I congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly. Your experience and the esteem in which you are held as the former Foreign Minister of Nigeria, as its Permanent Representative to the United Nations and as Chairman of the Special Committee against Apartheid guarantee that you will excellently perform the duties of your office. At the same time I wish to pay deepest respect to your predecessor, Mr. Dante Caputo of Argentina, and thank him for the exemplary and successful conduct of his functions.
Foreign Minister Dumas of France presented the views of the members of the European Community yesterday. I thank him for his clear statement. Now, at the closing of this millennium we are moving towards a new phase in world politics. The old structures still largely determine the political scene. but new structures are already becoming visible everywhere. We are confronted with global challenges. The natural sources of life are increasingly being jeopardized. In the last two years, world food production dropped for the first time. Plants and animals are becoming extinct. New epidemics are spreading. A large part of mankind lives in dire poverty. Terrorism and illicit drug trafficking call for joint action by the international community. Underdevelopment and the debt burden deprive a large section of mankind of any hope. Excessive armaments and regional conflicts, as well as violations of human rights and of the right of nations to self-determination, require fundamental new thinking and actions, m Europe there is fresh hope for a better future. This will have positive effects on the entire world.
In the year 2030 there will be 10 billion people on earth. For their sake -and it is not for distant descendants whose faces are hidden from us by the mist of distant centuries; it is for our children, our grandchildren - we must today lay the groundwork so that the glebe will remain habitable. No single country on Earth, however rich and powerful, is able to handle this task by itself and through its own ability. Joint efforts by all mankind are needed. First and foremost this means that we must move away from confrontation towards co-operation, we require co-operative structures.
Precisely because we Germans are aware of our responsibility for the Second World war we perceive our duty to work for a better world, for a world of peace, democracy and solidarity between nations, for a world of freedom and human rights, for a world at peace with nature. The Polish nation was the first victim of the war deliberately unleashed by Hitlerian Germany 50 years ago. And I am turning to You Mr. Skubiszewski, Foreign Minister of the new Poland, to say that the Polish people are assured that their right to live in secure borders will not be called into question, not now nor in the future, through territorial claims by us Germans. The wheel of history will not be turned back. Together with Poland we want to work for a better future for Europe. The inviolability of borders is the basis of peaceful relations in Europe.
Ever since its inception the Federal Republic of Germany has framed a European peace policy. As a member of the European Community and of the Atlantic Alliance, we belong to the family of Western democracies. To the United States we are linked through deep friendship, through the Alliance and through a commitment to common values. President Bush impressively reaffirmed this in his speech at Mainz, with France we have established a unique partnership and co-operation, as reflected in the Franco-German Treaty and in our day-today politics. This points to the future. The groundwork for the developments we are today witnessing in Europe, for the prospects that are now discernible, was laid by the founding of the European Community, by the treaties of Moscow and Warsaw, by the treaty with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, by the Basic Treaty with the German Democratic Republic and by the Helsinki Final Act. These are European paths that come towards each other; they must therefore be strengthened and extended. Nobody will be allowed to stray from them. We shall remain committed to the letter and spirit of those treaties.
Major elements of that peaceful order are the European Community and the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe process. The European Community, which is heading for a European Union, sees itself as a factor for economic and political stability in the world, it maintains closer relations, including those based on agreements with its neighbours in Europe and with States and groupings of States in all other continents. It strongly promotes voluntary regional associations in other parts of the world. It has to be open to multifaceted and broad-based co-operation with those countries of Central and Eastern Europe that desire it. New forms of co-operation and exchange are required. EUREKA is an offer open to all those who are interested. The new environment agency set up by the European Community can become the starting-point of new pan-European co-operation in the area of the protection of the environment.
Transport structures covering the whole of Europe are needed. We are receptive to ideas and suggestions from others. The trade limitations introduced for strategic reasons must be adapted to the changed quality of political, security-policy, economic and technological co-operation between West and East. They must not become an obstacle to a far-sighted policy.
East and West have opted for the path of co-operation. That is a source of hope for the nations of the world - not only the nations of Europe, The vision of a peaceful order in Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals - as the West proposed in the Harmel report as early as 1967, and as recurs in General Secretary Gorbachev's concept of the common European house - is opening up. The bold reforms in the Soviet Union, in Hungary and in Poland point in that direction.
We agree with our Western friends that the reform processes in Central and Eastern Europe are in the interests of all Europe and of the world. They deserve our support, not least through common, co-ordinated action, through a plan of solidarity for Europe. This process of reform in Central and Eastern Europe is not a case of one side's opinion being adopted by the other; it is a process of self-reflection on the common foundations of European culture and European history, to which all European nations have made great contributions. The reforms have become irreversible because man's yearning for more freedom is irreversible, but the developments are not immune to standstills, or even setbacks. In the long run, however, no country can evade this development. Anyone who hopes that the reforms will fail will be overtaken by the development.
In the West, too, nobody should underestimate the new possibilities; instead, people should make resolute use of them for the benefit of all Europe. History tends not to repeat the opportunities it offers. I appeal to the countries of
Europe not to let this historic juncture slip by. We Western democracies offer stable-framework conditions for this reform process. Statesmanly foresight and statesmanly responsibility are required now on all sides. Nobody can want others to be destabilized. The Federal Republic of Germany regards a peaceful order in Europe as the framework also for the goal defined in the Letter on German Unity: "to work for a state of peace in Europe in which the German nation will recover its unity in free self-determination". We want to attain this goal while fully observing the treaties that we have signed. That can be achieved only together with all other States in Europe - not against them. Nobody in Europe has cause to fear our policy. Our policy is linked to the destiny of the entire continent. It is a European peace policy. This precludes any national solo efforts. We consider it our task to work for a pan-European peaceful order from which no country may be excluded or nay exclude itself, our foreign policy, in accordance with the dictates of our Constitution, rejects any kind of power politics. It is a policy of responsibility, it is determined by the fundamental values of our Constitution, it is based on unconditional fidelity to treaties.
The Federal Republic of Germany, as a country situated in the heart of Europe, brings all its weight to bear for the purpose of co-operation, understanding and disarmament conducive to a better Europe. This includes cooperation with the German Democratic Republic. The two German States are aware of their responsibility for peace in Europe. This responsibility weighs more heavily than do those things that divide us. On the basis of this common responsibility,  the two German States have already made substantial contributions towards detente and disarmament in Europe. In particular, the people in our States have benefited from this. In these endeavours we act on the foundation of the basic Treaty with the German Democratic Republic and are guided by the Joint declarations issued by Chancellor Kohl and General Secretary Honecker on 12 March 1965 and 8 September 1,87. New and closer forms of co-operation are needed in many fields - economic and technological, scientific and cultural, transport and protection of the environment.
The two German states - each in its own fashion - must contribute towards overcoming the things that separate Europeans from each other. They must face the new developments occurring in the whole of Europe and work for their success. The Federal Republic of Germany wholeheartedly supports the process of European unification within the European Community, as well as the efforts of European
countries aimed at reform. The German Democratic Republic, under its own conditions, can contribute, through reforms, towards greater openness in Europe. just as the Soviet Union, Poland and Hungary are doing already. We have been deeply moved as we have witnessed, in recent weeks, the fate of young people who are sorrowfully leaving their home and familiar borrowings. Nobody can want such a development. A policy of reform would open up new prospects for the people of the German Democratic Republic, as in other Central and Eastern European countries. These would encourage the people to stay where they grew up and where they are at home. Today, East and West no longer discuss only the problems that have accused between them since the War. They Jointly focus their attention also on those tasks of the future which, as is stated in the Joint German-Soviet Declaration of June 1989, can be mastered only through concerted action by all states and  peoples. The Moscow Treaty continues to form the foundation of the relationship between our two countries. The German-Soviet Declaration underscores the importance of German-Soviet relations for the whole of Europe. This calls for new thinking by everyone and for everyone.
That declaration defined goals to which we have long been committed along with our Western partners-, the preservation and shaping of peace, the settlement of existing conflicts, the right of nations to self-determination, the precedence of international law in politics, international co-operation in the economic, scientific and technological fields, the results of which should benefit all mankind, the preservation of the natural environment and the overcoming of hunger and poverty in the world, and the combating of new threats such as epidemics and international terrorism.
A peaceful world of free people subject only to the rule of law and whose dignity is no longer impaired by hunger and poverty: that is seen as the true goal of politics. In that way, the design of a peaceful order for all Europe, the architecture of a pan-European house, is becoming clearly visible. Through arms control and disarmament we want to reduce the military elements of the East-West relationship. We want to demilitarise East-West relations, just as international relations must be demilitarized. We want to create an increasing number of co-operative security structures. We welcome and support the efforts of the United states and the Soviet Union to achieve co-operation marked by increasing mutual trust.
An entire continent is seriously committed to agreed and controlled disarmament. The Treaty on intermediate-range nuclear forces - the INF Treaty - was an important step towards that end. The two sides accept the principle that whoever has more weapons must disarm more. The aim is to ensure that the armed forces of the two sides have the capability of defence only and not of attack, especially surprise attack and large-scale offensive action. Ever more co-operative security structures will emerge, thus providing additional guarantees of security. The negotiations in Vienna on conventional stability and confidence-building measures, as well as the global prohibition of chemical weapons, will lend a new quality to those security structures. The meetings between Secretary of State Baker and Foreign Minister Shevardnadze have provided further signs of hope. In Vienna, Western proposals have created the conditions for far-reaching conventional disarmament. Given good will on the part of all concerned, an initial agreement could be achieved as early as 1990.
We strongly support the United States-Soviet negotiations in Geneva on nuclear and space weapons. By reducing their nuclear weapons, the nuclear Powers are living up to their responsibility towards the international community. The need for all countries to accede to the non-proliferation Treaty is becoming all the more urgent.
The negotiations on a comprehensive, global and verifiable ban on chemical weapons must finally be completed. Only in that way can the spread of those barbaric weapons be prevented. President Bush's declaration here at the United Nations that his country is ready to destroy over 80 per cent of its existing chemical weapons stocks even before the conclusion of a chemical weapons convention, provided that the Soviet Union reduces its chemical weapons to the same level, is unprecedented in the history of disarmament negotiations. The Federal Republic of Germany has constantly striven for the successful completion of the Geneva negotiations. President Bush's remarks concerning verification of compliance with a future chemical weapons convention have a significance that goes far beyond the scope of disarmament negotiations. Openness is becoming a guiding principle in dealings between countries. In fact, every step towards a more open world is a step towards the new world we seek.
The recent Canberra Conference made an important contribution in support of the Geneva negotiations. All producers are called upon to control trade in chemical substances and facilities that are suitable also for the manufacture of chemical weapons. The Federal Republic of Germany has considerably tightened its own control laws; as acknowledged in the final declaration of the Canberra Conference, it has thus made an advance contribution to the implementation of a future chemical weapons convention.
Disarmament is a task not for the industrial nations alone. The developing countries spend $200 billion a year for military purposes. That is four times the official development assistance they receive. Moreover, those resources are unavailable for their development. Regional theatres of conflict are exacerbated by the unbridled trade in arms. The arms trade must become more transparent to the international public. Such transparency forces both the importers and the exporters to account for and justify their actions, which itself has a moderating effect. The wholly disproportionate level of arms in all parts of the world makes disarmament a global task which must be dealt with by the United Nations.
A country's attitude towards disarmament is the most reliable measure of how far it is prepared to abandon old thinking. A State's attitude towards human rights is the most reliable measure of its stance on the inalienable dignity of each individual. A peaceful order in Europe - a peaceful order in the world - can rest only on the universal application of human rights and on the right of nations to self-determination. The future Europe is thus to be a large heterogeneous area based throughout on the rule of law.
To us, respect for human rights is the indispensable basis for any policy. In our view, there is still an urgent need to appoint a United Nations high commissioner for human rights and set up an international court of human rights. We ask that our initiative on abolishing capital punishment be supported also by those countries which, frequently for religious reasons, want to retain such punishment. The form of optional protocol we have chosen leaves the door open to those States that are not yet able to decide in favour of signing it. International terrorism world wide and international drug crimes constitute aggression against human dignity and against mankind. They threaten every political and social order. In future, countries will have to be measured by their efforts in this fight. Anyone who provides refuge for terrorists or spares those who commit drug crimes is placing himself outside the community of nations. The drug problem, that scourge of mankind, has become a global challenge.
This demands resolute co-operation by all countries. The common fight against illicit drug trafficking must be stepped up. Co-operation among all countries in combating cross-border illicit drug trafficking must be intensified. The social causes of drug production must be eliminated in the relevant countries through common efforts, and the social causes of drug dependence in the consumer countries must be eliminated as well.
We shall survive the third millennium only if all countries - large and small, weak and strong alike - unconditionally make international law the yardstick of their political actions. We must overcome force, both within and between States. The decade ahead of us must be a decade of pacifying regional theatres of conflict. A historic opportunity is emerging for the Central American peace process. All Governments interested in the fate of Central America have in the meantime fully endorsed the Esquipulas peace agreement. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany supports the United Nations contribution to that process.
Namibia, the last colony in Africa, will gain independence in a few months' time. The Western Contact Group, to which we belonged, initiated this process and participated substantially in shaping it. We are convinced that the Secretary-General of the United Nations and his special representative will bring the peace process in Namibia to a good conclusion. In so doing, they have the full confidence and support of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany. Our participation in the United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG) reflects this, we all hope that an independent Namibia that espouses democracy, pluralism and human rights will send signals to the Republic of South Africa that cannot be ignored. Apartheid is inimical to human rights. It cannot be reformed. It must be eliminated. We call upon the South African Government to terminate the state of emergency, to release all political detainees, Nelson Mandela in the first place, and to admit the opposition. That must pave the way for negotiations involving all the country's political forces for the purpose of developing a just constitutional order. we shall do "whatever is possible to help bring about round-table negotiations.
In the Middle East the objective continues to be a peaceful settlement that guarantees the right of all States in the region, including Israel, to live within secure and recognized boundaries and that enables the Palestinian people finally to exercise its right to self-determination. During the past few months there has been some movement in the Middle East conflict: the Israeli plan for elections in the occupied territories and President Mubarak's proposal to open up prospects for talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
The suffering of the Lebanese nation must be ended through a political solution. The cease-fire brought about by the Arab League's Committee of Three is an encouraging signal. We support all suitable efforts aimed at national reconciliation in Lebanon and the restoration of the country's full sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence.
In view of the dangers constantly generated by regional conflicts, a far-reaching improvement of the United Nations instruments for coping with those conflicts is needed. The Declaration on the prevention of conflicts, which we helped to draft in the Special Committee on the United Nations Charter and which was unanimously adopted at the forty-third session of the General Assembly, is a step towards that end. We have launched a new initiative designed to facilitate early and comprehensive fact-finding by the United Nations, particularly by the Secretary-General. The efforts of the United Nations and the Secretary-General to resolve conflicts must not fail for want of money.
Underdevelopment in large parts of the world is one of the global challenges of our time. People in all countries are entitled to a life that is worth living. Industrial and developing countries must collaborate to achieve economic development and social justice. The debt crisis can only be resolved through joint action by everyone concerned: the debtor and creditor countries, the Governments and the international financial institutions, as well as the private banks. All creditor countries are now, as before, called upon to frame their national regulations in such a way as to encourage participation by banks in debt relief. That is already the case in our country, without considerable funds from private banks the developing countries will not return to the path of growth.
The initiative of United States Secretary of the Treasury Brady is an important step in solving the debt crisis. At the forefront of the intensified debt strategy is the reduction of debts and interest. Fresh money must be made available. The rescheduling agreements with Mexico and the Philippines are major landmarks in the efforts to solve the debt crisis. The debts of the least-developed countries must be cancelled-, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany has already done so. For years now it has been providing development aid to those countries exclusively in the form of grants.
Many developing countries are carrying out radical and painful reforms in order to reshape their economic structures. They are thereby making a substantial contribution towards the stability of the world economy. These reforms should restore the confidence of domestic and foreign investors.
The prosperity of all countries can be increased most effectively through the free exchange of goods and services. That is why it is so important to make the Uruguay Round a full success. That still calls for considerable exertions and concessions, not least in areas that are sensitive for the industrial nations. All countries must resist the temptations of protectionism. The weakest are always hardest hit by the consequences of protectionism. The basic principles of the new thinking - openness instead of isolation, co-operation instead of confrontation - must also apply to international trade. The Belgrade conference of the Non-Aligned Movement reaffirms this new thinking and reflects the growing awareness of global interdependence.
Today it is a question of reconciling economic and ecological factors. People are increasingly resisting the destruction of the natural sources of life. There is no nation that is not affected, no nation that does not bear responsibility. Global warming, destruction of the ozone layer, desertification, contamination of soil, air and water through pollutants and waste and forest depletion all threaten life on our earth. We have but this one Earth, and it has been entrusted to us. It must remain habitable for all future generations as well.
Mankind's duty to preserve peace includes making peace with nature. The first steps have been taken with the Vienna Convention and the Montreal Protocol, the Convention on hazardous waste and the Convention to combat marine pollution. Those Conventions must now be applied worldwide. They must constantly be supplemented and improved until all known pollutants are covered. The World Climate Convention and measures to save the forests must be vigorously promoted. Protection of tropical rain forests is also a matter for the United Nations. The Organization must pool and co-ordinate the efforts of the international community in the field of environmental protection. Binding limits and levels must be fixed, and agreed deadlines must be met. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany will do its utmost to support all environmental activities of the United Nations, especially the United Nations conference on the environment which this General Assembly is to decide on at this session. This applies also to the international decade for the prevention of natural disasters. The Federal Government has made substantial efforts to protect natural resources. It will contribute to the work of the United Nations the experience of a country that has a strong environmental awareness, high environmental protection standards and advanced scientific and technological know-how.
The industrial nations must make a special contribution through the transfer of ecologically sound technology and through financial support for environmental projects in the developing countries. We must increase the responsibility of the United Nations for environmental matters and develop further its relevant organs, especially the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), widen their powers and, in particular, provide them with more funds.
The nations will achieve a new spirit of coexistence only if they acknowledge and respect each other's cultural achievements and characteristics. The awareness of mutual dependence in questions concerning our survival must be accompanied by unconditional respect for the dignity and achievements of every nation. The worldwide cultural dialogue should preserve the cultural identity of all nations. This calls for exchange on equal terms through mutual give-and-take.
The prestige of the United Nations increases with the new spirit of coexistence and the awareness of the need for a global domestic policy. This is not least a consequence of the growing understanding between West and East. The turn of the tide in international relations will also enable the United Nations to play the role its founders intended it to have, after the terrible experiences of the Second World War.
We can no longer afford confrontation and national egoism, as our extinction would be the penalty. The United Nations must evolve into a universal community of States and peoples in which everyone can express his views freely and openly, in which the rights of the stronger do not prevail. To all individuals and nations, the United Nations is already a symbol of a new international order founded on human rights and self-determination, on dialogue and co-operation. We are called upon to create peace between individuals, between nations. We are called upon to create peace between man and nature. Inalienable human rights and the right of nations to self-determination must form the bedrock of our actions.


It is a great honour for me to be addressing the Assembly today. It is my pleasant task, Mr. President, to offer you Seychelles' congratulations on your election, which is proof of the confidence all our delegations have in you. In selecting you, the General Assembly of the United Nations is paying a special tribute to Nigeria and, moreover, to Africa. I would also like to pay a tribute to the Secretary-General for his devotion to his task and his tireless efforts in the service of peace and development.
From its beginnings, the United Nations has played an essential role. Without dwelling on the results of its activities, we know that the United Nations has remained the only place where peaceful solutions have been sought ceaselessly. This aspiration and this perseverance alone proves that the United Nations is a symbol of all that is best in the international community. At its inception, the United Nations numbered only 50 States today, more than 40 years later, that number has more than tripled. Nevertheless, just as it did in the earliest days of its existence, the United Nations needs support  it needs a strengthening of that agreement to co-operate by all the States which share the legitimacy of its ideals. The preamble of its Charter, with the words ,We the people of the United Nations ... ,, calls for just this attitude of mutual understanding.
Because of co-operation by the international community, the world we see before us is one which is completely different from anything humanity experienced 50 and 100 years ago and more. In a world where coin tries are becoming more and more interdependent with every passing year, all the problems we face become universal ones.
The quest the United Nations has led so arduously under the banner of understanding, detente and negotiating has beyond a doubt our enthusiasm and our energies towards a more just and balanced world. However, the task is not complete in the domains of peace and disarmament, indebtedness and famine and the environment and its protection.
We must therefore adopt a positive strategy and as concrete resolutions as possible to meet the dangers which, unfortunately, are more than a mere threat. We can now affirm that what brings us closer together is much greater than what divides us. Over the past year the peoples of the world have made tireless efforts to defend peace and promote development. We can appreciate the positive results achieved through these efforts, and we are aware of the many achievements that have been made possible because of the United Nations. The climate of detente and peace must now be strengthened in all parts of the world, including the Indian Ocean region. It is in this spirit that we wish to express our hopes that military and nuclear arsenals will soon be dismantled. To do this it is imperative that all countries concerned, coastal or non-coastal, make the necessary efforts to bring about an early meeting of the International Conference on the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace. We must all contribute to the achievement of the ultimate objective, that is to say, the elimination of nuclear weapons and, ultimately, total disarmament.
All those who have begun to work to this end are to be thanked, as long as their activities are not illusory and the process is genuinely activated. Because what is at stake here is not just ethics or aesthetics but political issues in the noblest sense of the word.
Indeed, how can we conceive of economic recovery on a global scale if it is to be translated into the destruction of the environment, natural resources and ecosystems, which are so fragile? We are quite rightly worried about the damage that is being inflicted more and more upon our planet and, about the threats to our future, whether it be a matter of the global warming, desertification, deforestation, or pollution of the waters or of the atmosphere or the transboundary movements of toxic wastes, the problems of the environment can be solved only at the world level. That is why considerable progress has been made very quickly in achieving international agreement on these questions in order to protect our planet for future generations, for the truth is that we live in an interdependent world. The problems of the environment in one country have immediate ramifications in neighbouring countries, and ultimately throughout the world. It is a problem common to us all, one that knows no political or ideological frontiers. We must act in concert.
Never has man been so powerful - thanks to scientific and technological advances. Today, it is possible for him to correct the devastating errors of the past to use his knowledge for the sake of the environment; to try new methods in order to protect what is roost precious to us. We must act with determination and translate our good intentions into deeds. We must make concrete proposals and ensure that they are implemented.
lb this end, the Seychelles, whose survival depends very largely on its maritime environment, is justifiably worried about the consequences of climatic changes resulting from global ecological imbalance. We cannot remain indifferent to such a phenomenon, particularly since two thirds of our archipelago comprises atolls threatened with submersion if the sea-level continues to rise at its present rate.
We therefore welcome the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone layer and find it very reassuring that several countries have shown themselves ready to undertake a gradual elimination of destructive substances.
I agree that there can be no immediate response or magic solution to the tragedy of today, the steady worsening of our environment. But we must shoulder our responsibilities and take appropriate action. Here again, commitments and mutual concessions are necessary and they must be brought about at an early date.  History is in constant movement urging humanity to acquire new machinery for its own protection and survival. Machinery already exists for international co-operation thanks to which a number of important natural sites have been saved from annihilation. I am referring to the Convention on the world heritage. It is within the framework of this Convention that the Republic of Seychelles gave as a gift to humanity one of its islands, Aldabra. Since 19 November 1982, this jewel of nature has been a universal nature and peace conservation site. We believe that within the framework of this Convention, more sites, particularly those of an ecological nature, could be safeguarded and protected for future generations.
Within this context, we support the proposal to levy an international tax on pollution. The revenue thus obtained could be used for the implementation of ecological preservation programmes or programmes for restoring damaged ecosystems. This revenue would also go to finance environmental protection programmes of developing countries, the vast majority of which today are playing a major role in the preservation of our planet. Not only do they receive practically nothing in return, but the effects of the external debt have turned them into net exporters of capital. This new tax would help restore the flow of credit and finance development activities that could improve conditions of life.
There is another environmental problem, one that is even more disastrous and more urgent - that of toxic waste dumped clandestinely on the high seas. Toxic substances have already been dumped secretly in the waters of the south-west pact of the Indian Ocean near our coast. After a long time now zones in the south of the Pacific as well as in the Caribbean have been used for this purpose. Now these zones are saturated and the multinationals have endeavoured to find new sites in the developing countries, particularly in Africa, for the dumping of toxic materials. Small island States in particular have little means of countering this problem.
Let me take the case of my own country. Seychelles has a hundred or so islands and an exclusive economic zone of 1 million square kilometres. Members will understand that to patrol the territory is neither easy nor indeed possible. On the other hand, we have neither the means nor the necessary resources to exercise our jurisdiction over this vast tract of ocean. How then can prevent a ship from dumping its toxic waste in our waters or on one of our more remote islands? What kind of action can be taken in such circumstances?
The last summit meeting of the Non-Aligned Countries, held in Belgrade, ended with an appeal to States to adopt effective measures, including conventions and other appropriate juridical instruments, to interdict the dumping of toxic and other dangerous wastes in the territory of third-world countries. It was also proposed that developed countries should adopt strict administrative and legal measures which would prohibit the export of toxic waste to developing countries. My country, in its turn, urges here solidarity and co-operation on the part of the international community to see that these proposals are translated into deeds.
Furthermore, industrialized countries must understand that their energy consumption is the greatest cause of pollution of the biosphere. The use of those kinds of energy sources in developing countries is undesirable. The technologies of the industrialized countries are often either inappropriate or not easily adapted to the social and economic situation of developing countries. Those countries need adapted technologies - non-polluting technologies - as well as appropriate technologies for the preservation and promotion of the environment.
What we want here is not complacency or complicity but rather solidarity, which falls outside any polemical context. We want to re-examine the terms of the problem in favour of man and his environment within the framework of the economic stakes. We must, however, concede that because of our lack of historical vigilance we are witnessing today an alarming world ecological intolerance. We see before our very eyes an ineluctable widening of the gap between the growth of the industrialized world and the economic prospects of the developing countries: national debt, stagnation of and investment, a drop in commodity prices, and so forth.
The environment can be protected only if hunger and poverty are eliminated, A world in which poverty is endemic is likely to suffer ecological disasters. Debt-servicing and the drop in commodity prices have obliged many developing countries to over-exploit their natural resources to maintain their export earnings. Debts they cannot pay have led those countries, which depend above all on the export of commodities, to over-exploit their soil, and as a result they have turned arable land into desert. It is essential to find solutions to alleviate the debt burden that represent a more equitable distribution of responsibilities between creditor and debtor countries.
The pursuit of an environmental policy compatible with the objectives of lasting development is practical only within the framework of a rationale economic order, because the present system perpetuates underdevelopment. It constitutes the principal source of pollution. It pollutes through hunger and the exploitation of the weakest.
This is not the time for utopian writings, complete with safaris and coconut trees, nor for chroniclers who write so prettily of the flowers of culture, of poverty. There must be solidarity - it is more than ever necessary - because poverty is not inevitable, nor is it a genetic trait. Such solidarity must be demonstrated above all in the international economy. The poorest countries must benefit in particular from the support of the international community. The flow of financial resources to developing countries must be increased substantially. Multilateral organizations in particular must contribute. Their help is needed more than ever before.
It is therefore indispensable that the financial resources made available to developing countries be adequate to enable them to pursue a sound economic policy, and there must also be respect for the priorities of the beneficiary countries rather than those at the donor countries. We must put an end to the era of ecological negligence if we want to prevent the world from being stripped of its forests and marine life and to avoid the danger of the rising sea level and continuous climatic fluctuations. The sources of the deterioration of the environment must be identified, and strategies requiring lasting action must be adopted.
If those complex problems are to be dealt with, it is imperative that the international community as a whole - including scientists. Governments and non-governmental organizations - take part in the process of eliminating those scourges that impede the harmonious and integrated concerted management of the world heritage of nature that is our environment. The protection of the environment should be considered an integral part of the development process.
If we wish to promote international co-operation that will be effective in the protection of the environment, we must reach agreement on the concept of lasting development. This concept should include satisfying the fundamental needs of all people, stable economic growth, and, above all accelerated development for the developing countries and an improvement in the quality of life.
In this regard I hope that the 1992 Conference will include on its agenda problems relating to the environment within the context of the new realities of economic and social development. Experts from more than 50 countries are already examining the concrete problems relating to an ecological renascence. We share the conviction that wisdom demands that we work together intensively and with a genuine commitment to sharing our global responsibilities if we are to preserve the dignity of mankind.


It is profoundly symbolic that Africa is presiding over the General Assembly. On one hand, it heralds the imminent culmination of the lengthy process of decolonisation and, on the other, it reaffirms our belief in the successful abolishment of apartheid. In that struggle, the Ambassador of Nigeria, Mr. Joseph Garba, has played a prominent role as Chairman of the Committee concerned.
The fact that Latin America preceded Africa in the presidency of the highest international political forum is also of especial significance since the climate of detente, so insistently demanded by the South, began to emerge during its presidency. For the first time in this century and in the era of technological dominance, we have a situation in which the struggle for the attainment of peace and justice within nations makes understanding between the super-Powers possible.
The reappraisal o£ multilateralism in an ideologically relaxed international environment will open the way to the consolidation of this new process of detente. Inevitably and inexorably, reality is testing the principles that led to the costly military alliances and the forced division of the world into zones of influence.
Formulas of understanding and co-operation, unforeseeable only five years ago, are now emerging. This is the beginning of a global strategic re-alignment, which is replacing the framework that has prevailed during the last four decades.
This new scene shows complex and encouraging signs. The new dynamics of co-operation among States incorporates the diverse non-military issues that are currently threatening the peace. Hence we see an increasing interdependence between national, regional and global factors. However, the expected benefits of a progressively open world are neither automatic nor balanced. The developing countries are faced with the dual risk of marginalization and new asymmetries. Therefore, we reaffirm that underdevelopment constitutes one of the main threats to international peace. The steady increase of poverty, the impossibility of reactivating growth, the political impossibility of carrying out programmes of economic structural adjustment, terrorism, and the illegal trafficking in drugs are, among others, negative social factors that point dramatically to our critical position in the new global strategy.
The international community must face these problems resolutely in order to ensure peace. The positive effects which the international transformation is having in certain regions cannot serve as an excuse for the marginalization of developing countries. We therefore are faced with the challenge of giving positive meaning to the concept of interdependence in order to take advantage of the capacity of developing countries to participate in the spirit and rhythm of this global transformation, taking into account the direct relationship between political, economic, security and development factors.
The fundamental features of Latin America today are its increasing political maturity and the incidence of elements whose interaction threatens our security and growth. In this context, we are trying to assert ourselves in order to ensure our defence and the promotion of the democratic system, the strengthening of the value of multilateralism and collective action. Thus we place emphasis on the possibility of our tackling action, avoiding confrontation, but defining a genuine Latin American solution for Latin American problems, thereby avoiding the trend towards unilateralism.
Gradually, Latin America has set in motion various efforts at political co-operation aimed at implementing concrete proposals relating to the security of the hemisphere, the consolidation of democracy, the maintenance of peace, and the problems of international trade and the foreign debt. Another aspect of regional co-ordination efforts is expressed in a dialogue with other States or groups of States. Among these efforts, the Group of Bight represents an imaginative alternative in the new international context, promoting as it does a policy of peace and democracy that demands that there be international understanding and solidarity.
May I now emphasize the issue of the defence of democracy. This is a regional priority and a factor of Latin American unity. In our region we speak of the defence of democracy, because it is constantly threatened, despite the fact that our people have overwhelmingly opted for freedom. Our experience demonstrates that the political and social effects of the severe and prolonged crisis, which has stultified development and turned the region into an exporter of capital, constitutes the fundamental threat to democracy. Democracy alone does not guarantee economic growth nor does economic growth automatically lead to democracy. International solidarity and political will are needed in order to assure ourselves of both bread and liberty.
In Latin America we continue to observe the peace-making process in Central America with fraternal interest. Peru maintains its willingness to support this peace process within the terms of the philosophy that inspired the creation of the Contadora and Support Groups. Now that an agreement between the Central American countries has been reached at the highest level, nothing should impede compliance with Esquipulas II and Costa del Sol.
We consider it highly positive that the United Nations has taken the important step of supervising the electoral process in Nicaragua and of establishing the United Nations Observer Group in Central America - a multilateral presence compatible with national sovereignty. The stalemate over the question of the Malvinas Islands had to be ended. Dialogue is indispensable, and we are glad the parties have resumed this course. The evolution of world affairs has confirmed the validity of international principles that are part of an ever-changing legal reality that is now almost
universal: the principles of non-intervention, self determination, the peaceful settlement of disputes and respect for treaties as the basis for peaceful coexistence.
In this new era of international detente, the presence of foreign troops in Afghanistan has ended. We hope for national reconciliation that will lead to an independent and non-aligned Afghanistan in the near future.
With the implementation of the tripartite agreements between Angola, South Africa and Cuba, southern Africa has entered a new era of peace. It is finally laying the foundations for the historic plan for the independence of Namibia under the supervision of the United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG), which was established more than a decade ago.
The fall of the last stronghold of colonialism in Africa and the speedy entry of Namibia into the society of free nations heralds the end of the infamous crime of apartheid. Only the Pretoria regime remains. The international community must continue to exert pressure to bring it to end its international rebelliousness.
Greater efforts are required to resolve sources of tension that have long been under consideration by the United Nations, such as the Middle East and others. Although no immediate solution is in sight, new and positive developments have emerged: the proclamation of the independent Palestinian State on the basis of resolution 181 (II) of 1947, the renunciation of terrorism by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the acceptance of the existence of Israel by those who had denied it.
We call upon the parties finally to agree to the convening of an international conference on the Middle East under United Nations auspices and with its participation. This must lead to peace for all the States of the region within secure and internationally recognized borders, taking into account Israel's right to exist as a State, and restitution of the Palestinian people's right to self-determination and independence.
We are following with interest the prospects for the situation in Kampuchea arising from regional agreements and the withdrawal of foreign troops carried out in accordance with resolution 43/19.
Peace-keeping has had a special evolution. Peru has contributed to, and continues to participate actively in, operations directed to support it. We were therefore gratified to learn that the United Nations peace-keeping forces had been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
In summary, there are reasons for cautious optimism in evaluating the international situation. The United Nations has finally broken free of the inertia imposed on it by the cold war and the aftermath of the confrontation between ideological power blocs. At the same time, the international legal order and respect for its principles and institutions are being enhanced. It is a long time since they suffered the arrogant challenges of power politics. None the less, grave non-military threats to security persist, and they constitute the origin of new global problems that we will be able to tackle successfully only through collective action and co-operation within the United Nations.
In this context, the implementation of democratic processes to channel the will of the people is the indispensable basis for the decolonisation process and the solution of conflicts. Namibia, Western Sahara and Central America, are clear examples of the use of democratic procedures under the supervision of the United Nations.
Historically, democratic values have proven fundamental in the promotion of human rights as well as in the maintenance of the international legal order and the right of peoples freely to determine their own destiny. Democratic processes are a factor of peace. Therefore it is indispensable to apply the essence of democracy to international relations. Unfortunately, the instability and asymmetry of the international economic order undermine this process by denying the majority of the people equitable access to its benefits and participation in the decision-making process on issues of global concern on which their own survival often depends.
Earlier I mentioned the direct relationship between democracy and development as fundamental elements of security and its consequences for the future position of the underdeveloped areas in the new strategic world scheme, in Latin America we understand security as a comprehensive concept. In other regions also, common criteria on national, regional and collective security are the answer to the challenges posed by the new nature of traditional unilateralism. In essence this is the goal of all the multilateral strategies being implemented to solve current conflicts.
In addition to choosing an option in favour of nuclear disarmament, my country has taken an initiative in the field of conventional armaments on a regional scale. Peru has proposed substantial reductions of armament expenditures, as well as confidence-building measures. We achieved this by notching words with deeds. We suspended important military purchases and also promoted, as we still do, frequent contacts between military authorities as part of our neighbourly relations.
The projected convening of the fourth Review Conference of the Treaty for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Arms, in 1990, will constitute a corner-stone in the sphere of nuclear disarmament. Peru is ready to play a constructive role in its capacity as a developing country and a party to the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which instituted the first nuclear-weapon-free zone, thus making an article of faith of the renunciation of those weapons. We consider it essential that that Treaty be observed universally and definitively.
We are deeply concerned by the continuation of dangerous nuclear tests because of the ecological damage they represent. We are gratified that our initiative for their complete and definitive prohibition has prospered.
While the multilateral solution of regional conflicts of the post-war period continues, new global threats have emerged, demanding collective and immediate action.
At this session, the General Assembly has on its agenda the question of international terrorism. In addition to categorical condemnation of this phenomenon, stronger legal commitments must be made within the framework of the United Nations, drawing a clear line separating States from such activities no matter where or by whom they are perpetrated. We are concerned and disappointed that lack of knowledge of real situations leads democratic societies to apologize for crime and its proselytization on their territory. The agents of terror and violence shamelessly present themselves as victims in the name of human rights they violate daily. In Peru this insane violence has cut short the lives of thousands of people, including international experts and co-operation specialists - the true missionaries in the struggle against poverty in our country.
Forty-two years ago, during the first session of the General Assembly, Peru demanded concerted action by the international community to fight drug trafficking. In keeping with that farsightedness, we repeat that demand today. There is no need for us to stress the danger that this scourge represents for mankind. Without exaggeration we can state that the next world war will be one waged against drugs, its destructive effects on health and its corrupting impact on institutions.
Our youth, which should guarantee the continuity of our values, is the very first target of this social scourge. The security of our countries and of international society as a whole demands responsibility on the part of all. the struggle for its elimination.
We Peruvians do not shirk our responsibilities. We devote a substantial part of our scarce resources to fighting drug trafficking, despite the economic crisis that we are enduring.
However, the fight against drug trafficking must be viewed as a process with interdependent phases, starting with the growing of the cocoa leaf crop. From ancient times our peasants have dedicated themselves to this agricultural activity, on a reduced scale and only for legitimate purposes. Today, this activity has acquired an economic significance upon which tens of thousands of peasants depend. If we were to deprive them of it we would be promoting a social problem of hunger and protest which might lead to subversion and the relocation of illegal crops. Therefore, genuine solutions must be found that take into account political and social, as well as environmental, issues.
That is why we cannot speak about solutions based upon eradication but, rather, about crop substitution on the basis of international agreements of preferential treatment for commodities and the improvement of our transportation infrastructures in order to facilitate access of such commodities to markets at competitive prices.
The growing link between terrorism and illegal drug trafficking, with the latter financing the former in exchange for gangster-like protection, is now a proved practice. This association brings out the worst in both individual criminal activities. The ethics of those who claim to be defenders of a supposedly superior system are abdicated and negate the principles of equality, social justice and liberty are negated, as well as the human rights of the Peruvian people, which are systematically being violated by those who are colluding in this sinister alliance.
Control of the trade in the chemical inputs for drug manufacturing, the seizure of property and money derived from drug trafficking, and cooperation against the laundering of the illicit profits from it. together with the urgent implementation of a system for the promotion of prices and access to markets of goods to substitute for illegal drug crops, would and should complement the International Convention against illicit trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances and thus become a message of hope for our people.
The boldest proposals put forward so far would seem to lead to the solution of the global problem I have outlined - namely, the partial conversion of the debt into resources to be used to fight drug trafficking, the legal seizure of all coca-leaf production, and, finally, the decriminalisation of consumption. These Proposals have not yet been considered in depth, but - and this is important - they go beyond the stage of mutual accusations between producing and consuming countries and introduce a positive dialogue that, despite differences of views, opinions and objectives, agrees on the higher goal* putting an end to this scourge.
The decisions to be taken should be agreed by the Heads of State of the countries involved in this process. President Bush, in a speech delivered on 5 September last, extended the invitation. Bolivia, Colombia and Peru, the front-line States, have accepted this invitation and are actively working on co-ordinating the pertinent agenda and programme. Should we, however, limit Participation to the United States on the side of consumers? Should we not extend it to other countries which may potentially create the demand?
We know that when drug traffickers find difficulties in obtaining access to the market they promptly find an alternative. That is why it would be a disservice to exclude from this dialogue the Heads of State of other countries that represent alternative potential markets.
Global concern about the deterioration of the environment today constitutes one of the priorities of the international community. Peru reaffirms the-sovereign right of States over their natural resources and the rational use of those resources. Nevertheless, we consider it indispensable to stress the need to preserve the right to development as an inherent part of collective well-being. That requires increased international co-operation to guarantee the developing countries access to new environmentally sound technologies.
There is a need to establish a new category in international relations, a new field of international political co-operation, in order to neutralize these global scourges from whose effects no State can remain exempt since they constitute a new form of transnational phenomenon in international relations. In this category are terrorism, illegal drug trafficking, the preservation of the environment and the malfunctioning of the economic and social system manifested in hunger, absolute poverty, the external debt problem and the demographic explosion.
Despite the new level of dialogue attained by the super-Powers, we continue to be unprepared in the midst of a crisis of solidarity and co-operation within an international society that resembles a body devoid of defence mechanisms or a capacity to respond. Hence, we must have recourse to all the potentials of multilateralism.
In contrast to the greater clarity that reigns over political issues, short-sightedness remains in international economic relations, as well as the persistent contradiction of unjust and unequal structures, which makes development a frustrating challenge.
Therefore. the international political scene must find its logical counterpart in the gradual correction of the deficiencies in the unfair international economic structure within an interrelated approach that takes into account money, trade and finance. To that end we, the developing countries, have renewed our cogent to act collectively in order to achieve the restructuring of the international economic system. If these strategies are not to become an irony in the light of the expansion of absolute poverty, the failure to meet targets, the reverse flows of financial resources and the unilateral and indiscriminate application of macroeconomic policies, there must be collective and democratic managed of global interdependence.
We are increasing aware that we live in an interdependent world, that mankind is one and that it shares and experiences a global reality, without impinging on national identities, our people must act positively and flexibly, building bridges to understanding and conciliation that will bring together all their efforts and energies in the construction of a more humane and just world where only peace, together with social justice, will reign.


May I begin by congratulating you. Sir, on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-fourth session. Your wide experience in the United Nations makes you especially qualified to guide the Assembly and its deliberations. You have my best wishes for the demanding task that lies ahead of you. May I also express my thanks to the outgoing President, Mr. Dante Caputo, who so ably fulfilled his role on behalf of the Assembly. It gives me particular pleasure to pay tribute to the Secretary-General. We owe a great deal to his authority and leadership.
As we are assembled here for the annual general debate, every Member state needs to reflect on certain fundamental questions. Is the United Nations doing everything possible in order to meet its challenges? Are we making progress? Can we say that the United Nations enters the last decade of this century with determination and justified self-confidence? Is my own country doing everything it can in order to help the world Organization? The answers to these questions must be sought in the actual work of the Organization and of its Member States. For my part, I shall try to emphasize some of the challenges we in Finland regard as particularly imports at the present time. It seems to us that the main challenges can be expressed in two words -insecurity and poverty. Both produce fear  d suffering. Neither can be dealt with by any single remedy.
The United Nations was created first and foremost in order to maintain international peace and security. In this respect, the past year represents a mixture of success and disappointment. We are encouraged by the high-level dialogues that have continued between the major Powers. we have witnessed with satisfaction such concrete achievements as the continuing progress in the verified dismantling and destruction of American and Soviet intermediate-range nuclear weapons. As one of the participating States in the process of the Conference on Security and cooperation in Europe, Finland follow, closely and with ,much hope the new efforts to achieve substantive conventional disarmament in Europe.
At the same time we are concerned about the violence that has erupted and continues in many parts of the world. Most of the underlying problem are already on the agenda of the General Assembly, and we shall express our views on them in due course. Now I want to speak about the global challenges. As regards the process of disarmament on the global level our hopes in Finland are fastened particularly on the preparation of a chemical weapons convention. The political will is there, as was demonstrated again at the conferences held in Paris and in Canberra this year. During this year, as before, Finnish experts have continued their research in order to help to develop appropriate methods that could meet the complex verification requirements  global and comprehensive chemical weapons convention. We expect progress from the protracted negotiations with growing impatience. We welcome the impetus recently given them in the bilateral talks between the United States and the Soviet Union.
Security on the global level must take into account other factors in addition to armaments and military threats. Security requires confidence in the future. Such confidence must be felt both by Governments and by their peoples. Only a representative Government that respects human rights and that therefore enjoys the confidence of its own people can face the future with a sense of security and successfully maintain stable relations with other Governments. Some dramatic - in fact, tragic - events have recently illustrated the importance of respect for human rights. We hope that lessons have been learned.
Confidence in the future also requires that the other global challenge, that of poverty, be overcome. The sufferings of poverty may not be in evidence everywhere, but the challenge requires global co-operation for development. The Assembly will meet next year in a special session devoted to international economic co-operation. Soon thereafter a new international development strategy for the 1990s should be adopted. A successful special session and a new and realistic strategy should help to bring about a new spirit of international economic co-operation.
In the process of preparing both the development strategy and the special session emphasis should be on the development of human resources in all forms, including the recognition of a well-functioning private sector in balance with an effective public sector. In that context funding generated by national and international sources should be well co-ordinated. The necessary investments in developing countries require increasing domestic and external financing.
The debt overhang has resulted in the transfer of resources from developing countries, which exceeded $US 50 billion last year, a trend that should be reversed. This requires that a political solution, including a functioning debt strategy, be found. The debt overhang cannot be overcome by the international community at the upcoming special session of the General Assembly and in the new international development strategy. It would be important for the efforts to reverse the transfer of resources from the developing countries if the target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product as development-and transfer were generally reached. For its part, Finland will this year reach that target set by the General Assembly.
The structure of the United Nations in the economic and social fields should respond to the tasks to be specified in the strategy for the 1990s, thus -consolidating the role of the world Organization. The Finnish Government finds that the Secretary-General has a major catalytic role to play in putting forward concrete proposals to improve the Organization's effectiveness in those fields. That would also help Governments in agreeing on the areas where they are to concentrate the activities of the United Nations in the economic and social fields. Today I wish to emphasize two issues that must, in my opinion, have a Prominent place in this respect. Development cannot be sustainable if the world population continues to grow at its present rate. Development cannot be sustainable if the natural resources of the Earth continue to be depleted at the present rate. There is a growing awareness of such problems in all parts of the world. That awareness is more and more strongly reflected in the work of the United Nations, it has prompted a number of positive measures. More is needed.
According to recent United Nations estimates the world population could stabilize in the twenty-first century at the level of 10 to 11 billion persons. An early stabilisation of population growth would, of course, facilitate the fight against poverty. To reach that goal, determined population policies, translated into national population plans as spelled out in the World Population Plan of Action, should be pursued vigorously.
With regard to the protection of the environment, no problem has lately become
so apparent and widely recognized as the problem of climate change. Both industrialized and developing countries are directly affected by the depletion of the ozone layer through increasing emissions of carbon dioxides, which produce the so-called greenhouse effect in the climate of the Earth, and by the increasing presence of substances in the atmosphere that cause acid rain and direct dangers to health.
It is therefore hardly a surprise that we have witnessed increasing international activity in this field. Several initiatives have been taken to launch concerted international action to combat atmospheric pollution in all its aspects, including climatic change. It is our view that effective strategies and policies should be developed by the international community as soon as possible in all fields relating to environment. That is a major undertaking that requires consolidated effort by the General Assembly and by the relevant United Nations specialized and other agencies. Environmental problems have a universal character. Any new activities should be streamlined with already ongoing action and well-established treaty-making procedures. The General Assembly must play a pivotal role in that effort.
Five months ago Finland hosted a Conference of the Parties to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer aid the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Those instruments, of 1985 and 1987 respectively, have this year already been found inadequate in light of the latest advances in knowledge. At the Conference the representatives of the more than 80 States present agreed unanimously to the Helsinki Declaration on the Protection of  the Ozone Layer, which contains an ambitious undertaking to phase out completely the use of ozone-depleting chlorofluorocarbons by the year 2000, or sooner if possible, and to phase out other ozone-depleting substances as soon as possible. We expect that undertaking to be converted into a legally binding decision at next year's meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. Appropriate measures should also be undertaken to make environmentally sound substitutes widely available to developing countries as soon as possible.
In the field of environment protection the problems that are typical in the industrialized countries are often also found in the big urban centres of the developing countries. The problems that are now typical in many developing countries - such as soil erosion and the destruction of forests - illustrate mistakes already committed by earlier generations, most of all in Europe. We can therefore all learn from each other. There is information available about the environment and its protection, and about earlier mistakes. The available knowledge needs to be applied and converted into practical programmes, not only on the level of global strategies, but also on the level of regional, national and local development.
In our own development co-operation programmes, we in Finland have emphasized such activities as deforestation, where we feel that we have some experience and expertise. We see deforestation as urgent in order to help stop soil erosion, counteract the greenhouse effect and counterbalance the continued cutting of trees for fuel and for other immediate human needs. In this respect, the development of new and renewable soirees of energy is of crucial importance.
On a broader scale, we look forward to the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. We see it as representing probably the most important joint effort required of mankind during the remaining part of this century. This session of the General Assembly is called upon to take important decisions for the preparation of the Conference. In that connection, as in all our activities to face up to environmental problems, we in Finland will strongly emphasize the need to support the developing countries in order to ensure that their development is environmentally sustainable.
A large part of the burden, particularly for financing research and the introduction of new environmentally sound technologies, will have to be borne by the industrialized countries. We accept our part of this burden, knowing of course that all states will have to share in the efforts according to their capabilities. Since concern for the environment is global, this concern should in our opinion give a further incentive to all States without exception to involve themselves
actively in international co-operation for environmentally sound and sustainable development. We also think that the time is ripe for the preparation of structural reforms making the United Nations Organization more responsive to the problems of protecting the environment. My Government has an open mind regarding the various ideas that have been discussed. We would find it natural for this Assembly to take decisions ensuring environmental Questions a permanent and prominent place in the structure of the Organization.
One of the activities of the United Nations which has rightly gained prominence during this year is peace-keeping. At the present time, Finland is the biggest contributor of personnel to the United Nations peace-keeping forces. Their total strength is close to 15,000, and the number of Finnish personnel is now almost 2,000. It is therefore with particular satisfaction that we in Finland share the pride felt in this house over the latest Nobel Peace Prize, which was awarded to the United Nations peace-keeping forces. In co-operation with the other Nordic countries, Finland has this year taken steps to share with other interested States its experiences concerning the training and preparation of national contingents for peace-keeping tasks.
We are also satisfied at the reactivation of the United Nations Special Committee on Peace-keeping Operations. The accumulated experiences in this field have already grown to such an extent that it is high time indeed to make a thorough review of all practical proposals that may help to strengthen the role of the United Nations in peace-keeping.
In this connection, I wish to emphasize the importance of finding a lasting solution to the financial difficulties that still affect current peace-keeping operations, thus indirectly undermining the financial basis of the whole Organization. The idea of having sufficient financial reserves for peacemaking and peace-keeping, particularly for the start-up phase of operations, which my   predecessor put forward in his address to the General Assembly last year, has received support in a number of Quarters. I note in particular that the Secretary-General, in his own report to the General Assembly, has referred to the possibility of establishing a special reserve fund for peace-keeping, to be supported by all Member States. We hope that this idea can soon be followed up in practice with full respect for the principle of collective responsibility. The first condition, in our view, is that Member states should accept the principle of financing all operations without exception through assessed contributions and that they should pay all their assessed contributions in full and on time.
The principal factor explaining the recent growth in the participation of Finnish personnel in United Nations peace-keeping is the deployment of an enlarged battalion within the United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG) in Namibia. A sizable number of volunteer soldiers has thus been added to the two Finnish battalions and smaller units already serving in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Namibia is a major test for the United Nations. The beginnings of the UOTAG operations to implement Security Council resolution 435 on the independence of Namibia were unexpectedly rough and difficult. It is still too early to draw conclusions from the whole process of transition to independence, but we believe that the programme has been brought back on track thanks to the persistent efforts of the Secretary-General and the competent performance of the UNTAG personnel. Of course, many problems still remain to be solved and call for our unrelenting attention. We are looking forward with confidence to the moment when we can welcome independent Namibia into our midst as a Member State of the United Nations. For Finland, Namibia will be a major partner in our development co-operation.  The situation in the Middle East continues to pose a persistent threat to international security. The dangers of the absence of peace in the area are demonstrated almost daily. Repressive measures continue in the territories illegally occupied by Israel. The cycle of violence has not been broken. The
eking turmoil in Lebanon gives cause for deep concern. There must be a way to or the suffering of the Lebanese people by the common endeavours of the Lebanese themselves, the Arab League and the international community.
It is pressingly urgent that the way should be prepared towards an international peace conference and, further, to a comprehensive settlement in the Middle East. There is an almost universal recognition of the basic principles for a settlement. The right of all States in the region to live within secure and recognized boundaries, as well as the right of the Palestinians to national determination, should be recognised. Democratic elections in the occupied territories could facilitate this process. If such elections are properly mentored and take place within the framework of a structured effort, they could provide a link in a process leading to a comprehensive settlement. The momentum for achieving a solution to this long-standing conflict will be lost unless all possible avenues are pursued vigorously and with an open mind. In this respect, the proposals made by President Mubarak of Egypt are welcome and merit serious consideration.
The United Nations has manifestly demonstrated its relevance and strengthened its role as a forum for co-ordinated international action. Yet the world Organization and its member States can do more. Serious global problems call for urgent global solutions. Only a re-invigorated United Nations can answer the challenges the world will inevitably face in the 1990s and beyond. Let us unite our forces to make the United Nations capable of meeting those challenges.