I am convinced that solution of the problem confronting us - which, in essence, concerns the possibility for all the countries of the area, including Israel, to live within secure and recognized borders, and the right of the Palestinians to a homeland - is not always facilitated by those who take up purely declaratory positions which remain without effect. I believe that a serious, positive effort must be made by all of us to reduce existing differences.
In the Middle East context we also view developments in Lebanon with concern, for its institutional difficulties are all the more alarming in that they could jeopardize not only the coexistence of Christians and Muslims, but the very unity of the State.
In Central America, after encouraging progress in the dialogue following the Esquipulas agreements, we note with concern disturbing symptoms of intransigence that will make it harder to achieve the general reconciliation we hoped for and, hence, that "happy peace for all" to which the Presidents of the Central American countries referred last year when agreeing, inter alia, on the promising idea of a common Central American parliament.
Italy is an active participant in the political dialogue instituted between the States of the region and the countries of the European Community. The latter countries are continually and actively following the regional peace efforts and hope that all parties will show that genuine political will necessary to give those efforts a constructive thrust and renewed momentum.
The Horn of Africa region also deserves the attention of the Assembly because of the tensions still existing there. These tensions, and some major natural disasters, have unfortunately made living conditions unacceptable for hundreds of thousands of human beings. Realism and a genuine spirit of conciliation are the components needed to consolidate promising agreements and translate into reality the political solutions that would restore peace to that area, as an essential prerequisite for its social and economic progress. For years Italy has been giving the highest priority to its co-operation in the development of this region. We are prepared to strengthen this co-operation further if conditions permit. In this context, Italy is devoting special attention to the situation in Eritrea, where its co-operation and humanitarian assistance efforts are encountering particular obstacles, which are having a negative impact on the normal development of those efforts.
Another crisis, that in Kampuchea, shows signs of positive developments, provided that the parties are able to maintain the commitments already undertaken and the conditions are achieved for the formation of the broadest possible domestic coalition.
The history of our planet is becoming increasingly a closely shared experience in which peoples, nations and different economic and social systems are participating. This is not, at this juncture, an empty statement. On the contrary, it has a particular meaning for a world that has become more aware of the dangers of collective destruction caused by misguided developments in science and technology and is consequently intent, above all, on rediscovering the values of solidarity and justice. The deliberations of the forty-third session of the General Assembly cannot fail to take account of the new climate of increasing openness to mutual understanding and of willingness to search more actively for common ground.
Italy has always been a supporter of the role of the United Nations in the pursuit of international peace and security. Our very presence in the Security Council reflects those concerns and proceeds from the assumption that the role of the Secretary-General should be enhanced and that parties to a dispute should be constantly persuaded to take a peaceful view of their own interests.
The successes the United Nations is scoring today confirm the validity of multilateralism and show that we must all have faith in a system of agreements that promotes the rule of law and increasingly restricts recourse to violent means.
In this connection we affirm our belief in the principle of universality as a fundamental principle that must be reinforced and extended, where the proper conditions exist, by consistent conduct on the part of United Nations bodies and Member States. We hope, in this context, that contacts between the two Koreas will be resumed and yield positive results, so that the principle of universality may also become a reality for them.
We must also ensure that the United Nations is in a position to over time its present budgetary crisis and that there is a sound financial basis for its peace-keeping operations, which we all wish to see extended and consolidated, so as to infuse new life into the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Our Organization cannot confine itself to reacting to events. It must take preventive action and look ahead if it is to understand and satisfy the far-reaching demands of our peoples and redress the glaring imbalances which are still poisoning relations between nations. We must, in other words, take full advantage of the opportunities available for bringing about a world order guaranteed by the rule of law and considerations of justice.
The path is now strewn with obstacles, difficulties and burdensome restrictions. The efforts of the entire international community are required to overcome them. Our peoples feel ever more acutely the need for an improved quality of life, a healthier and better protected environment and true freedom from the enemies of society and civilization, such as the heavy indebtedness of some countries, recurrent food crises, pollution of the atmosphere and the oceans, the effects of excessive urbanization and the production and use of drugs. In actual fact little has been done to combat these evils, I am thinking, in particular, of the terrible dimensions of the drug phenomenon, which is undermining the very foundations of our society and destroying our young people, who are our hope for the future.
We must attack drug production by carrying out adequate programmes to assist economic and social development and to substitute other crops for drugs in the producing countries. We must attack trafficking by means of increased co-operation between judicial and police authorities and by introducing, through international agreements, financial controls that will make it possible to freeze and confiscate the proceeds of drug traffickers. Lastly, and perhaps above all, we must strike a blow at illicit drug use by putting into effect all appropriate preventive measures, educating and sensitising public opinion, harnessing for this purpose the power of the major communications media, using appropriate school and leisure facilities and instituting programmes for the treatment, recovery and rehabilitation of drug addicts.
International co-operation to combat drug use is particularly necessary now that it is affecting all States, albeit to a different extent, so that no country can really consider itself immune. It is a terrible evil which we all share, from East to West, North to South, and we all have a duty to take forceful determined action to combat it.
The economic, social, health and environmental effects of urbanization also need careful consideration. It has been estimated that, after the year 2000, some 50 per cent of the world's population will be living in megalopolises, and that this phenomenon will affect the emerging countries particularly.
While it is easy to imagine the kind of effects produced by the concentration of populations in cities, it seems more difficult at the present level of our knowledge to identify suitable remedies to reduce - at least partially – the resulting anomalies. Perhaps, in this particular area too, help will come from co-operation between scientists, in a setting in which science is growing more open, rising above ideological barriers to become a vehicle of universal progress and not an instrument of competition.
There are certainly many opportunities, even in this area of the quality of life, for encouraging and developing international co-operation. The United Nations, precisely because of its universal character, cannot evade these new ' challenges and, indeed, should be ready to provide convincing and eloquent responses to them.
I am not at present in a position to suggest the courses to be taken.
Perhaps, and particularly with a view to preparing for or, if possible, preventing major natural disasters - I have in mind disasters of the Sahel type - we might consider setting up a collective emergency force to be placed at the disposal of the Secretary-General. The establishment of such a force would complement certain activities which, to some extent, are already being carried out, and would confirm the universal role of the United Nations, viewed as a catalyst for human solidarity.
It would be over-ambitious of me to delineate the exact contours of our future, and predict the structure of our society at the planetary level.
However, there is one element in the thinking of the authors of the San Francisco Charter that remains particularly valid - the idea that the United Nations and its machinery should be a profoundly innovative factor in relations between States. Besides, the mere fact of achieving harmony between peoples with such diverse cultures and systems through a process that precludes suspicion and mistrust in the interests of promoting co-operation, must inevitably result in something original and unique.
Now is the time to embark on this venture, precisely because we must realize that the principles and purposes set forth in the Charter could not have been properly affirmed in an atmosphere, such as we have experienced in the past, characterized by serious tensions between the two major Powers. Is it possible, then, to attain these objectives in the framework of the process of revision taking place in relations between the United States and the Soviet Union? If we tried to give a definite affirmative answer to that question I think we would be venturing onto the unsafe ground of prophecy. We will merely note that there now exist favourable conditions for change and that the requirements linked to this change ace coming to light, even if they are not always perceived fully and with total clarity.
More than any other design, that of a more balanced order, an order that is informed, above all, with the principles of justice, appears the most likely eventuality as we approach the year 2000, if only because, as Plato said, every individual or State that is unjust contains within itself the seeds of its own destruction. And this is still valid for all mankind.