May I at
the outset congratulate President Freitas do Amaral of
Portugal on his well-deserved election to the presidency of
the fiftieth session of the General Assembly of the United
Nations and assure him of the full cooperation of the
delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran at this
important session, which coincides with the fiftieth
anniversary of the United Nations.
Less than a month from today, Members of the
Organization will assemble in this very Hall to celebrate
a half-century of operation of the United Nations. Fifty
years ago, when the bitter events and experience of the
Second World War were omnipresent, the original
Members decided to establish an organization “determined
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”.
They signed the Charter of the United Nations, the result
of two months of negotiations and compromise among the
participants at the San Francisco Conference, which was
to serve as the framework and the guide to prevent war
and promote the economic and social advancement of all
nations, large and small.
However, it is generally acknowledged that shortly
after the establishment of the Organization, the spirit of
cooperation and friendship gave way to bloc politics and
rivalry, which led to the cold war and effectively
prevented the achievement of the objectives enshrined in
the Charter. It would not be excessive to point to the
antipathy between the two blocs as the principal cause of
wars, underdevelopment of the third world, suppression of
liberation struggles of nations under foreign domination,
and interference in the internal affairs of others. It was
this mentality, prevalent in the bipolar world, which in
effect denied the Organization the opportunity to fulfil its
obligations completely, and which circumscribed the
extent of participation by Member States in the
decision-making process and brought about the dominance
of a few countries.
After 50 years of turbulence, the United Nations is
now in one of its most sensitive periods. Although many
problems and obstacles of the past no longer exist, a new
set of challenges have appeared, each of which has taken
the credibility, efficiency, relevance and ability of the
Organization to task, and which provide opportunities and
responsibilities to bring into conformity the modus
operandi of international relations in general and the
Organization itself in particular, with the purposes and
principles of the Charter.
Today the United Nations faces these challenges and
opportunities at a time when it remains the only truly
universal organization. This universality of the
Organization can naturally put tremendous resources at its
disposal to facilitate the achievement of the principles and
25

objectives of the United Nations Charter, particularly the
maintenance of international peace and security, the
promotion of economic and social development, justice and
mutual cooperation, and place it in a better position to deal
with emerging challenges in a more efficient and
distinguished fashion.
What should be of the utmost importance to the
Organization is the extent to which Member States
participate in its decision-making process. In fact, if we
define and assess the universality of the Organization in
terms of the wide participation by Member States in its
decision-making process, and not merely in terms of the
number of its Member States, and direct all our efforts to
strengthening such universality, we will contribute
tremendously to enhancing the credibility, authority and
ability of the Organization. In other words, when public
participation of all Members as sovereign States is
guaranteed in decisions of the Organization and their
implementation, then the possibility of the exerting of
undue influence and dominance by a few States to shape
the approach of the Organization vis-à-vis international
issues according to the limited confines of their own
national interests diminishes to a large extent.
Regrettably, even in the current international
environment, certain Members continue to adopt unilateral
actions contrary to the provisions of the Charter, and
thereby exhibit an absence, for their part, of the spirit of
international cooperation.
The arrogant approach and attitude of the Government
of the United States of America towards the international
community, and the unsuccessful attempts of the American
foreign policy establishment to exploit issues of global
concern, such as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction, to advance an extraneous and
illegitimate agenda represent a most vivid and indeed
dangerous manifestation of such unlawful unilateral
measures.
The United States Secretary of State must put to rest
the illusion that his Government can become both the judge
and the policeman of the global community. Nor should he
expect others to follow American pressures against
independent States brought to bear with the sole objective
of pleasing Zionist pressure groups even at the expense of
disregarding the interests of the American people.
Perhaps they still do not really believe in the
fundamental principle of the sovereign equality of States
that constitutes the cornerstone of the United Nations and
that requires each and every Member of the Organization
to play its role in securing the objectives of the Charter.
This mentality is unfortunately the unwelcome heritage of
the cold-war period when, owing to the nature of bloc
rivalries, States Members of the United Nations were
viewed, not as independent, sovereign equals, but as
members of power blocs. The unfortunate natural by-
products of such a world view are inequality, hegemony,
disrespect for the interests and spiritual values of other
nations, disregard of the choices and opinions of the
majority, preference for the short-term interests of the
minority and self-serving interpretations of the rules and
principles of international law.
It seems imperative, therefore, that in the new
international political environment all organs of the
United Nations, particularly the Security Council, should
adopt substantive and procedural measures to facilitate the
full integration and participation of all Member States.
The Security Council, which constitutionally represents
the general membership of the Organization and acts on
its behalf, should muster the requisite political will to deal
with all crises on the basis of principle and the same set
of standards and should avoid preference for the interests
of powerful States over the interests and choices of the
majority in order to discharge its responsibilities in
accordance with the Charter. To achieve that objective
some structural, substantive and procedural reforms in the
work of the Council, including democratization and
transparency, are inevitable and will enhance the
credibility, efficiency and relevance of the Council as the
representative of the general membership.
At the same time, I should emphasize that the most
important organ of the United Nations, the one that is the
manifestation of the principle of sovereign equality and
affords direct participation to all Member States, is the
General Assembly. Therefore, strengthening this important
organ and ensuring the accountability of other organs,
particularly the Security Council, before the General
Assembly will guarantee full and more meaningful
participation by the Organization’s general membership in
its decisions and their implementation. This will go very
far towards strengthening true universality and providing
the most effective guarantees for the implementation of its
decisions.
In the past few years, following the end of the cold
war, we have witnessed increased efforts to formulate
new sets of international standards in various political,
social and economic spheres. A thorough review of the
final documents of recent international conferences clearly
26

illustrates that, notwithstanding the conceptual and
normative transformations which the international
community has undergone in the formulation and
expression of its concerns and recommendations, it has
legitimately stood firm on the need to respect the
fundamental principles that preserve the very fabric of our
diverse and pluralistic world. For instance, concepts and
phrases such as “the necessity and importance of upholding
full respect for the spiritual and ethical values, national and
regional particularities, as well as different historical and
cultural backgrounds of countries”, and “the necessity of
homogeneity and conformity in final documents and
recommendations of international conferences with the
purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and
the prevalence of a spirit of international cooperation and
consensus in their implementation and follow up” have
been incorporated and reaffirmed in the final documents of
the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, the
International Conference on Population and Development in
Cairo, the World Summit for Social Development in
Copenhagen, and the recently held Fourth World
Conference on Women in Beijing.
This clearly attests to the fact that while the
international community has taken it upon itself to adopt a
just and non-discriminatory approach through international
cooperation towards the protection and promotion of all
human rights, including the right to development, as
universal, indivisible and interdependent rights, it continues
to insist on the absolute imperative of guaranteeing that in
the process of international standard-setting, promotion and
protection, the sanctity of the principle of the national
sovereignty of all States is respected and that no nation’s
religious values and beliefs and cultural and national
identity are infringed.
Furthermore, the Charter of the United Nations
recognizes international cooperation in economic and social
issues as necessary for the maintenance of peaceful and
friendly relations between States. Unfortunately,
notwithstanding this emphasis, because of the conditions
prevailing in international relations, both during and after
the cold war, the importance and centrality of issues related
to economic and social development have not received due
consideration.
In addition, at a time when the North-South gap
continues to widen on a daily basis, the world economic
trend, manipulated by unilateral actions and protectionist
policies on the part of the developed countries, also tends
further to debilitate the potential of the developing countries
to deal with the adverse impacts of international economic
development. In this connection, we welcome the
Secretary-General’s “Agenda for Development” and
announce our intention to participate actively in the
deliberation of it. We firmly believe that post-cold-war
opportunities should be utilized to their maximum
potential so as to place issues of economic and social
development at the centre of the United Nations attention.
Hence, there is a renewed need for recommendations
about and practical measures for expansion of the role of
the United Nations in promoting the economic
development of developing countries, as well as full and
rapid implementation of relevant agreements and
internationally agreed upon objectives in this field. In this
connection, the fundamental principle that States have the
right to benefit from the utilization of their own resources
that are vital for their sustained economic growth and
development in accordance with their national policies
and priorities must not be neglected.
Another key characteristic of the post-cold-war era
is the expansion of peace-keeping operations, which have,
in recent years, demanded an increasing share of the
energy and resources of the Organization. Nevertheless,
the expansion of United Nations peace-keeping operations
should not take place at the expense of its activities in the
area of development, which constitute one of the most
effective measures for preventing the occurrence of
tensions and conflicts as well as for ensuring tranquillity
and stability. The Islamic Republic of Iran, along with
other non-aligned countries, supports the United Nations
peace-keeping efforts in principle, but emphasizes that all
Member States that are willing and able to participate in
such operations should be treated equally and without
discrimination. In like manner, while a unified United
Nations command structure is essential for successful
peace-keeping operations, its leadership should not be the
monopoly of a handful of States.
Although the United Nations has been successful in
returning peace and stability to some volatile parts of the
world, its disregard for some important principles has
resulted in the failure of the Organization to resolve other
crises that still rage. Let me emphasize that it is
absolutely imperative for the United Nations fully to
respect fundamental principles, including national
sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in
the internal affairs of States in all phases of the
establishment and execution of peace-keeping operations.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, eager to contribute
more actively to this growing area of United Nations
27

activity, announces its readiness in principle to participate
in United Nations peace-keeping operations in accordance
with our tenets and the fundamental principles of the
Charter. Here, I deem it necessary to reiterate the
preparedness of the Islamic Republic of Iran to dispatch
peace-keeping forces to Bosnia and Herzegovina, which we
had earlier committed along with other Islamic countries to
strengthen the United Nations Protection Force
(UNPROFOR) in order to enable it to discharge effectively
its mandate to protect safe areas.
We hold the firm view that if the Security Council had
at least provided the necessary mandate or committed the
necessary forces for the protection of the safe areas,
including through taking advantage of the assistance offered
by the Islamic countries, the Bosnian Serbs could not have
continued, with relative ease, their crimes of genocide
against the defenceless people of United Nations-declared
safe areas. However, the lack of political will to suppress
aggression and to deal effectively with non-compliance with
United Nations decisions, coupled with the unreasonable,
immoral and legally baseless insistence by some on
extending the arms embargo against the former Yugoslavia
to the victim of its aggression have in fact proven to the
Serbs that they can continue with impunity their murder,
destruction, aggression, “ethnic cleansing” and genocide.
Since the outbreak of the crisis, Islamic countries,
including the Islamic Republic of Iran, have adopted a
constructive position and called for international
cooperation in finding a just and peaceful resolution of the
conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The recent decision of
the joint meeting of Foreign and Defence Ministers of the
Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) Contact
Group and troop contributing countries to establish the
“Assistance Mobilization Group” in order to address the
humanitarian, economic, legal and defence requirements of
the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina represents a proper
approach to this tragedy in keeping with the principles and
purposes of the United Nations.
This decision, along with the previous declaration by
OIC member States of their readiness to dispatch a
sufficient number of peace-keepers to Bosnia, as well as
their declaration on the “de-jure inapplicability” of the arms
embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina are not only solidly
based in international law, the United Nations Charter and
humanitarian principles, but also emanate from the
considered assessment that without a proper military
balance, it would be impossible to compel the Serbs to
engage in serious negotiations or to guarantee the
unhindered implementation of any negotiated settlement.
In this connection, the Islamic Republic of Iran
welcomes the recent cooperation between the two Contact
Groups, and holds that only a plan which does not entail
recognition of the fruits of “ethnic cleansing” and
guarantees the national sovereignty and territorial integrity
of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a Member of the United
Nations can restore peace and stability to the region.
Furthermore, it is necessary in any peace negotiations to
accord the non-Serb populations of Kosovo, Sanjak, and
Vojvodina the same rights and privileges as those
requested for the Serbs in Bosnia. Moreover, in order to
guarantee a durable settlement and to preclude the
repetition of aggression and genocide, the International
Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for
Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law
Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia
since 1991 should continue its work resolutely, without
any regard for political expediency, and severely pursue
and punish those who are found guilty.
The increasing growth of inter-State cooperation
within the framework of regional groupings constitutes
another characteristic of the new international climate.
There exist natural common grounds for cooperation,
as well as shared interests among the countries of any
region, which together create a framework for the
promotion of regional organizations. Such regional
cooperation leads, in turn, to enhanced peace and stability
in each region and the world through the expansion of a
culture of cooperation, coexistence and dialogue. In this
context, the Islamic Republic of Iran has emphasized
regional cooperation and taken significant steps in this
regard in order to enhance prosperity, peace and stability
throughout its own region.
Today, the Economic Cooperation Organization
(ECO) has grown to an organization with 10 members.
With a population of 336 million, rich natural resources
and considerable potential, and in close proximity to
important centres of economy and trade in Asia, Europe,
and the Middle East, the organization endeavours to
strengthen and expand its activities, particularly in the
areas of transportation, communications, trade and energy,
in order to achieve well-being and prosperity for the
peoples of the region, and to promote trade and economic
growth.
In another effort for the expansion of regional
cooperation, the Islamic Republic of Iran has made
concrete proposals for the establishment of the Caspian
Sea Cooperation Organization which, with the
28

participation of the littoral States, would aim for the
expansion of cooperation in the fields of shipping, fishing,
the protection of the environment and the exploitation of
the resources of the Caspian Sea. Fortunately, the proposal
of the Islamic Republic of Iran has been accepted by the
States concerned, that is, the Russian Federation, the
Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Azerbaijan and the
Republic of Turkmenistan. In our opinion, the Caspian Sea
must be a sea of peace and tranquillity whose affairs will
be decided by the concurrence of all its littoral States.
Considering the political and economic characteristics
of our region, and the occurrence and expansion of conflicts
and tensions due to internal and external factors, the
Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran feels nationally
and internationally obliged to exert every effort aimed at
the enhancement of economic prosperity and regional
security, the prevention and de-escalation of tension and the
peaceful resolution of regional crises, based on respect for
sovereignty and territorial integrity, the inviolability of
internationally recognized borders, and non-interference in
the internal affairs of others.
In Afghanistan, while refraining from any involvement
in the regrettable fratricidal war, our policy has focused on
keeping channels of communication open with the
Government and all Afghan groups in order to put an end
to fighting and to bring about a negotiated settlement.
In the crisis in Tajikistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran
has exerted every effort and has succeeded in securing
negotiations in Tehran at the highest level between
Government and opposition groups, leading to the signing
of significant agreements concerning a cease-fire and the
peace process. Attempts to find solutions to these crises
require the constructive engagement of regional States and
the effective participation of the United Nations and the
Organization of the Islamic Conference.
At the same time, the maintenance of internal and
regional stability and security in Central Asia and the
Caucasus requires economic prosperity. The Islamic
Republic of Iran, in view of the special economic and
geographical situation of regional States, has tried to serve
as a reliable economic and trade partner, through bilateral
economic cooperation, as well as the establishment of
trilateral commissions with the participation of States from
within and outside the region aimed at the expansion and
facilitation of trade.
Inter-State cooperation in the sensitive and strategic
area of the Persian Gulf, where regional States share many
commonalities, can also lead to economic prosperity, as
well as guaranteeing peace and stability. The military
presence of foreign Powers, who have interests at
variance with stability and long-term cooperation among
regional States, cannot be conducive to achieving the
common objective of securing the tranquillity of this
important waterway.
In the final analysis, all littoral countries of the
Persian Gulf would be better served if they were to join
hands in a concerted effort to maintain peace and security
in the region, which will directly affect our destiny. Such
efforts can be channelled through an institution organized
by these same littoral States, where confidence-building
measures commensurate with the specificities of the area
can be devised and followed up.
Reducing military budgets, setting a ceiling for arms
purchases, acceding to disarmament and arms-control
treaties, cooperating with the United Nations Register of
Conventional Arms and devising a mechanism for
transparency in armaments are but a few examples of
confidence-building measures which the aforementioned
institution could consider. The Islamic Republic of Iran
declares its full readiness to enter into bilateral and
multilateral negotiations with its neighbours in order to
reach common understandings on these issues.
In the Middle East, the Zionist entity, supported by
certain powerful countries, continues its occupation of
Palestine and parts of Syria and Lebanon, and persists in
its policies of aggression, suppression of those who dare
to express opposition to its illegal occupation, and
violation of the very basic human rights of the Palestinian
people.
Experience and the events of the past few years
further illustrate the fact that the only viable option for
restoring peace and security to the Middle East is one
which is comprehensive and just and which addresses the
fundamental issues of the Palestine question. Such a
solution should entail a realization of the inalienable
rights of the Palestinian people, including the return of all
Palestinian refugees and displaced persons to their
homeland, the full and free exercise of their right to self-
determination, and liberation of all occupied territories. In
view of the volatility of the Middle East and the Persian
Gulf, these two regions must be off limits to any foreign
military presence and weapons of mass destruction. My
Government continues to underscore the need to
implement numerous General Assembly resolutions as
well as the decision of the Review and Extension
29

Conference of the States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) to establish a
nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East as an
important factor for installing stability in the region. What
has actually prevented the NPT from achieving its
objectives and the establishment of the Middle East as a
zone free from nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass
destruction has been Israel’s illegal nuclear capabilities and
its refusal to join the NPT and put its unsafeguarded
nuclear facilities under the safeguard regime of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Undoubtedly, without the direct and indirect financial
and technological support of certain Western
nuclear-weapon States, Israel could not have acquired the
capability to develop nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, there
exist strong indications that the nuclear capability of that
regime is being continually increased by the very same
countries that are the most vocal proponents of nuclear
non-proliferation. This discriminatory trend persists even in
circumstances where Israeli nuclear policy has adversely
affected regional security, the negative effects of which
include a lack of confidence and a perception of insecurity
in the region, an escalating arms race and influx of foreign
weapons into the region, and the refusal of some States in
the region to join certain disarmament treaties.
On the international level, it must be acknowledged
that, despite the modest progress achieved in the control of
nuclear, chemical and conventional weapons, these weapons
have unfortunately increased qualitatively and quantitatively
to an alarming degree. We are of the view that the failure
of the international community to deal effectively with
these weapons is primarily due to the fact that major
producers of conventional weapons and weapons of mass
destruction have prevented the United Nations from
fulfilling its primary responsibility and central role in the
field of disarmament. Another main reason for this failure
is that the policies of major arms-producing countries
designed to control the spread of weapons of mass
destruction and conventional weapons are always
short-sighted and discriminatory and aim simultaneously at
securing the destructive power of their own weaponry and
their own military dominance.
A glance at generally unsatisfactory disarmament
negotiations in various fields, including nuclear
disarmament, the Hague negotiations on the chemical
weapons Convention, negotiations concerning verification
systems for the bacteriological weapons Convention, and
the performance of the United Nations Register of
Conventional Arms make the veracity of our contention
quite evident.
Following four weeks of difficult negotiations, the
1995 Review and Extension Conference of the NPT could
not reach the conclusion that any progress towards the
primary objectives of the Treaty, including complete
nuclear disarmament and the peaceful use of nuclear
energy, had been achieved in the past 25 years. The
indefinite extension of the Treaty must be viewed within
the framework of three major final documents of the
Conference, together with the necessity for all signatories,
particularly the nuclear Powers, to commit themselves to
the full implementation of all provisions and objectives of
the Treaty. These obligations include achieving complete
nuclear disarmament, expanding the peaceful uses of
nuclear energy, strengthening the role and enhancing the
authority of the IAEA as the only international body
competent to oversee the good-faith discharge of Member
States’ responsibilities under the Treaty, ensuring the
universality of the NPT as an urgent priority, and
establishing the Middle East as a zone free from nuclear
weapons and other weapons of mass destruction. In this
connection, the nuclear-weapon States should, as a first
step, prove their good faith by refraining from nuclear
testing and finalizing a comprehensive test-ban treaty in
1996.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, inspired by the divine
teachings of Islam and benefiting from national solidarity
and the continued participation and efforts of its people,
has endeavoured to develop a society on the basis of the
dignity and worth of the human person and respect for
human values, a society whose ethos includes fairness and
social justice as well as cultural, social and economic
development. In this regard, despite extensive damage
caused by the imposed war and other economic pressures,
the Islamic Republic of Iran, endowed with the resolve
and work ethic of its entire population, has been able not
only to move towards reversing the vast destruction of the
war, but also successfully to complete its first five-year
economic and social development plan and embark upon
the implementation of the second five-year plan on solid
foundations. We foresee bright prospects for a
strengthened economic, social, cultural and political
infrastructure.
Since the Islamic Republic of Iran firmly believes
that the maintenance of peace and security, at the
national, regional and international levels alike, is
dependent upon economic growth and sustained
development, we spend only about 1 per cent of our
30

national budget on defence and devote the rest to
overhauling and strengthening our economic, social and
cultural infrastructures. We have made this strategic
decision at a time when the bitter experience of military
aggression against my country, a foreign military presence
in the region and an alarming military build-up following
the second war in the Persian Gulf could have justified very
extensive military expenditures.
The current session of the General Assembly provides
a golden opportunity for us to engage in a serious review
of the performance of our Organization over the past 50
years, assess the current international situation and try to
shape the conduct of international relations in the light of
the United Nations Charter in a fashion that remedies the
shortcomings of the past.
The most important characteristic of our world is its
cultural diversity, which has enriched human civilization.
The experience of the past 50 years has clearly illustrated
that attempts to impose Western standards, beliefs and
culture upon the rest of humanity have not only failed to
achieve the desired results, but also undermine the
foundations of peaceful coexistence and mutual
understanding because, in spite of the appearance of
championing the cause of freedom and tolerance, such an
approach manifests extreme intolerance towards the values
and beliefs of others.
Mutual respect for the rights, values and beliefs of all
members of the international community, along with the
empowerment of all nations to participate actively in the
setting of international norms, the maintenance of peace and
security and the promotion of economic and social
development throughout the world must form the solid
foundation of Member States’ activities in the next 50 years
of the United Nations. The Islamic Republic of Iran is
prepared to fulfil its role in this respect.


My country, Senegal, is very pleased to express to Mr.
Diogo Freitas do Amaral its warm congratulations on his
election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its
fiftieth session. His election reflects how much the
international community values the role his country —
Portugal — has played in analysing and managing the
major questions that mark the evolution of the world. It
also values his personal qualities as a diplomat and a
statesman, as well as his experience in the field of human
relations, the fundamental basis of peace among nations.
I should like also to pay tribute to Mr. Freitas do
Amaral’s predecessor, Mr. Amara Essy, Foreign Minister
of Côte d’Ivoire, who conducted the work for the year of
the forty-ninth session with effectiveness and remarkable
open-mindedness, thus earning the pride of all Africa.
Finally, I should like here, once again, to emphasize
my country’s support for the Secretary-General, Mr.
6

Boutros Boutros-Ghali. His initiatives, his repeated actions
and his determination to accomplish his noble mission in
the service of peace, security and development, despite a
particularly unstable international situation, have earned the
gratitude of the world. History will owe him a debt of
thanks.
Today, the United Nations has travelled through half
a century. For 50 years the peoples of the Earth, following
the Second World War, having wisely learned the lessons
of the mistakes and set-backs of the history of human
conflicts, have been engaged in an effort to create a new
environment, an atmosphere of mutual understanding and
of cooperation in solidarity, a framework within which
mankind can finally realize that communal spirit, generosity
and mutual respect are the best possible guarantees of
peace, well-being, health and the environment, as well as
the blossoming of society.
For 50 years, pursuant to the principles set forth in the
United Nations Charter by the founders of our shared
Organization, we have, stage by stage, laid the foundations
for an international system that can provide collective
security for all countries and, at the same time, create the
best possible conditions for life in greater freedom.
If we consider the action that the Organization has
undertaken since its creation — in particular, if we analyse
the management of the many conflicts that arose here and
there during the period of the cold war — we can see,
without any shadow of doubt, that it has indeed proved to
be an irreplaceable tool for the promotion and maintenance
of peace.
Indeed, beyond the simple maintenance of
international peace and security, the Organization
remarkably distinguished itself in the struggle for
decolonization, but, above all, in the establishment of a
progressive system of specialized agencies, all of which
provide highly valued assistance in the social, economic,
humanitarian and cultural fields.
But, despite these recorded achievements, we have to
admit that there is still a long road to travel, that a number
of important challenges still have to be met, and new and
bold initiatives taken, if we are to realize fully the ideals
contained in the San Francisco Charter.
Patient preparation is being made for a historic reform
of the structures of the Organization itself and, specifically,
the Security Council. In this connection, Senegal
unreservedly supports an increase in the numbers of
permanent and non-permanent members of the Council
with a view to strengthening the conditions and
machinery available for the maintenance of peace.
It must indeed be accepted that the end of
ideological confrontation has brought the world neither
the peace nor the development that was so earnestly
anticipated by the founding fathers of the Charter.
From Afghanistan to Angola, from Bosnia and
Herzegovina to Somalia, from Liberia to the republics
that emerged from the former Soviet Union, many
conflicts continue to this day to resist our attempts to
solve them. True, for some conflicts, such as those in
Angola or the Middle East, significant progress has
recently been achieved. And I wish to take this
opportunity to welcome the new important step that has
just been taken in the search for a settlement to the
Middle East conflict with the signing, on 28 September in
Washington, of the Taba Agreement.
In the case of other conflicts, such as that in Bosnia
and Herzegovina, a glimmer of hope is now showing over
the horizon thanks to the concerted action of the Western
Contact Group and the Contact Group of the Organization
of the Islamic Conference, as well as the European Union,
the United States of America, the Russian Federation and
other Governments of good will. This is also an
opportunity for me to congratulate the Organization of the
Islamic Conference and its member States for all their
efforts and initiatives. They have made a considerable
contribution to the results we have solemnly welcomed
today.
In this regard, it is clear that the heroic struggle of
the Bosnian people, underpinned by its leaders’ acute
awareness of their responsibilities, has made a powerful
contribution to the new situation which the international
community wishes to see strengthened and eventually
result in a definitive peace for the former Yugoslavia.
The proliferation of conflicts resulting from the
disappearance of blocs has had the positive effect of
laying the foundation for a consensus on the machinery,
criteria, conditions and means to be used to ensure,
organize and safeguard peace throughout the world. This
consensus implies that we must have greater recourse to
preventive diplomacy as an innovative concept to ensure
that our system of collective security functions properly.
This consensus also implies that the mandates of peace-
keeping operations should henceforth be better defined in
the light of the circumstances and objectives sought. The
7

necessary means should therefore be collected and
mobilized.
The importance which my country, Senegal, attaches
to this question is commensurate with its tireless
determination to work towards an effective security system
that works because it is fully adapted to current realities. It
is above all in this spirit that Senegal is a regular
participant in the work of the Special Committee to review
the whole question of peace-keeping operations in all their
aspects.
Moreover, Senegal’s position is in accord with the
clear awareness in Africa of changes occurring throughout
the world and which led our continent in 1992, at the
summit meeting of the Organization of African Unity in
Dakar, to conceive and establish a mechanism for the
prevention, management and settlement of conflicts. This
African initiative, which contributes to the maintenance of
peace and security throughout the world, should therefore
be supported by the international community in order to
reduce the practical ramifications of the lack of funds
which, as everyone knows, is so sorely afflicting Africa,
and enable it to achieve its legitimate ambitions through
fulfilment of the aims of this machinery. With such support,
our continent, Africa, would be able to devote itself further
to settling the conflicts in Rwanda, Burundi, Liberia, Sierra
Leone and Somalia.
Speaking of regional conflicts, in regard to the
problem of Jammu and Kashmir — involving two
neighbouring and fraternal countries, India and Pakistan,
with which Senegal has friendly relations — my delegation
would urge a definitive settlement that would allow these
two great Asian nations to devote their efforts to
establishing an atmosphere of peace conducive to integrated
development and mutual benefit. The Organization of the
Islamic Conference, in conjunction with these two
countries, is giving careful thought to this matter.
It is universally recognized today that there can be no
development without peace and stability. It is thus in the
lack of development, poverty, marginalization and exclusion
that we must seek the underlying causes of insecurity. We
must therefore devise together a new system of collective
life that will give everyone new reasons for hope on the
basis of the spirit of solidarity and desire for peace in
which the system is founded.
Such action should begin with a new awareness that,
even if the expression “globalization of the economy” is
now in vogue, the phenomenon goes far beyond the trend.
Indeed, it involves, coevally, economics, finance and
information. It is also and particularly relevant to the
major problems of humanity’s future, be it the question of
protecting the environment, fighting threats against our
collective health, drug trafficking or fighting organized
crime. It has become obvious today that the solutions to
these problems cannot but be global.
In the light of these new realities of today’s world,
it is clear that only a new conception of collective
solidarity will allow us to avoid or at least mitigate the
many serious consequences of poverty and exclusion that
are so damaging to everyone. We must therefore make a
collective commitment to defining a new social covenant
for the future of mankind. The struggle against poverty in
the countries of the southern hemisphere therefore
assumes particular importance in this context.
Given the current globalization and liberalization in
the economy of nations, the new World Trade
Organization (WTO) — opened in Geneva a few months
ago after having been christened at the historic Marrakesh
meeting — should prove to be a new framework and
cradle for a world open to fairer, more balanced and more
human economic and trade relations between the countries
of the North and South, in the spirit of the legitimate
claims of the peoples of the third world. Here, I wish
solemnly to reaffirm that the WTO carries with it the
hopes of the world for a new era of profitable, balanced
and sustainable trade for all.
From this perspective, the World Trade
Organization, to the establishment of which the African
countries contributed, should help those countries to
participate more actively in the new international
economic system.
Moreover, the globalization and liberalization of the
economy should also encourage the developing countries
to intensify South-South cooperation as an essential
component of both the strategy for development and the
means to ensure the integration of their economies in the
new context and within the new aspirations of the
international community for development in peace,
particularly of the countries of the South. The same is
true of the need to boost commodity prices and to ensure
equitable access to markets — to all markets — to allow
our countries to develop genuine and effective trade
policies. My country, Senegal, wishes unreservedly to
stake its claim to this dynamic process.
8

On the occasion of this fiftieth anniversary of the
creation of the United Nations, from this rostrum I wish to
make a solemn and heartfelt appeal on behalf of the
development of Africa. This appeal reflects a major concern
of African leaders and peoples. The United Nations, as we
know, has devoted much fruitful attention to this matter, as
witnessed by the convening in Geneva last July, within the
framework of the session of the Economic and Social
Council, of a high-level debate on African development.
Today, it is a truism to stress the dangers of Africa’s
marginalization. It is a danger, a real one, painful and
serious. Although it is real, the danger is none the less
unacceptable. It is therefore absolutely essential, for all
those for whom solidarity and international cooperation
continue to hold meaning, that it be averted.
I welcome the fact that the Secretary-General of the
Organization that shelters us today is one of those who
believes that there is no historical inevitability which Africa
cannot overcome. Has not Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali
decisively proved this by deciding to launch a special
initiative for Africa, with the clear aim of breathing fresh
life into international cooperation?
Through me, Senegal reiterates its total support for
this initiative, which is particularly fortunate since it
dovetails with all the priorities Africa has set for itself —
namely, food security, water control, social and human
development, democracy, mobilization of resources and,
finally the struggle against poverty.
It should also be recalled that the Head of the
Senegalese State, His Excellency President Abdou Diouf,
has been tirelessly devoting himself for a long time now to
seeking global solutions to the problems of Africa,
particularly the excruciating question of debt which is
delaying the development of African countries.
Thus, during his first term of office as Chairman of
the Organization of African Unity, he was the initiation of
the convening in 1986, for the first time in the annals of the
United Nations, of a special session of the General
Assembly devoted to Africa’s critical economic situation.
Similarly, Senegal welcomed the conclusion in Paris
in 1994 of the international Convention to Combat
Desertification in those Countries Experiencing Serious
Drought and/or Desertification, particularly in Africa, and
would like to stress here that this Convention must be put
into effect very soon and that the allocation of the
considerable resource that would be needed to uproot this
scourge from the African continent should be accelerated.
This is the task which for years now has been the special
concern of the Interstate Committee for Drought Control
in the Sahara.
We cannot speak about development without
addressing the question of respect for and protection of,
fundamental human rights and freedoms, which have
today become a universally recognized requirement.
Everyone is aware of how wedded Senegal is to this
requirement of our modern times that, in view of the
changes which have affected the world since the end of
the 1980s, all African countries, integrate this policy into
their development policy as an unavoidable dimension of
progress.
To conclude, may I emphasize once again that the
new international context and the multi-dimensional
nature of the problems that must be solved require
concerted action by all of us: integrated action, solidarity
among all partners — Governments, agencies and bodies,
public or private — that mould the life and the evolution
of the human international community.
Solidarity is the cement and also the guarantee of
this common approach, which is inspired by what is
needed for mankind to survive. Solidarity is first and
foremost a profound conviction that we all belong to one
and the same world, whether it be developed or
underdeveloped. Solidarity also entails a duty to face up
to our common problems and our common challenges,
whether we come from the North or from the South.
Solidarity is, finally, a collective will to build the future
on the basis of a partnership from which none are
excluded. Solidarity is also a common commitment
voluntarily to promote the collective progress of all
mankind. It is in the name of all the nations that are so
greatly devoted to the mission of man on earth that we
must nurture solidarity, cooperation, friendship and
brotherhood.
In this spirit and at this juncture in the history of our
planet when hope has been rekindled by the celebration
of the fiftieth anniversary of an organization — the
United Nations — without which the world would not be
what it is today, we solemnly express our ardent hope
that this 1995 session, the fiftieth in the history of the
United Nations, will be the dawn of a new era in which
we shall witness the realization of all our ideals of peace,
justice and progress, to the greatest benefit of future
generations, to which it is our duty to hand over a world
of peace, a world of security and a world of development.


I am delighted to
address the General Assembly in the year of its fiftieth
anniversary. On behalf of the Nigerian delegation, I
convey warm congratulations to the President on his
election to preside over the General Assembly at its
fiftieth session. We are confident that in carrying out his
duties he will bring his wisdom, competence and
diplomatic skills to bear on the work of the Assembly.
We congratulate his friendly country, Portugal, and
reaffirm the warmth of the bilateral relations between our
two countries.
Let me also convey our sincere thanks to his
distinguished predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Amara
Essy of Côte d’Ivoire, for the outstanding manner in
which he conducted the affairs of the General Assembly
at its forty-ninth session. I also wish to express my
delegation’s appreciation to the Secretary-General for the
courageous manner in which he is responding to the
challenges of his office.
The uniqueness of the current session is not lost on
my delegation. It is not only a solemn occasion to reflect
on the achievements and difficulties of our Organization
during the past 50 years, but also a golden opportunity to
chart a new way forward. We therefore hope that the
work of this and future sessions of the General Assembly
will continue to be inspired by the purposes and
principles of the United Nations Charter.
The establishment of the United Nations in the
aftermath of the Second World War marked a turning
point in the history of international relations. As an
intergovernmental Organization whose principal tasks
include the maintenance of international peace and
security, the promotion of international cooperation for
7

development and the progressive development and
codification of international law and respect for human
rights, the United Nations best epitomizes the will of the
peoples of the world to live together.
We in Africa attach great importance to this fiftieth
anniversary, as in 1945 the vast majority of our countries
were not independent and therefore could not participate in
the processes leading to the signing of the United Nations
Charter in San Francisco. It is gratifying, however, that
from being represented by only four countries on that
occasion, Africa has since grown to be the largest regional
group within the Organization. This is in accordance with
the universalist aspirations of the United Nations.
The phenomenal growth in membership evokes happy
memories of the transition of a large number of Member
States, particularly from Africa and Asia, from colonial
dependencies to nationhood. For many years the United
Nations was the catalyst in this process. Our continental
organization, the Organization of African Unity (OAU),
from its inception in 1963, similarly embraced this
objective as a primary preoccupation. It was my country’s
privilege to be associated at the regional and global levels
with the struggle against apartheid and for freedom and
self-determination on the continent.
The United Nations is perhaps best known for its
endeavours in the maintenance of international peace and
security. This remains a major preoccupation, as events
since the end of the Cold War have demonstrated that civil
conflicts and political instability in many countries,
particularly in the developing world, have become endemic,
with grave consequences for international peace and
security. These conflicts, which have their origins in,
among other things, new nationalisms, ethnic differences
and religious bigotry, constitute a test of the international
community’s will to meet the new challenges and provide
appropriate solutions.
On this occasion, therefore, it is the hope of the
Nigerian delegation that the Assembly will make sustained
efforts to take decisions that will significantly enhance the
prospects of global peace and security. We expect that
further thought will be given to redefining the role of the
United Nations and its perspectives on preventive
diplomacy, peacemaking, peace-keeping and peace-building
as continuing imperatives in crisis management and conflict
resolution.
Given that the maintenance of international peace and
security is a shared responsibility, the United Nations
should undertake to realign and strengthen its cooperation
with regional organizations and arrangements. This is not
to underestimate the need for Member States to make
serious efforts to prevent war and civil conflict through
confidence-building measures and the formulation and
implementation of appropriate domestic policies. In this
regard, we cannot but reaffirm the continuing validity of
the peaceful resolution of disputes through mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement and respect for
applicable international laws.
We deplore the growing arms race and the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, on which
vast resources are now being wasted. The nuclear genie
has left the bottle and cannot now be led back into it; the
trauma of Hiroshima and Nagasaki persists and continues
to haunt the international conscience. Let us therefore
resolve that such a tragedy will never happen again. The
time for disarmament under effective international control
is now.
Although progress towards the achievement of
general and complete disarmament has been slow, we
would like to commend the United Nations for its role in
this sphere. Nigeria regards the agreements banning
biological and chemical weapons as landmark
arrangements. We must remain committed to the ultimate
goal of the total elimination of all weapons of mass
destruction.
On its twenty-fifth anniversary, in May of this year,
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT) was extended indefinitely. Developments since
then have seriously undermined the confidence we have
all reposed in the Treaty and its regime, and have
regrettably cast major doubt on the commitment of
Member States, particularly the nuclear Member States,
to disarmament. In our view, efforts to achieve this must
remain fundamental and include the conclusion of a
comprehensive nuclear- test-ban treaty by 1996, the cut-
off in the production of fissionable materials for weapons
purposes, and the granting of security assurances by the
nuclear-weapon States to non-nuclear-weapon States in a
legally binding instrument.
In our continuing efforts to ensure a peaceful and
secure environment for the development of the African
continent, Nigeria is delighted to welcome the successful
completion of the negotiations on the Treaty of an
African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone, which was endorsed
by the Organization of African Unity (OAU) Council of
Ministers in June 1995. By this action, African leaders
8

have given concrete expression to their collective
commitment to make the continent a nuclear-weapon-free
zone. It is our expectation that during this session the
international community will respect this initiative through
the endorsement of the Treaty. We hope that the nuclear-
weapon States will ratify the protocols to be annexed to the
Treaty.
The framers of the Charter of the United Nations did,
in fact, recognize that peace and development go together.
Among the high purposes of our Organization is the
promise of economic and social achievement by all peoples.
To this end, a good deal of effort has been made by the
United Nations and its agencies to support the
implementation of programmes of action initiated by
developing countries at national, subregional and regional
levels. We commend these agencies for their efforts in
tackling the problems of social and economic development.
In discussing the general issue of development, we
recognize the primacy of the United Nations in promoting
international cooperation for development. It is in this
connection that we have welcomed the contribution of the
Secretary-General in his Agenda for Development. For us
in Africa, development is a question of survival. We place
a particular premium on it as we confront the challenges of
poverty and underdevelopment.
While the unsatisfactory economic situation of Africa
has been the subject of many international conferences, the
resulting programmes of action have remained largely
unimplemented. Such programmes include the United
Nations Programme of Action for African Economic
Recovery and Development 1986-1990 and the United
Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the
1990s, adopted in 1991. The failure to implement these
programmes has been due primarily to the lack of will and
acceptance of a concept of economic interdependence by
our development partners. Yet, it remains important that
development should be seen as an integral and indivisible
whole, an objective to be pursued collectively in the global
economy.
The economic crises confronting the developing
countries are multifaceted. I would, however, like to stress
the pre-eminent need for the international community to
resolve the external-debt crisis, which is a key impediment
to growth and development in our respective countries.
Most African countries devote a large proportion of their
foreign exchange earnings to debt-servicing. It has,
therefore, been difficult for these countries to also pursue
sustained economic development objectives. It is clear that
Nigeria — as, indeed, most other countries of our
continent — faces limited possibilities for the
implementation of their economic reform programmes
without urgent and adequate debt-relief measures.
We believe that development cooperation should
engender genuine interdependence, mutual interest and
benefits in the context of global partnership. In the
expectation that the developed countries will support and
indeed assist the developing countries in their
development efforts, we call for fuller cooperation
between the two sides. The initiative to hold the Asia-
Africa Forum in Bandung, Indonesia, in December 1994,
as a follow-up to the Tokyo International Conference for
the Development of Africa, was bold and imaginative.
The conclusions and recommendations of these initiatives,
which are also critical, need to be faithfully implemented.
The integrated approach to development being
pursued by the United Nations is right and deserves to be
commended. In this regard, we welcome the outcome of
the recently concluded World Summit for Social
Development and Fourth World Conference on Women.
These conferences have helped to promote women in
development and to enhance their role in public affairs.
We acknowledge the interdependence of societies as
underscored by these conferences, and the fact that all
cultures have a contribution to make at the crossroads of
civilization and development.
While recognizing the achievements of the United
Nations, it is fit and proper, at this point, to identify also
those areas in which the Organization has not fully
realized its objectives.
On peace and security, it should be acknowledged
that the United Nations has a commendable record of
success. Since its founding, it is significant that there has
been no global war and that the end of the cold war has
enhanced the prospects for cooperation and the lessening
of tension. However, new conflicts have emerged which
have defied solution by the United Nations. It is evident
that the challenges of peacemaking, peace-keeping and
peace-building require new perspectives and commitments
from Member States. Moreover, while seeking to provide
solutions to these conflicts, the United Nations must
accept that it has a limit to its capacity. It should,
therefore, not micromanage the internal political
arrangements of countries in conflict. It is equally
important that the United Nations be seen to be
transparent and even-handed in crisis management in all
regions. Furthermore, the United Nations should do more
9

to cultivate and cooperate with regional organizations and
arrangements in conflict resolution.
On decolonization, the balance sheet of the United
Nations performance is largely positive. However, the
legacies of colonialism and the challenges of nation-
building have created difficulties for new States. These
difficulties have resulted in the inability of many of the new
States of the developing world to conduct their domestic
and external relations in a manner consistent with the
provisions of the Charter. The experience of a number of
these States indicates that powerful members of the
international community continue to insist on their models
as standards for universal behaviour and application. The
political and economic lives of the new States are further
circumscribed by international financial institutions
dominated by the economically strong. These institutions,
which are as old as our Organization, have yet to adapt to
the new economic realities and needs of the new States
they seek to serve.
With regard to development, the objectives of the
Charter have remained largely unfulfilled in view of the
growing economic disparities between a minority of
developed countries and the vast majority of countries
which are classified as developing. Regrettably, dialogue
between the North and the South, which is vital to
effectively address this imbalance, has reached a deadlock.
This dialogue needs to be relaunched in order to achieve a
just and equitable world order for sustainable development.
Since joining the United Nations 35 years ago, Nigeria
has played its part in upholding the purposes and principles
set forth in the United Nations Charter. It has also pursued
its objectives with dedication and commitment. From
decolonization to peace-keeping, we have spared neither
efforts nor resources in fulfilling our obligations under the
Charter. Our record in peace-keeping speaks for itself.
Within the ambit of South-South cooperation, Nigeria
has extended assistance to other developing countries,
particularly in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. In our
subregion, we are in active partnership with the countries
of the Economic Community of West African States
(ECOWAS) to accelerate development through cooperation.
It is our hope that ECOWAS will become an essential
component for continental integration as envisaged under
the Abuja Treaty on the African Economic Community.
To avoid any doubt, I wish to state that we in Africa
have long accepted that the primary responsibility for the
development of our continent rests squarely on our
shoulders. But the reality of our experience is that we
have had to fight on the two fronts of political and
economic reforms at the same time. Few regions of the
world have borne such excruciating burdens in their
development process. This calls for understanding and
encouragement rather than indifference and benign
neglect. Consequently, in addition to regional integration
efforts, we in Nigeria have undertaken bold economic and
political reforms. On the economic front, the current
Administration in Nigeria has deregulated the economy
and created new incentives for domestic and foreign
investments.
On the political plane, Nigeria has embarked on
courageous reforms. In spite of unforeseen difficulties and
the complexities of the Nigerian situation, we have
continued to make steady progress in our determined
efforts to establish a veritable and enduring democratic
polity. Indeed, only three days ago my Head of State,
General Sani Abacha, announced a comprehensive
programme of transition to democratic rule and the final
disengagement of the military from power. This
programme was carefully drawn up taking into account
the objective realities of our national situation to ensure
not only an orderly transition, but also the
institutionalization of durable democratic structures of
governance at all levels.
While we recognize and appreciate the
understandable concerns of our foreign friends and the
international community at large, we hope that due
support will be given to our endeavour in the full
realization that a democratic Nigeria, the most populous
black nation on Earth, is an asset to itself and has much
to offer the international community.
In order that the United Nations might be better
equipped to discharge its responsibility as a forum for
harmonizing the actions of nations, it is essential that the
ongoing process of revitalization and institutional reforms
be intensified. This is necessary if the United Nations is
to assert its central role in the establishment of a new
world order. It is also vital if the United Nations is to
truly reflect the equity and geographical balance that are
critical for its efficiency and authority.
Nigeria, therefore, reaffirms its support for the
expansion of the Security Council both in its permanent
and in its non-permanent membership and, in this
connection, my delegation renews the offer made by our
country to serve the international community as a
permanent member in the expanded Security Council.
10

As we look to the future, it is obvious that the
effectiveness of the United Nations will depend on the
collective will and support of its entire membership. There
are two levels of responsibility in ensuring a strong and
vibrant United Nations. The first is what the United Nations
itself must do; the second, and more important, is what we
the Member States accept to do to enable the Organization
to respond effectively to our collective quest for peace,
freedom, justice and development. In pursuit of these
objectives, Nigeria is determined to continue making its
contributions.


I am
pleased to begin my statement by extending to you sincere
congratulations on your election to the presidency of the
present session of the General Assembly. I am confident
that your high competence and profound experience will
contribute effectively to the success of the work of the
present historic session.
This session coincides with the fiftieth anniversary of
our Organization. There is no doubt that such an important
occasion calls for examining the course the Organization
has taken in order to draw the best object-lessons that
would enable the international community to proceed to the
building of a better future in which peace and stability
would prevail on the basis of justice, the balance of
interests of all peoples and genuine international
cooperation that would be free from selfishness and
hegemony; a future which would open the doors towards
the solution of economic, social, cultural and humanitarian
problems that continue to cause suffering to the
overwhelming majority of States, especially in Asia, Africa
and Latin America.
Members of the international community welcomed
the end of the cold war. They view it as the harbinger of a
new age. However, many representatives of many Member
States did point out the dangers of imbalance in
international relations. They warned that the supremacy of
one super-Power would make international life hostage to
that Power and, thereby, lead to the imposition of its views,
interests and policies on the rest of the world. The
correcting of this imbalance in the international situation
requires a great deal of care in upholding equality between
States, restructuring the United Nations in line with well-
balanced formulas, revitalizing the work of its institutions
in a manner that would ensure balance and genuine
participation in responsibility, prevent hegemony by one or
certain parties over the international community and over
the United Nations with its institutions. Although these
objectives have not been achieved so far, to work towards
their achievement and to develop an understanding of what
they involved continue to be urgent needs of the highest
priority.

We believe that the imposition of a unipolar
standpoint on the work of the United Nations totally
contradicts the purposes and principles of the Charter.
The persistence of such attempts would lead only to more
anxiety and deterioration in international relations.
This conviction stems from Iraq’s actual experience
over the past five years. It is an experience that relates to
the implementation of the resolutions of the Security
Council on the so-called Gulf Crisis, and especially the
implementation of resolution 687 (1991).
That resolution imposed upon Iraq a number of
obligations, as a basis for a comprehensive settlement of
the situation. A few days after the adoption of the
resolution, Iraq informed the Security Council of its
readiness to comply with the provisions of the resolution
despite the harsh nature of the obligations imposed
thereby. Since that date, Iraq has seriously taken upon
itself the implementation of the resolution in order to
normalize the situation at the regional and international
levels. In fact, a great many steps have taken place in
implementing the resolution. Our people hope that what
has been achieved will be the subject of an objective and
fair evaluation by the Security Council that would lead to
the lifting of the embargo imposed upon Iraq for more
than five years now.
Allow me to review very briefly the steps
taken by Iraq in the context of implementing the
obligations imposed by the Security Council in
resolution 687 (1991).
On 10 November 1994, Iraq officially recognized the
sovereignty, the territorial integrity and the political
independence of the State of Kuwait, and the international
boundary demarcated by the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait
Boundary Demarcation Commission. This was done in
implementation of resolutions 687 (1991) and 833 (1993).
Iraq has cooperated also with the representatives of
the United Nations in returning Kuwaiti property on the
basis of the lists presented through the United Nations
coordinator. In this connection, Iraq affirmed that it will
return any item of property that would be found when it
is established that it belongs to Kuwait.
As regards the prisoners of war and the missing
persons, Iraq, in implementation of Security Council
8
General Assembly 21st plenary meeting

resolutions 686 (1991) and 687(1991), released all prisoners
of war and detainees who were in Iraq and repatriated them
in cooperation with the International Committee of the Red
Cross (ICRC). As for investigating the fate of missing
persons, we are cooperating fully within the framework of
the joint work carried out under the auspices of the ICRC
by the Tripartite Commission and its Technical
Subcommittee on Military and Civilian Missing Prisoners
of War and Mortal Remains. Since the middle of 1994,
when we found the appropriate modality for effective
technical work in dealing with this humanitarian problem,
we have sought within the said framework to provide
answers to the questions raised in the individual inquiry
files presented to us on the basis of the available
information. Moreover, Iraq has been receptive to all the
initiatives of States and personalities to find a quick
solution to this humanitarian problem in accordance with
the Geneva Conventions.
With regard to the subject of compensation, Iraq
accepted the principle of responsibility in accordance with
international law to compensate direct damage resulting
from the events in Kuwait as stated in resolution 687
(1991).
Iraq has cooperated also with the United Nations Iraq-
Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM) in carrying out its
tasks and has extended every possible assistance to the
Mission with the aim of enabling it to perform its duties.
Iraq has affirmed its adherence to the 1925 Geneva
Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of
Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases and Bacteriological
Methods of warfare, and deposited the instruments of
ratification of the 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of
the Development, Production and Stockpiling of
Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on
their Destruction, in implementation of paragraph 7 of
resolution 687 (1991).
As for the implementation by Iraq of section (C) of
resolution 687 (1991), that is the provisions relating to
proscribed weapons, our relationship with the Special
Commission and the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) witnessed, in the middle of 1993, a turning point in
the field of positive and constructive cooperation in order
to finalize the implementation of the said section.
On 26 November 1993, we presented the official
response in regard to compliance with resolution 715 (1991)
relating to monitoring in the field of weapons.
In the process of work with the Special Commission
and the IAEA, we have not hesitated to offer all possible
assistance to facilitate the work, whether by presenting
information, available documents, details relating to past
programmes, the destruction of prohibited weapons, and
the setting up of an effective monitoring system. We have
been able to achieve substantive progress in this area, as
acknowledged by the Special Commission in its report to
the Security Council on 19 June 1995, and have taken the
final steps to complete the desired work.
These facts are well established in the relationship
between Iraq and the Special Commission and the IAEA.
The substantive nature of these facts cannot be distorted
by the campaign waged against Iraq by well-known
quarters because of special objectives of their own which
are totally alien to the objectives of resolution 687 (1991).
Despite all the propaganda, Iraq no longer has any
proscribed weapons, equipment, devices or materials, and
this is the essence of resolution 687 (1991). We affirm
our determination to continue our cooperation with the
Special Commission and the IAEA to close the weapons
file in accordance with the relevant resolutions and have
the embargo against Iraq lifted.
I should like to express here our deep regret
regarding the a priori ill-intentioned exaggerations which
cast a terrifying image of past Iraqi weapons programmes,
and the deliberate distortion of the fact that these
programmes were something of the past and that they no
longer exist. Raising fears in such a contrived fashion is
not an objective position at all. It is an attitude prompted
by political objectives which are far removed from the
concern over security and stability in the region and the
provisions of resolution 687 (1991).
Iraq has taken all these steps even while it has
continued to suffer the hardship caused by a total
embargo, the most extended ever imposed by the Security
Council in all its history. It is an embargo that embraces
everything and every aspect of life with the exception of
food and medicine. However, the freezing of Iraq’s assets
with foreign banks has prevented Iraq from using any of
those assets to purchase its needs of medicines and
foodstuffs and, thereby, has made the exception relating
to food and medicine devoid of any practical content. The
situation in Iraq has been aggravated by the actual
practice obtaining in the work of the Security Council
Committee established by resolution 661 (1990), which is
in charge of the application of sanctions against Iraq.
Work in the Committee proceeds along highly
9
General Assembly 21st plenary meeting

bureaucratic lines and follows the rule of unanimity. This
has provided certain States with an easy way to object and
thereby to reject a large number of export requests to Iraq
to meet civilian humanitarian needs, from pencils and
educational materials to automobile tyres and other simple
civilian provisions. All these matters are documented in the
records of the 661 Committee.
The deliberate insistence on prolonging the embargo
against Iraq is not linked to Iraq’s implementation of its
obligations. It is a systematic plan to inflict severe damage
upon Iraq and to deliberately destroy its infrastructure and
put paid to its developmental capabilities. This is a fact that
is known to all. The reports of the competent United
Nations Agencies operating in Iraq and of
non-governmental organizations concerned with relief
warned against the deterioration of the situation as a result
of the shortage of food and medicine, which threatens the
lives of millions of Iraqis, including thousands of children,
women and old people. In this connection, I should like to
refer to the last alert of the World Food Programme, issued
on 26 September 1995.
The report of the Secretary-General on the work of the
Organization, and his “Supplement to An Agenda for
Peace”, refer clearly to the problem of sanctions. We
should like in turn to draw the attention of Member States
to the fact that the application of sanctions against Iraq,
with such cruelty and bureaucratic complexity, calls for
questioning and scrutiny, in the interests of objectivity. We
are not sure that all the representatives in the General
Assembly know that the Security Council reviews the
sanctions regime against Iraq every 60 days, and that 27
reviews have been conducted to date without any easing of
the sanctions. The situation remains the same as it has been
since 3 April 1991, as if nothing had been achieved. Is this
a healthy situation?
The tragic consequences of the embargo have not been
limited to the food and health sectors in Iraq. The sections
of agriculture, education and environment also have
sustained grave damage, due to the shortages of materials
and the basic requirements needed for work in such sectors,
even at the minimum level required to satisfy the basic
needs of the civilian population.
The aggravation of this extremely difficult situation
has not prevented us from continuing to implement our
obligations under the relevant resolutions of the Security
Council. It is worth noting that, as is known to all, while
we were being called upon to implement our obligations,
and while we were deploying persistent efforts to do just
that, we have not received in return any objective and
equitable position that would have reduced sanctions
commensurately with the progress achieved by Iraq in
implementing the resolutions, or that would have given
encouragement and hope and given confidence that the
situation would be normalized eventually, in accordance
with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
The reality has been the very opposite. From the
very beginning and to date, we have been the target of
many threats; doubts have been raised about our
intentions; and we have been, twice, the target of armed
aggression. There has been considerable deceit with
regard to objectives. Pressure has been brought to bear on
any party that even thought of treating us fairly, even if
such fairness was not intended as a gesture towards Iraq
but as a means of safeguarding the credibility of the
Charter system and of the resolutions of the Security
Council. We have been accused of intermittent and
selective cooperation and of a lack of peaceful intentions
and lack of credibility, to such an extent that the levelling
of accusations by certain parties has come to resemble a
chronic pathological alignment. Such accusations have
been accompanied by the continued pursuance on the
practical level of policies aimed at interfering in the
internal affairs of Iraq in order to destabilize it; to
undermine its security, stability, the freedom of its people
and its sovereignty; and to try and change its political
system.
A super-Power has imposed upon my country two
no-fly zones, in the north and the south, without any legal
justification or authorization from the Security Council. It
has also exercised every means of pressure and deception
to perpetuate the harsh conditions caused by the embargo
against Iraq, while, at the same time, it conspires, quite
openly, to change the regime. Without any hesitation, its
officials declare that such is its intention. While all this
takes place, it is we who are asked to prove our peaceful
intentions and credibility.
It is no secret that the Power that leads the onslaught
I have spoken of against Iraq is the United States of
America. All the facts on the ground make it clear that it
is the United States of America and no one else that
should be asked to demonstrate its credibility, to prove
that its intentions are peaceful, and to desist from its
continuing acts of provocation, aggression and
interference in the internal affairs of Iraq and from
fomenting tension in the Gulf region under the pretext of
an illusory threat.
10
General Assembly 21st plenary meeting

President Saddam Hussein noted that the American
administration’s accusation that Iraq lacks credibility in its
relationship with the Special Commission is a false one,
and that it is the United States that does not have credibility
in dealing with States and international organizations.
Where is the credibility in the position of the United States
when it declares its determination not to lift the sanctions
against Iraq even if Iraq implements Security Council
resolution 687 (1991), of which the United States was the
chief author? Again, where is the credibility in the position
of the United States when the American administration
masses its naval and military forces in the Gulf and in the
Mediterranean under the false pretext that Iraq is planning
to attack Jordan, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia?
I do not wish to enter into polemics with the
representatives of the United States in the General
Assembly. But I find it necessary, with regard to the
American allegations about credibility, to raise certain
points of principle which call for serious thought and
contemplation. Before I do that, I should like to ask this
question: if it is important that the implementation of the
resolutions of the Security Council should be founded on
credibility, then how can allegations about the credibility of
Iraq be accepted at a time when the State which repeats
those allegations puts itself above the Security Council and
above the Charter and gives itself the right to interpret
United Nations resolutions and to arbitrarily draw
conclusions from such interpretations that agree with its
own selfish interests which are far removed from any basis
to be found in the provisions of the resolutions themselves?
While on the subject of credibility, where are the
efforts of the Security Council, and the United States in
particular, with regard to the implementation of paragraph
14 of Security Council resolution 687 (1991), which aims
at declaring the Middle East as a zone free from weapons
of mass destruction? This is an objective that has to be a
fundamental cornerstone of the edifice of peace, security
and stability in the region if such an edifice is to be built
on sturdy, well-balanced and equitable foundations. It is an
objective that acquires great importance from the standpoint
of the oft-mentioned credibility, since it is a known fact
that Israel possesses those weapons. Why does the United
States keep completely silent about paragraph 14, and why
has the Security Council not taken any action towards the
implementation of that part of its resolution? Does such a
blatant double standard have anything to do with
credibility?
Is it objective or even fair to imagine that the
obligations stipulated in Security Council resolutions could
be implemented in a natural fashion in the context of such
circumstances, atmospherics, and hostile policies directed
against Iraq?
Iraq is well aware of the fact that it is not in its
interest to conceal any information relating to past
weapons programmes, and that its interest lies in working
to lift as soon as possible the sanctions that are imposed
on it. Indeed, Iraq is acting in full conformity with this
objective. In this connection, we call upon member States
of the Security Council not to jump to any conclusions on
the basis of any unjust accusations levelled at Iraq,
because the right thing to do would be to wait for the
outcome of the work of the Special Commission, which
is responsible for evaluating the implementation by Iraq
of the Council’s resolutions concerning the proscribed
weapons.
We do not call for anything more than the legally
sound application of Security Council resolutions in
consonance with the purposes and principles of the
Charter, and not in line with the whims and aims of
unilateral policies of a certain State, which are founded
on the logic of naked power, opportunism, double
standards and the imposition of hegemony.
We believe that there is a collective duty to work
jointly with firmness in order to put things in the right
perspective in order to ensure the sound application of the
provisions of the Charter. The first step in this direction
requires us to ponder the philosophy of the sanctions as
created by the Charter. Is the sanctions regime a means
towards an end, or is it an end in itself? What is the
nature of the said regime? Is it punitive, or is it a means
whereby the purposes of the Charter should be achieved
without reference to the individual policies of individual
Member States?
It is well known to all that the sanctions regime
created by the Charter is nothing more than a means
aimed at achieving certain results which would ultimately
lead to the realization of the purposes and principles of
the United Nations as elaborated in Articles 1 and 2 of
the Charter, and that the means should cease to be applied
once the end has been achieved.
The competence of the Security Council to impose
sanctions is an exceptional means that is used when it is
established, objectively, that all other means of peaceful
settlement of disputes have failed. Such a means should
not be, however, a tool in the hands of a super-Power or
of a group of major Powers to achieve foreign policy
11
General Assembly 21st plenary meeting

goals at the expense of the common interest of Member
States.
It is now patently clear that the imposition of sanctions
on Iraq and the maintenance of the embargo against it, in
the well-known fashion, cannot be justified on the
substantive basis of the provisions of the Charter, because
it has become, in actual fact, an extension of the unilateral
policy of a super-Power that has made sanctions an end in
themselves and a vindictive means that serves its own
interests in the region.
In essence, the grounds for the imposition of sanctions
on Iraq no longer exist and, thus, the sanctions should be
lifted. But a well-known State obstructs the process.
We should like to say to the United States that the
solution lies in dialogue, which provides a mechanism for
the achievement of interests on a balanced and equitable
basis. This is what Iraq has called for and continues to call
for. The policy of hegemony and of creating crises cannot
but fail, because it is illegitimate and because the
international community rejects it. While this continues to
be our position of principle, we unfortunately find that the
United States statesmen ignore the realities of the region
and the needs and aspirations of its peoples, who yearn to
live in stability, peace and fruitful cooperation amongst
themselves and with the world as a whole.
At a time when we witness the tensions and internal
conflicts that prevail in the states of the region, and the
feelings of bitterness amongst their peoples as a result of
the current short-sighted policies, which recall to mind the
policies of the old imperialist Powers, we in Iraq should
like, from this rostrum, to call for the promotion of
relations of dialogue, understanding and good
neighbourliness amongst the States of the region, on the
basis of mutual respect, in accordance with the principles
of the Charter of the United Nations.
Iraq is an ancient country with a very long history that
goes back 7,000 years. The Iraqi people, who have
contributed greatly to human civilization, will remain in
control of their affairs, independent in their choices and
capable of overcoming crises.
We hope that Member States, especially the permanent
members of the Security Council, will make every effort to
interpret and apply the provisions of the resolutions of the
Security Council in accordance with their normal legal
meaning and not on the basis of whims and the political
interests of this or that State. Any course of action that
deviates from this principled rule would lead only to loss
of credibility and utterly undermine the principle of good
faith in the determination of international obligations.
The United Nations was established in order to
achieve the common goals of preserving peace, security
and stability in the world. The provisions of the
Organization’s Charter, in letter and in spirit, are founded
on the balancing of rights and duties and aim at
protecting the common interests of the international
community. Therefore policies that are based on the logic
of naked power and unilateral action outside the concepts
of the Charter, and that aim at achieving individual
objectives, are bound to contradict the very raison d’être
of the Organization and to contravene the letter and spirit
of its Charter. Such policies would only lead to the
marginalization of the Organization’s role in international
affairs.
It behoves us as we are about to celebrate half a
century of the existence of the Organization to rededicate
ourselves to honouring our undertakings as enshrined in
the Charter.