 On behalf of the People's Republic of Mozambique it gives me pleasure to congratulate Ambassador Choudhury on his unanimous election to the presidency of the forty-first session of the General Assembly. His election to such a high office expresses the confidence of all of us in his outstanding qualities as an able and experienced diplomat. I am confident
that under his guidance the deliberations of this session will be crowned with success. I assure him at the outset of our total readiness to co-operate with hint in the discharge of the functions entrusted to him.
X congratulate the outgoing President, Mr. Jaime de Pinies, who guided with competence the deliberations of the historic fortieth session of the General Assembly.
I wish to express once again to the Secretary-General of our Organization, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, my appreciation of his zeal and his devotion to the United Nations cause as well as to that of the fulfillment of the principles and objectives enshrined in the Charter. I also wish to express the feelings of satisfaction of the Government I represent ^t seeing the Secretary-General back with us and fully recovered.
It is with deep concern that our Organization is witnessing a proliferation of conflicts and tensions in the international arena.
Southern Africa is one of the most worrying regions of conflict. The apartheid regime constitutes, by its policy and practices, a serious threat to international peace and security. In advocating theories of racial supremacy and claiming a divine mission assigned to the Afrikaner tribe, in perpetrating systematic massacres against the majority of the population, apartheid is Zionism. Like Zionism, the apartheid regime seeks to impose its power on the region through aggression and occupation. Thus, it occupies Namibia and parts of the territory of Angola. It attacks neighboring countries, including those whose economic and military weakness and small populations pose no threat to the security of the South African regime. The tactics of armed banditry used by Hitler to destabilize and destroy targeted countries are today used by Pretoria in southern Africa. In Mozambique, Angola, Zimbabwe and other countries in southern Africa, armed bandits, trained, equipped, transported, organized, financed and commanded by South Africa, commit horrible crimes against people and their property. Hitler's ambitions to establish a Germanic Europe find their counterpart in our region in the South African theory of the establishment of a constellation of States which would be under the dominance of the Afrikaner regime. All this shows the Nazi-Fascist nature of the regime in Pretoria, a regime that constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security.
It is against this heinous regime that the South African people stand up with courage and determination within South Africa. It is a heroic struggle that has achieved unprecedented development in the last two years. The South African people, under the leadership of the African National Congress (ANC) and other progressive and democratic forces, have taken the initiative in transforming South African society and creating an ambiance of equality, liberty and justice. They are more conscious than ever of the justness of their cause. Assassinations and massacres have failed to deter the people's movement, thus proving that unarmed people, when they are united, determined and fighting for a just cause, can render inoperative the repressive machine of the regime.
With this struggle, the South African people are beginning to build a united, democratic and anti-racist nation. Blacks, Coloreds, Indians, whites. South Africans of varying beliefs and social status, are fighting side by side for the abolition of apartheid. Even in the bantustans the people are rebelling against the regime and its collaborators, thus destroying the illusion of a fragmented and submissive South Africa.
In the process of the liberation struggle, the ANC has been the catalytic force in the struggle for the abolition of apartheid. It has been able to sustain the burning torch of the liberation struggle for the fulfillment of the principles enshrined in the Freedom Charter. The ANC's cause has become one that is embraced by all nationalist organizations, be they political, trade-unionist or religious.The commitment of the South African people to the struggle for their liberty grows all the time. Against this strong determination of the South African people to free themselves from racist oppression, the apartheid regime throws its murderous machine. Thus, in the last two years thousands of men and women, young and old, have been imprisoned, tortured, banned or assassinated.
Those patriots and martyrs exemplify the courage of a people that no longer fears the regime's repressive apparatus. Facing armored cars and bullets with bare hands, the South Africans are deciding on their country's future and are ensuring that South Africa will be free. I should like once again to express our solidarity with those heroic people and with their struggle.
The struggle of the South African people for liberty, equality, justice and democracy is paralleled by the struggle of the Naaibian people for the realization of their inalienable right of self-determination and independence. Their struggle enjoys the unconditional support of the People's Republic of Mozambique.
Twenty years have elapsed since this Organization terminated South Africa's Mandate over Namibia. In the course of those years we have adopted numerous declarations and resolutions either demanding the withdrawal of South Africa from the Territory of Namibia or condemning South Africa's refusal to abide by the decisions of the General Assembly and the Security Council.
Just a few days ago the fourteenth special session of the General Assembly, devoted to the question of the independence of Namibia, was held. He noted with regret that the United Nations has once again been prevented from unanimously adopting effective measures against South African colonialism. He also noted with dismay that despite professions of agreement on this fundamental question of Namibia's independence, some of us remain indifferent to the continued imprisonment, torture and massacre of the Namibian people by the Pretoria regime. These parties persist in making Namibia's independence conditional on the withdrawal of Cuban internationalist troops. They question the legitimacy and justness of the armed liberation struggle the people of Namibia have been compelled to wage. What other possible avenues are open to colonized peoples when oppressive regimes are indifferent or, as in the present case, when a regime challenges the international community as a whole? What alternatives are left to the Namibian people when the colonial regime defies United Nations resolutions to which it has agreed and challenges the international community, when it is unwilling to accept the dialog that would lead to the genuine independence of the Territory, when it arrests, tortures and massacres the people of Namibia and when it turns the ' Territory into a prison where every ten inhabitants are under the permanent control of one soldier? There is neither moral nor religious justification for demanding greater patience of these people.
In the history of the struggle for independence the people of Namibia are not the first to tread the path of armed struggle. Peoples of Europe, Asia, America and Africa duly represented here affirmed their right to independence through armed struggle. Europe, weapons in hand, fought against Hitler's occupation and fascism. The People's Republic of Mozambique is itself a product of armed struggle for national liberation.
Given the intransigence of the illegal regime of Ian Smith and the non-compliance by some States with the sanctions imposed by our Organization, Zimbabwe would not have acceded to independence and become a full-fledged Member of the United Nations had it not waged armed struggle.
Namibia is former German colony that should have acceded to independence in the 1960s, as did Tanganyika, Burundi, Togo, Rwanda and Cameroon. Historical facts prove that the question of Namibian independence has nothing to do with the situation prevailing in Angola. It was still a Portuguese colony with Portuguese troops on its soil when South Africa declared the annexation of South West Africa. Eight years before the independence of Angola the United Nations established the Council for Namibia to administer the Territory until independence. Pretoria opposed that process. In 1973 the Security Council, by a unanimous vote and with the acquiescence of South Africa, adopted its resolution 435 (1978). Cuban troops were already in the sovereign territory of Angola, and neither South Africa nor any other Western country raised that issue as being an impediment to the Territory's independence. We recall that other arguments were advanced by the racist South Africans. It is only after all those arguments had been overcome that South Africa and this or that other country raised the false pretext of the presence of Cuban forces.
Pretoria is thus blocking the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). It is contrary to ethics and to international law to link the independence of any people to issues extraneous to that people's country and concerning which they do not have the power of intervention or decision. Today as yesterday the purpose of South Africa's maneuvers with respect to Security Council resolution 435 (1978) is to preserve the colonial occupation of Namibia and to prevent the international community from concentrating its attention on the total elimination of apartheid.
The obstinate attitude of Pretoria is possible only thanks to the support and complicity of certain Western countries which allow the South African authorities to buy time and create the conditions for undermining the unity of the Naiaibian people and destroying the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), its sole authentic representative.
We must reiterate here our rejection of linkage and reaffirm that Security Council resolution 435 (1978) remains the sole acceptable basis for a negotiated solution of the problem. It must be implemented immediately and unconditionally.
When one talks of apartheid, one speaks of the aggression constantly perpetrated by South Africa against the independent countries and peoples of southern Africa. One speaks of armed banditry and organized terrorism that are the preferred instrument of the racist regime in its political and economic destabilization of the countries of southern Africa. South Africa's is a strategy for regional domination that seeks to turn our countries into docile instruments of apartheid.
Part of the territory of Angola is under racist occupation. With the objective of consolidating its aggression against and occupation of the sovereign territory of the People's Republic of Angola, the Pretoria regime protects and renders all forms of military assistance to the puppet bands of UNITA. We vigorously condemn this aggression against the People's Republic of Angola, a full-fledged Member of our Organization, and we demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of South African troops from Angola.
The People's Republic of Mozambique has not been spared from this aggressive and bellicose policy of destabilization. Through armed bandits, the Pretoria regime is waging a veritable undeclared war against our country. That war is translated into terrorist acts such as the systematic destruction of communal villages, schools, hospitals, farms and sugar and tea factories. The terrorists, in the pay of Pretoria, cruelly assassinate farmers, foreign technicians, students, nurses, priests, nuns and clerical members of several religious denominations.
As an example, it is estimated that overall destabilization since 1975 has resulted in the destruction of about 500 schools, leaving 90,000 students without classes; 800 shops have been destroyed and put out of operation, with serious' effects on agricultural marketing; one in every 10 health units has been sacked.
Those are just a few instances of the i rap act of the external aggression against Mozambique. Our Government has assessed the direct effects of this undeclared war at more than $US 4 billion. The estimate does not include the indirect effects of the paralysis of production and the strangling of the distribution, transport and shipment system. Nor does it include the cost of rehabilitating the economic and social infrastructures that have been destroyed.
These acts of terrorism against the People's Republic of Mozambique give concrete effect to a strategy conceived outside our country. Only a plan engendered by external forces could conceive of such cruelty, such great destructive fury and such a total absence of the most elementary national and human sentiments.
We are witnessing maneuvers by Pretoria and other imperialist circles to transfer the operational bases of the armed bandits to countries other than South Africa, with a view to extending the conflict between the peoples of the region and apartheid to relations among certain African States.
We have frequently reaffirmed our vigorous condemnation of terrorism. We are concerned about the fact that members of terrorist groups that sow death and destruction in Mozambique enjoy the support and public complicity of some Western countries, countries that proclaim themselves to be champions of the struggle against terrorism.
The southern African experience teaches us that apartheid is an intrinsically violent and bellicose regime that refuses solutions through dialog and a negotiated solution to the conflict between it and the people of the region.
Solutions proposing the abolition of apartheid have had no response from the authorities in Pretoria. That is the reason why the Pretoria regime imprisons the genuine leaders of the South African people and imposes a state of emergency, refuses to negotiate with the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO); and dares to violate the agreements and commitments that should bind the regime to put an end to its bellicose policy in its relations with the neighboring countries.
In the history of the diplomatic struggle aimed at persuading the Pretoria regime to abandon its racist policies, the Western countries themselves have met with South Africa's intransigence. The international community has arrived at a consensus that the apartheid system has no mechanisms of self-correction and that it cannot be reformed. In that respect, may I quote the following said by President Samora Machel:
"There is no democratic apartheid. There is no humane apartheid. There is no peaceful apartheid. Apartheid is the negation of justice, equality, social interaction. It is an institutionalized expression of the violation of every human right. Apartheid, like colonialism, cannot be reformed. Apartheid, like colonialism, must be eradicated."
The so-called reforms heralded by the apartheid regime, under the slogan "adapt or die", are nothing but attempts to deceive the people of South Africa and international public opinion as well as to appease the popular revolt and thus safeguard and perpetuate the supremacy of the white minority.
The Pretoria regime has already shown itself to be insensitive to persuasion through dialog conducive to a speedy end of the system. As we stated at the Paris International Conference on Sanctions against Racist South Africa, certain Western countries that continue to refuse to contemplate effective measures against South Africa should tell us what to do when they say no to violence, no to sanctions, no to pressures; and South Africa tells us: no to dialog. These countries should show us the road to take in view of the failure of the pseudo-reformist movement undertaken by the racist regime itself. The arguments that sanctions would hurt the black South Africans the most and would affect the economy of the countries of the region are not consistent.
In South Africa nothing can be worse than death itself. Death and murder are daily occurrences there. Even corpses are riddled with bullets on their way to the cemetery. Mourners are also shot at and end up being corpses themselves to be buried. That is one of the reasons why the South African people call for sanctions as a means to shorten their suffering.
Addressing the issue of the effects of the sanctions on the neighboring countries, the President of the People's Republic of Mozambique,
Mr. Samora Moises Machel, told the Summit Conference of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries in Harare:
"In reality. South Africa has applied undeclared sanctions, since 1975, against countries of the region, apart from the destruction caused by aggression".
While South Africa considers the application of sanctions against it as immoral, it has none the less applied sanctions against the States neighboring it. The apartheid regime has systematically destroyed communication and transportation systems that ensure the economic life of the countries of the region.
By sabotaging, through the armed bandits under its command, access to the Mozambican ports of Maputo, Beira and Nacala and the Angolan port of Lobito, South Africa aims at impeding the economic emancipation of the peoples of southern Africa that at present is being undertaken by the Southern African Development Co-ordinating Conference. In this context, the losses caused by the apartheid regime up to 1985 to the States members of the Southern African Development Co-ordinating Conference are estimated at $US 10 billion.
Apartheid is a crime against humankind and therefore must be eradicated. The elimination of apartheid demands that the whole international community take effective, concerted and forceful measures.
I reiterate here the appeal we have on various occasions addressed to all Member States to denounce, condemn and fight by all means the South African bellicose policies; to restate their moral, diplomatic and material support for the African National Congress (ANC) and the other democratic forces in South Africa that are struggling for a just and democratic society; to fight the armed banditry and State terrorism that are devastating our region and demand that South Africa henceforth terminate its support of terrorists; to provide concrete multifarious assistance to the front-line States, particularly Angola and Mozambique, so that those two front-line States may strengthen their defense capability and safeguard their independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity and ensure the good fractioning of the port and railway systems vital to the economies of the hinterland States.
The twenty-second Submit of Heads of State and Government of the Organization of Africa) Unity, held in Addis Ababa in July, and the eighth Summit of the Non-Aligned Countries, held in Harare this month, adopted two special declarations on southern Africa. In them the Heads of State and Government reiterated their commitment and determination to struggle for the establishment of freedom and justice in South Africa and in Namibia through the total dismantling of apartheid. They expressed the support of the two Organizations for the demands of the Commonwealth countries contained in the Commonwealth Agreement on southern Africa.
The Heads of State and Government of the two Organizations adopted concrete measures to be implemented, inter alia the following", first, to exert pressure on the South African regime to bring it to change its policies; secondly, to support the people of South Africa and Namibia in their struggle against apartheid and the front-line and other States of southern Africa in their endeavors to reduce their dependence on racist South Africa.
We appeal to the Member States of the Oil the Nations to support and fully implement those declarations.
In the Maghreb region, the Sahraoui people have been struggling for the past 10 years for reaf fir nation of their right to self-determination and independence. That is a right enshrined in the Charter of our Organization, and it has been constantly reaffirmed year after year. The efforts undertaken by the Secretary-General with a view to finding a negotiated solution for the Sahraoui conflict cannot but be considered positive. It is our strong desire that these efforts may lead to direct negotiations between the Kingdom of Morocco and the Polisario Front in fulfillment of the relevant resolutions of the Organization of African Unity, the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations.
We express our solidarity with the Palestinian people, led by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), in their struggle towards the achievement of legitimate and inalienable rights, including the right to create a free, independent and sovereign State. We demand the total and unconditional withdrawal of Israel from the occupied Arab territories and strict respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States of the region, in particular Lebanon.
The ongoing fratricidal war between Iran and Iraq, two Member States of our Organization, is a matter of great concern. The resolutions of the Non-Aligned Movement and the United Nations reflect a strong expression of the will of the international community to assist in bringing about an end to this war. We appeal to the two parties to the conflict to abide by them.
The people of East Timor continue to struggle heroically against foreign occupation aid for respect for their inalienable right to self-determination and independence. We commend the efforts undertaken by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in the search for a just solution compatible with the true aspirations of the East Timor people. We invite the parties involved, Indonesia in particular, to implement the resolutions of our Organization. We warmly greet FRETILIN, which has been able to keep alive the flame of the liberation struggle of the Maubere people. We reiterate our unflinching solidarity with FRETILIN.
On the Korean peninsula, we support the efforts and proposals of the People's Democratic Republic of Korea for the peaceful reunification of the Korean nation. We reject the idea of two Koreas. The international community must make every effort to ensure that a united Korea will be admitted as a Member cf our Organization in the near future.
The conflicts in Central America must end with a solution that respects the independence and sovereignty of the peoples of the region. We condemn the acts of terrorism perpetrated against the defenseless population, and we call for an immediate end to the interference in the internal affairs of Nicaragua. In this context, we hope that the findings of the International Court of Justice will be respected.
The People's Republic of Mozambique pays special attention to, and regards as very important, the question of the trans for nation of the Indian Ocean in to a zone of peace free of nuclear weapons in the context of resolution 2832 (XXVI) of the General Assembly, we are concerned by the presence of foreign military bases in the region since they constitute a threat to regional peace and security. We therefore reaffirm our total support for the convening of a United Nations conference on the Indian Ocean. We reject every attempt aimed at postponing sine die the holding of such a conference.
This year having been declared the International Year of Peace, the attention of humanity continues to be directed to the question of disarmament. General and complete disarmament, in particular nuclear disarmament, stems from humankind's need to preserve life on our planet, to guarantee its own survival. It is a task of paramount importance that must be undertaken by the entire human race. We
consider it to be urgent that all States, in particular the nuclear Powers, collectively and individually take positive and concrete measures conducive to total disarmament.
Only a realistic and responsible attitude on the part of all States will enable us to guarantee security and tranquility for every nation in the world and to establish a peaceful, prosperous and happy future for succeeding generations.
We wish to commend the efforts undertaken by certain States or groups of States in support of nuclear disarmament. We commend the unilateral moratorium undertaken by the USSR in the field of nuclear testing, which is a demonstration of its willingness to move towards nuclear disarmament.
For the People's Republic of Mozambique, disarmament does not only mean saving humanity from total annihilation but also enabling nations to tread the path of development and prosperity.
The spending of financial, material and human resources for military purposes is contrary to the aspirations of the people to economic and social development. we cannot accept the present situation, in which roughly 32 million is spent each minute cm the manufacture or arms, while at the same time 30 children die of hunger, disease and malnutrition. It runs counter to human solidarity for military expenditures to be 25 times as great as the total sum available for assistance to developing nations.
Under development, as a negation of the legitimate right of the peoples to development, constitutes a threat to world peace and security. We therefore consider important the international community's commitment to eliminate the ever-widening gap between developed and developing nations.
The international community warmly welcomed the decision of the United Nations General Assembly proclaiming 1986 the International Year of Peace. In pursuance of that decision, various initiatives have been undertaken around the world with a view to educating mankind to cherish, defend and preserve peace.
The people and Government of the People's Republic of Mozambique have associated themselves with the international community, through nationwide celebrations, in this universal exercise of reflection on and campaigning for peace.
With this in mind, a national committee was established to co-ordinate a vast Program to promote the objectives of the International Year of Peace. In the same context an international seminar on peace was held in Maputo in July.
The response of the People's Republic of Mozambique to the declaration made by the General Assembly at the fortieth session stems from the will of our people and State to live in peace and to contribute to the easing of world tensions and conflicts.
In Mozambique, as in southern Africa as a whole, peace continues to be the main aspiration of men, women and children, and of the young and old of all races, creeds and social levels. It is a dream that everyone dearly loves and deeply cherishes.
In this regard, I should like to fulfill a pleasant duty by bringing to the attention of the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Peres de Cuellar, a message - an appeal - by a group of children from my country who represent millions of others who long for a peaceful world. Those children are preoccupied with the present, but above all, with the future - the future of humankind. Those children addressed to me, in my capacity as Chairman of the co-ordinating committee for the celebrations of the International Year of Peace, the following letter:
"The earth is the home that was given us to live in, to love and to suffer in. To destroy it would mean destroying all its inhabitants. In other words, it would as if we were left without a home, forced to sleep in the open. Worse still*, its destruction would mean the end of all of us who inhabit this marvelous planet.
Unfortunately, we are at the beginning of that end. We are at the brink of this catastrophe, this holocaust, this monstrous crime.
We are new like a grenade just before the moment of detonation. We are like a gunpowder keg, ready to explode.
We, human beings, are bringing closer our own end. We, human beings, are setting the day of final judgment. We kill, assassinate, loot, destroy...
We channel our intelligence into the production of weapons rather than the promotion of health, education, science and beneficial  technology. Today, the earth is nothing but a mountain of dung, and we its worms. Hunger, misery, war, destruction...
Our planet is suffering from a disease whose cure only we, the human species, can diagnose.
And to do so would not be difficult: we would need only mutual understanding. ...Love of children, flowers, men and ourselves.
Love of our existential being, respect for the world that shelters us. But in the midst of so many minds uniquely devoted to destruction, there are people who still believe in the future, who still have faith in the human capacity to build and to safeguard the good.
Amidst the exploding bombs, there are still those who dream of establishing peace and making this marvelous planet a quiet place for humanity to live. "In the midst of such meanness and injustice, there is still hope of saving the flowers, the fields, and the children ... and of giving them all possible love. Of guaranteeing them a secure, comfortable and pleasant place to live. He are proud to know that we belong to that group. Even though we are living in a coin try suffering the consequences of meanness, war, assassinations and hunger resulting from destruction, we hope one day to see the Mozambican people living their daily lives in tranquility.
lb see a child, in the city, in the countryside, in the communal village, walking calmly to school, without showing in its face signs of fear that it may not return home ... or return and not find its parents.
We are privileged to live in a country where teaching comes from men who have fought, still fight and will always fight for peace, for what is good. Who have established and preserve equality, fraternity, justice and love. ... And if war exploits are still a daily happening in our lives, this due to the mean character of human beings without spirit, without soul, without the least human sentiment, who are bent purely and simply on destruction. However, history has taught us that the just will prevail. Those who value peace, justice and love will win. We shall win.
For our party and State, for all of us, peace-loving children, the year 1986 is of the highest significance in our struggle. Because it is, as is well known, the International Year of Peace. In prompt response to the United Nations, our country dedicated a week of celebrations in support of peace. This response to the appeal by the United Nations on the part of our Party and State shews the extent of their concern with the problem of peace and the maintenance of peace, we are a group of youngsters who also agreed to contribute to the International Year of Peace as testimony to our support for the United Nations declaration, and also in re "Although humble, our contribution consists of two boohs, entitled Independence and Peace. That theme was born of the fact that without independence there can be no peace.
The first consists of signatures of various peace-loving people, dedicated to peace.
The second is a more personal way of expressing our sentiments to the world and its problems, to the permanent struggle for peace.
... Both are the result of a contest on peace initiatives promoted by the United Nations and in which we are participating.
He entrust the Chairman of the co-ordinating committee for the celebration of the International Year of Peace, Mr. Joaquiro Alberto Chissano, who is also a great fighter for human rights, to deliver those two volumes to United Nations Headquarters. He hope that the competent authorities at the United Nations will echo our initiative so that the rest of the world may know how much we love peace and strive for it. He also express our willingness and determination to pursue our ideals. Our initiative will not end here. He want to give birth to the spirit of love and peace and we will act accordingly. He also want to live in happiness and to transmit that happiness to the uncounted thousands of succeeding generations.
That is the best way of preparing our future and of preserving the present. Everything could begin with a simple handshake. We want and love peace. Signed, peace lovers Gizela Machungo, Tatiana Cabaco, Habiba Marta Guebuza, Isabel Silesio, Salome Silesio, Sinamwemba Namashulua, Oscar Namashulua, Sergio Namashulua, Ernesto dos Santos, Nj'impine Chissano, Chinguane Mabote, Jose Mabote, Eduardo Matsinhe, Henrique Manu and Samora Machel Jr."

I shall have the pleasure, in due course, of handing over to the Secretary-General the two works I have mentioned. The first work, a book of 185 pages, consists of clippings of articles and pictures relating to the struggle for peace selected from various magazines and newspapers in Portuguese from various countries. This compilation includes texts selected from the works of several writers, statistical data and statements by and interviews with scientists, authors and peace-loving persons. It is the result of research and reflection on and the study of peace by children.
The second work, as I have said, is of the same length and contains the signatures of several personalities, including Heads of State or Government of several countries, students and teachers, who, besides signing it, agreed to provide a written commentary on the issue of peace.
In the name of the children of the People's Republic of Mozambique, I ask the Secretary-General, through you. Sir, to convey to the entire international community the sentiments they have expressed in their works.
Twenty-two years ago today, on 25 September 1964, the Mozambican people, under the leadership of FRELIMO, launched the epic task of liberating the land and the people from the foreign yoke. In celebrating this date we are marking the beginning of the exercise of democracy by our people and their participation in determining the destiny of their country. At this very moment, the second general election is taking place nation-wide, which makes a reality of and consolidates the democratic, popular nature of our State.
The beginning of our armed struggle for national liberation was also, for us, the beginning of the Mozambican people's contribution to the struggle for peace in our region, Africa, and the world as a whole. We have thus joined hands with the community ox nations in its efforts to build a better world.
Today, 25 September 1985, the People's Republic of Mozambique, an African, non-aligned, socialist country, wishes to reaffirm from this high rostrum its adherence to the United Nations Charter and its determination to struggle for the promotion of the principles and objectives enshrined therein.
For this reason we say: for the liberty and independence of peoples, for democracy and equality among men and nations, for justice, for co-operation and development, for international peace and security, the struggle continues.


A short walk from this Hall is the delegates' Meditation Room, a refuge from a world deafened by the noise of strife and violence. "We want to bring back the idea of worship", Dag Haramarskjold once said about this room, "devotion to something which is greater and higher than we are ourselves".
It is just such devotion that gave birth to the United Nations: devotion to the dream of world peace and freedom, of human rights and democratic self-determination, of a time when, in those ancient words, "... they shall beat their swords into plowshares ... nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more".
The United States remains committed to the United Nations. For over 40 years, this Organization has provided an international forum for harmonizing conflicting national interests and has made a significant contribution in such fields as peace-keeping, humanitarian assistance, and eradicating disease. Yet, no one knows better than those in this Hall how the noble ideals embodied in the Charter have often remained unfulfilled. This Organization itself faces a critical hour - that
is usually stated as a fiscal crisis. But we can turn this "crisis" into an opportunity. The important reforms proposed by the Group of Experts can be a first step towards restoring this Organization's status and effectiveness. The issue, ultimately, is not one of cash but of credibility. If all the Members of this universal Organization decide to seize the moment and turn the rhetoric of reform into reality, the future of the United Nations will be secure. And members have my word for it: My country, which has always given the United Nations generous support, will continue to play a leading role in the effort to achieve its noble purposes.
When I came before the Assembly last year, an important moment in the pursuit of those purposes had not yet occurred. The leaders of the Soviet Union and the United States were to meet in Geneva. These discussions have now been held. For over 15 hours, the Soviet and American delegations met. For about five hours, General Secretary Gorbachev and I talked alone.
Our talks were frank. The talks were also productive - in a larger sense than even the documents that were agreed. Mr. Gorbachev was blunt; so was I. We came to realize again the truth of the statement: Nations do not mistrust each other because they are armed; they are armed because they mistrust each other. And I did not hesitate to tell Mr. Gorbachev our view of the source of that mistrust: the Soviet Union's record of seeking to impose its ideology and rule on others. So we acknowledged the deep and abiding differences between our systems of government, our views of history, and the future of mankind. But, despite these differences, we resolved to work together for real reductions in nuclear arms, as well as progress in other areas.
Delegates to the forty-first session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, today I want to report to you on what has transpired since the summit, notably the important letter X sent on 25 July to Mr. Gorbachev. In that letter, I dealt with the important issues of reducing nuclear arms, agreeing on strategic defenses, and limiting nuclear testing. In addition to those issues, which concern the military aspects of Soviet-American relations, I would also like to address other essential steps towards peace: the resolution of political conflicts, the strengthening of the international economy, and the protection of human rights.
Before I do this, however, let me, in the tradition of candor established at Geneva, tell you that a pall has been cast over our relations with the Soviet Union. I refer here to a particularly disturbing example of Soviet transgressions against human rights.
Recently - after the arrest of a Soviet national and united Nations employee accused of espionage in the United States - an American correspondent in Moscow was made the subject of fabricated accusations and trumped-up charges. He was arrested and jailed in a callous disregard of due process and numerous human rights conventions. In effect, he was taken as a hostage - even threatened with the death penalty.
Both individuals have now been remanded to their respective ambassadors. But this is only an interim step, agreed to by the United States for humanitarian reasons, it does not change the facts of the case: Gennadi Zakharov is an accused spy who should stand trial; Nicholas Daniloff is an innocent hostage who should be released. The Soviet Union bears the responsibility for the consequences of its action. Misusing the United Nations for the purposes of espionage does a grave disservice to this Organization.
The world expects better. It expects contributions to the cause of peace that only the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union can make.
It is for this reason that I wrote last summer to Mr. Gorbachev with new arms control proposals. Before discussing the proposals, let us be clear about which weapons are the most dangerous and threatening to peace. The threat does not come from defensive systems, which are a shield against attack, but from offensive weapons - ballistic missiles that hurtle through space and can wreak mass destruction on the surface of the Earth - especially the Soviet Union's heavy, accurate ICBMs, with multiple warheads, which have no counterparts in size or number in any other country.
That is why the United States has long urged radical, equitable, verifiable reductions in these offensive systems. Note that I said reduction; for this is the real purpose of arms control: not just to codify the levels of today's arsenals, not just to channel their further expansion, but to reduce them in ways that will reduce the danger of war. Indeed, the United States believes the prospect of a future without such weapons cf mass destruction must be the ultimate goal of arms control.
I am pleased to say that the Soviet Union has now embraced our idea of radical reductions in offensive systems. At the Geneva summit last November, we agreed to intensify work in this area. Since then, the Soviets have made detailed proposals which, while not acceptable to us, appear to represent a serious effort. So we continue to seek a 50 per cent reduction of American and Soviet arsenals - with the central focus on the reduction of ballistic missile warheads. If the Soviet Union wants only a lesser reduction, however, we are prepared to consider it but as an interim measure. In other provisions as well, we have sought to take account of Soviet concerns. So there has been movement.
Similarly, in the area of intermediate-range nuclear forces, the United States seeks the total elimination of such missiles on a global basis. Again, if the Soviet Union insists on pursuing such a goal in stages, we are prepared to conclude an interim agreement without delay.
All this gives me hope. I can tell representatives that the exchanges between our two sides this summer could well have marked the beginning of serious, productive negotiation on arms reductions. The ice of the negotiating stalemate could break, if both sides intensify their effort in the new round of Geneva talks and if we keep the promises we made to each other last November.
For too long a time, however, the Soviet response has been to downplay the need for offensive reductions. When the United States began work technology to make offensive nuclear weapons obsolete some day, the Soviets tried to make that the main issue - as if the main danger to strategic stability was a defense against missiles that is still on the drawing boards, rather than the menacing ballistic missiles themselves that already exist in excessive numbers.
Still, the United States recognizes that both the offensive and defensive sides of the strategic equation must be addressed. And we have gone far to meet Soviet concerns expressed about the potential offensive use of strategic defensive systems. I have offered firm and concrete assurances that our strategic defense initiative could never be used to deploy weapons in space that can cause mass destruction on earth. I have pointed out that the radical reduction we seek now in offensive arsenals would be additional insurance that strategic defense initiative cannot be used to support a first-strike strategy. Our preference from the beginning has been to move forward co-operatively with the Soviets on strategic defenses, so that neither side will feel threatened and both can benefit from the strategic revolution that strategic defense initiative represents.
The United States continues to respect the anti-ballistic missile Treaty - in spite of clear evidence that the Soviets are violating it. We have told the Soviets that, if we can both agree on radical reductions in strategic offensive weapons, we are prepared right now to sign ah agreement with them on research, development, testing and deployment of strategic defenses based on the following.
First, both sides would agree to confine themselves, through 1991, to research, development and testing, which are permitted by the anti-ballistic missile Treaty, to determine whether advanced systems of strategic defense are technically feasible.
Secondly, a new treaty, signed now, would provide that, if after 1991 either side should decide to deploy such a system, that side would be obliged to offer a plan for sharing the benefits of strategic defense and eliminating offensive ballistic missiles. This plan would be negotiated over a two-year period.
Thirdly, if the two sides cannot agree after two years of negotiation, either side would be free to deploy an advanced strategic defensive system, after giving six months* notice to the other.
As the United States has repeatedly made clear, we are moving towards a future of greater reliance upon strategic defense. The United States remains prepared to talk about how - under what ground rules and process - we and the Soviet Union can do this co-operatively. Such strategic defenses, coupled with radical reductions in offensive forces, would represent a safer balance and give future statesmen the opportunity to move beyond it - to the ultimate elimination of nuclear weapons from the face of the Earth.
In addition to our proposals on offensive reductions and strategic defense, we have suggested new steps in another area - nuclear testing. Just as eliminating all nuclear weapons is our long-term goal, so too is a total ban on nuclear
testing; but both must be approached with practical steps. For the reality is that for now we still must rely on these weapons for the deterrence of war; thus the safety and reliability of our deterrent are themselves critical to peace.
The United States is proud of its record of nuclear safety and intends to maintain it. Nevertheless, we are as I said, ready now to take two important steps towards limiting nuclear testing: first, we ace ready to move forward on ratification of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty and the Treaty on Peaceful Nuclear Explosions, once agreement is reached on improved verification procedures. We have proposed new ideas to make this possible; secondly, upon ratification of those treaties - and in association with a program to reduce and ultimately eliminate all nuclear weapons - we are prepared to discuss ways to implement a step-by-step parallel program of limiting and ultimately ending nuclear testing.
Those are steps that we could take in the near future to show the world that we are moving forward. I therefore call upon the Soviet Union to join us in practical, attainable progress in limiting nuclear testing.
Just a few days ago I received a reply from General Secretary Gorbachev to my letter of 25 July - and, for the moment, let me say simply that we are giving it
As we move towards our goal of eliminating nuclear weapons, it is vital that we also address important imbalances in other kinds of weapons. This is why the United States has proposed a comprehensive global ban on all chemical weapons and why we and our allies have tried hard to break the stalemate in the conventional force negotiations in Vienna. In the Stockholm Conference a major advance has been achieved: a concrete new set of military confidence-building measures which
But we must remember from the experience of the 1970s that progress in arms control cannot be divorced from regional political developments. As I said at the beginning, political tensions cause military competition, not the other way around.
However, while the United States and the Soviet Union disagree over the root causes of political tension, we agree that regional conflicts could escalate into global confrontation. Last year, from this rostrum, I presented a formula for peace which would apply to five critical regional conflicts that are potential flash points for wider conflicts. I pointed out how difficult it is for the United States to accept Soviet assurances of peaceful intent when 126,000 Soviet troops prosecute a vicious war against the Afghan people; when 140,000 Soviet-backed Vietnamese soldiers wage war on the people of Cambodia; when 1,700 Soviet advisers and 2,500 Cuban combat troops are involved in military planning and operations in Ethiopia; when 1,300 Soviet military advisers and 36,000 Cuban troops direct and participate in combat operations to prop up an unpopular, repressive regime in Angola; when hundreds of millions of dollars in Soviet arms and Soviet-bloc advisers help a dictatorial regime in Nicaragua try to subvert and betray a popular revolution.
The danger inherent in these conflicts must be recognized. Marxist-Leninist regimes tend to wage war as readily against their neighbors as they routinely do against their own people. In fact, the internal and external wars often become indistinguishable. In Afghanistan, for example, the puppet regime has announced its intention to relocate tens of thousands of people from border areas, Can anyone doubt this will be done in classic communist style - by force? Many will die, to make it easier for the Soviets and their satellite troops to intimidate Pakistan.
It is just such transgressions that make the risk o£ confrontation with democratic nations so acute. So, once again, I propose a three-point peace process for the resolution of regional conflicts: first, talks between the warring parties themselves, without which an end to violence and national reconciliation are impossible; secondly, discussions between the united States and the Soviet Union - not to impose solutions but to support peace talks and eventually eliminate the supply of arms ^and the proxy troops from abroad; thirdly, if the talks are successful, joint efforts to welcome each country back into the world economy and the community of nations that respect human rights.
In addition to regional disputes, the grave threat of terrorism also jeopardizes the hopes for peace. No cause, no grievance can justify it. Terrorism is heinous and intolerable. It is the crime of cowards - cowards who prey on the innocent, the defenseless, and the helpless.
With its allies and other nations, the United States has taken steps to counter terrorism directly - particularly State-sponsored terrorism. Last April, the United States demonstrated that it will defend its interests and act against terrorist aggression. Let me assure all of you today, especially let me assure any potential sponsors of terrorism, that the American people are of one mind on this issue. Like other civilized peoples of the world, we have reached our limit. Attacks against our citizens or our interests will not go unanswered.
We will also do all in our power to help other law-abiding nations threatened by terrorist attacks. To that end, the United States believes that the understandings reached by the seven industrial democracies at the Tokyo summit last May made a good start towards international accord in the war on terrorism. We recommend to the General Assembly consideration of the Tokyo resolutions.
Moving to the economic realm, how ironic it is that some continue to espouse such ideus as a "new international economic order" based on State control when the world is learning, as never before, that the freedom of the individual, not the power of the State, is the key to economic dynamism and growth. Nations have turned away from centralized management and government controls and towards the incentives and rewards of the free market. They have invited their citizens'to develop their talents and abilities to the fullest and, in the process, to provide jobs, to create wealth, to build social stability and foster faith in the future for all. The economic summits of the industrial democracies have paid a tribute to these principles - as has the historic United Nations special session on Africa in
Hay. We applaud the African nations' call for reform leading to greater reliance on their private sectors for economic growth. We believe that overcoming hunger and economic stagnation requires policies that encourage Africa's own productivity and initiative; such a policy framework will make it easier for the rest of the world, including the United States, to help. The laws of economic incentives do not discriminate between developed and developing countries. They apply to all equally.
Much of the recent recovery in the world economy can be directly attributed to this growth of economic freedom. And it is this trend that offers such hope for the future. And yet this new hope faces a grave threat: the menace of trade barriers. History shows that the imposition of such barriers invites retaliation, which in turn sparks the very sort of trade wars that plunged the world in the 1930s deeper into depression and economic misery. Truly, protectionism is destructionism.
That is why the United States seeks the assistance of all countries represented here in the General Assembly in protecting the practice of free and fair trade. We applaud the success of the meeting of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) trade ministers last week in Uruguay, where agreement was reached to launch a new round of multilateral trade negotiations covering a wide range of topics important to economic growth, with over 90 other countries members of GATT, the United States is working to maintain the free flow of international trade.
In addition to resistance to protectionism, the United States is also seeking to stimulate world economic growth in other ways. Our Treasury bill interest rate is now just over 5 per cent, the lowest it has been in nine years - which provides enormous relief to debtor countries. America's new tax structure will open the way for greater prosperity at home, which will contribute to greater prosperity abroad.
Finally, the united States is working with other countries to minimize currency swings, to promote stability in the monetary markets, to establish predictability as a basis for prosperity.
But, the United States believes the greatest contribution we can make to world prosperity is the continued advocacy of the magic of the market-place - the truth, the simple and proven truth, that economic development is an outgrowth of economic freedom just as economic freedom is the inseparable twin of political freedom and democratic government.
And it is here that we come to our final category - human rights - the indispensable element for peace, freedom, and prosperity. I note that Mr. Gorbachev has used in recent speeches the same categories I have used here todays the military, the political, and the economic; except that he titled his fourth category: humanitarian.
The difference is revealing. The United States believes that respect for the individual, for the dignity of the human person - those rights outlined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Hunt i Rights - does not belong in the realm of charity or "humanitarian" causes. Respect for human rights is not social work; it is not merely an act of compassion, it is the first obligation of government and the source of its legitimacy.
It also is the foundation-stone in any structure of world peace. All through history, it has been the dictatorships and the tyrannies that have surrendered first to the cult of militarism and the pursuit of war. Countries based on the consent of the governed, countries that recognize the inalienable rights of the individual, do not make war on each other. Peace is more than just an absence of war. True peace is justice, true peace is freedom. And true peace dictates the recognition of human rights.
Commitments were made more than 10 years ago in Helsinki concerning those rights and their recognition. We need only look to the East today to see how sadly unfulfilled those commitments are. The persecution of scientists, religious leaders, peace activists, political dissenters, and other prisoners of conscience continues unabated behind the Iron Curtain. You know, one section of the Helsinki Accords even speaks to: "improvement of working conditions of journalists".
So, it is clear that progress in the human rights area must keep pace with progress in other areas. A failure on this score will hinder further movement in East-West relations.
These, then, are the areas of concern and of opportunity that the United States sees in the quest for peace and freedom - the twin objectives of the United Nations Charter.
Last year, I pointed out in my address to the General Assembly the differences between the United States and the Soviet Union are deep and abiding. But I also called for a fresh start in relations between our two nations, a fresh start that could benefit our own people and the people of every nation. Since that time, the United States has taken action and put forth new proposals that could lead our two countries and the entire world in a direction we all have long sought to go. Now more than ever, it is the responsibility of the Soviet Union to take action and demonstrate that they too are continuing the dialog for peace.
As I have said, I believe that we can be hopeful about the world and the prospects for freedom. We only need look around us to see the new technologies that may some day spare future generations the nightmare of nuclear terror, or the growing ranks of democratic activists and freedom fighters, or the increasing movement towards free market economies, or the extent of world-wide concern about the rights of the individual in the face of brute, State power.
In the past, when I have noted such trends - when I have called for a "forward strategy for freedom" and predicted the ultimate triumph of democratic rule over totalitarianism - some have accused me of telling people what they want to hear, of urging them not: to engage the day but to escape it.
Yet, to hope is to believe in humanity; and in its future. Hope remains the highest reality, the age-old power; hope is at the root of all the great ideas and causes that have bettered the lot of humankind across the centuries.
History teaches us to hope - for it teaches us about man, and about the irrepressible human spirit, A Nobel laureate in literature, a great figure of the American South, William Faulkner, once said that the last sound heard on earth would be that of the two remaining humans arguing over where to go in the spaceship they had built. In his speech to the Nobel Committee in 1950, Faulkner spoke of the nuclear age, of the general and universal physical fear it had engendered, a fear of destruction that had become almost unbearable. But, he said:
"I decline to accept the end of a man. I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal ... because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance."
Faulkner spoke of the old verities and truths of the heart, of the courage, honor, pride, compassion, pity, sacrifice and, yes, that hope which is the glory of our past. And all of these things we find today in our present; we must use them to build our future. It is why today we can lift up our spirits and our hearts; it is why we resolve that with God's help the cause of humanity will not merely endure but prevail; that some day all the world - every nation, every people, every person - will know the blessings of peace and see the light of freedom.


 It is indeed a pleasure to stand before the Assembly and extend to Mr. Choudhury, in the name of Qatar, my most sincere congratulations on his election as President of the present session of the General Assembly, which we hope will be successful and fruitful. His election is an expression of faith in his person, his vast experience and his great knowledge and ability. We are confident that he will put those attributes at the service of the international community during the term of his presidency. His election is also a reflection of the positive role played by his country through its membership in the United Nations,, Nor can I fail to mention the good relations and historical ties that exist between our two countries. We take a keen interest in furthering those relations.
I take this opportunity also to extend my thanks and appreciation to Mr. Choudhury's predecessor, who conducted the work of the previous session with great ability and competence.
Similarly, my thanks go to Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar for his efforts to strengthen the Organization and its role, in order to safeguard peace and security and end all the conflicts that cloud the international climate. The State of Qatar praises and supports the valuable report on the work of the Organization submitted by the Secretary-General to the present session of the General Assembly.
The respect and appreciation enjoyed by the United Nations as an international organization embodying the highest human ideals and dedicated, as stated in the Charter, to safeguarding international peace and security make it incumbent upon us all to strengthen its role, respect its decisions and recommendations and implement and abide by the principles of the Charter.*
* Mr. Dos Santos (Mozambique), Vice-President, took the Chair. However, we note with great regret the failure of certain Members of this Organization to abide by its resolutions and decisions, and the inability of the Organization itself to compel those Members to do so. That state of affairs makes it incumbent upon us all to strive seriously and sincerely to find ways and means of compelling all Member States to abide by the decisions of the United Nations. Otherwise, what is the point of their joining this Organization?
This should not be taken as a denial of all the efforts that the United Nations and its Secretary-Genet.^ have made and are still making on all fronts to strengthen international peace and to consolidate the effectiveness of the Organization. In this regard I must note the excellent work of the Group of High-Level Intergovernmental Experts to Review the Efficiency of the Administrative and Financial Functioning of the United Nations. It is only natural that 40 years after the establishment of the Organization, and in view of the increasing responsibilities and functions entrusted to it, a financial and administrative evaluation should be undertaken with the aim of improving its working methods, increasing its efficiency and securing additional resources with which it can serve the noble objectives for which it was founded.
My delegation would like to affirm the importance of the political element and of a sincere political resolve by Member States as essential to the upholding of the principles and purposes of the united Nations Charter and the implementation of its decisions. That would strengthen the Organization's role and renew the international community's faith in it, thus ensuring a positive response from that community which would result in the Organization receiving the financial contributions it needs to clear away the obstacles in its path.
The Palestinian question remains the most glaring example of failure to abide by United Nations decisions and resolutions and of attempts to obstruct them. Ever since its usurpation of the land of Palestine and its expulsion of the legitimate
inhabitants of that land, the Zionist entity has represented the main challenge to the will and decisions of the United Nations. It continues to practice its terrorism and aggression against the Palestinian people both within and outside their homeland. Prom the beginning, it worked hard to expel them from that land by force of arms. Massacres and genocide awaited those who did not leave. Yet the Zionist entity was still not satisfied. It pursued the Palestinian people into their refugee camps, seeking their physical and psychological destruction.
Furthermore, it extended its aggressive attacks to neighboring Arab countries and annexed part of their lands, on the flimsy pretext of safeguarding its own security. There may well be people who believe that absurd fiction, but who can explain the Zionist entity's aggression against the Iraqi nuclear reactor, which was built for peaceful purposes, or its aggression against Tunisia, hundreds of kilometres from its borders? Regrettably, there are those who despite all this are still ready to give the Zionist entity all the moral and material support it needs, together with the most sophisticated weapons, which it uses to kill Arabs wherever they are to be found.
«
The Palestinian question is the core of the Middle East conflict. All other developments and secondary problems in that region arise solely out of that central issue. -The Middle East, that sensitive part of the world, will know no tranquility or stability until the Palestinian issue is resolved in a just and humanitarian manner, with the Palestinian people regaining the land from which they were expelled, and being allowed to establish an independent State on their national soil, under the leadership of their sole authentic representative, the Palestine Liberation Organization (FLO).
The international community can expect only increased tension and adverse consequences if a just solution is not achieved and if the racist Zionist aggressor is allowed to continue its suppression of and aggression against the Palestinian Arab people, thus trailing under foot the most basic principles of humanity and international law, and to continue to deny the Palestinian people their historic rights and to destroy their identity, culture and institutions.
In addition to the Palestinian question there is another very important and serious issue: the Iran-Iraq conflict. The war between Iraq and Iran has entered its seventh year. We are all well aware of this destructive conflict's human and economic cost for our two Muslim neighbors. We are also well aware of the threat that the continuation of the war poses to the security and stability both of the region and cf the whole world as a result of its harmful effect on freedom of navigation and on international trade. This situation must necessarily be damaging to international co-operation.
Together with its fellow members of the Gulf Co-operation Council and other Arab and Muslim States, Qatar has spared no effort in seeking an end to this destructive war. It has called on the international community - particularly the United Nations - to make every effort to find a peaceful solution that would guarantee to each of those two countries its legitimate interests and historical rights. It is unfortunate that all these international, Arab and Muslim efforts have thus far been in vain.
The members of the Arab Gulf Co-operation Council welcome Iraq's positive stand, as represented by its willingness to respond to all initiatives and to put forward ideas and suggestions for peace between the two countries, and they still hope that wisdom will prevail and that Iran will respond to the desire of the Muslim world - indeed, the world as a whole - for the two countries to arrive without delay at a definitive solution to end their war. Such a solution could be founded on the basis of safeguarding all legitimate interests, and on the principles of good-neighborliness, respect for sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other States.The State of Qatar views with increasing concern the events in Afghanistan, a Muslim country with which we have strong historical ties, which has become another hotbed of tension. The presence of foreign troops on the soil of Afghanistan against the will of its people represents a dangerous threat to the peace and security of that country and has led to a conflict whose eventual scope and consequences no one can foresee. My country hopes that those foreign forces will be withdrawn soon and that the Afghan people will be given the opportunity to choose the political system that suits them best.
The present situation in southern Africa is of primary concern to us. It is our sincere hope that suitable solutions will soon be found to ease tension and put an end to the suffering of the peoples of the region and to the repeated aggression perpetrated by the racist regime of Pretoria against its neighbors. We hope that that despicable regime will abide by the United Nations decisions and allow the African peoples to govern themselves.
Recently my country participated in the summit Conference of the Non-Aligned Movement, held at Harare, Zimbabwe, in a country that was a bastion of racism in Africa until its heroic people set an example by their national struggle and steadfastness in the face of racism and won its freedom and independence.
My country supports all the decisions adopted by that Conference, particularly those concerning the problem of apartheid in South Africa and Pretoria's policy of denying the majority its right to participate in governing its country. We reaffirm our support for and solidarity with the just struggle of the Namibian people under the leadership of the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), and the heroic struggle being waged by the majority in South Africa against the ruling racist minority.
It is the responsibility of us all to mobilize international public opinion in support of these just causes. We call on the countries that co-operate with the racist regime to put an end to their financial and military support and boycott that regime commercially in order to force it to abandon its implacable racist policies.
My delegation followed closely and with great interest the deliberations of the General Assembly at its special session on the critical economic situation in Africa. We welcome the Declaration adopted at that session and the good intentions that were expressed by industrialized countries. We hope they will be translated into positive action at the earliest possible time and that the international community will perform its humanitarian role in helping the African countries overcome the negative effects of circumstances, mostly beyond their control.
The present situation can bs resolved only through concerted efforts in
support of the efforts of the African countries themselves to overcome the negative consequences of their critical economic situation.
We look forward to an international community in which peace and security prevail, in which all States and peoples co-operate and live in equality. It is in that context that we repeat our call to the United States and the Soviet Union to put an end to their cold war, the intensity of which has increased in recent years. We urge them to end the arms race in which they are engaged and work together to improve the chances of peace and of finding just solutions to the chronic and the urgent problems in the Middle East, southern Africa and Latin America.
-he world economic crisis continues to wreak havoc on the developing countries. The international community as a whole is vulnerable and exposed to its consequences owing to the interdependence of interests. The debt and interest
burden has readied phenomenal proportions in the third world. The deterioration of the terms of international trade, the consequences of the protectionist policies adopted by the industrialized countries and the decline in the prices of commodities produced by the developing countries have all come at a time when inflation and prices have risen in the developed and the developing countries.
This critical economic situation, represented by inflation, recession and a decline in the prices of raw materials, must impel the international community to realize the necessity of resuming the North-South dialog in order that agreement may be readied between the industrialized and the developing countries for the setting up of a new economic order or improving the present one. Only then will a solution be found to the current economic difficulties.
Economic development is the only means by which the developing countries can settle their foreign debt, which represents the major crisis facing these countries and can lead to their financial collapse. In this context, and in order to stimulate growth and development, we call for an increase in imports from developing countries along with a genuine reduction of interest rates on the outstanding debts of the debtor countries. We also call for an increase in lw-interest loans extended by international lending institutions and the extension of repayment periods.
On the other hand, the developing countries should develop their economic policies in such a way as to allow for the stabilization of consumption and the optimum use of credits to set up investment projects guaranteed to generate work opportunities.


I should like, first of all, on behalf of the delegation of the Kingdom of Morocco, to extend to Ambassador Choudhury our sincere congratulations on his election as President of the General Assembly. We are convinced that his eminent qualities as a statesman, together with his great experience in international affairs, are the best guarantee of the success of this important session. We are particularly satisfied at seeing him preside over our work because brotherly ties and many affinities link his country, Bangladesh, with the Kingdom of Morocco.
I also take this opportunity to express to his predecessor. Ambassador Jaime de Pinies, our deep satisfaction with the remarkable way in which he fulfilled the mandate we entrusted to him at the opening of the previous session. Once again he provided proof of his exceptional skill and his great faith in our Organization.*
 We wish to reiterate to our Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, our profound esteem and our appreciation of his tireless and persistent efforts in the past five years to enable our Organization fully to shoulder its responsibilities in the maintenance of international peace and security and in the attainment of a better world characterized by stability and co-operation between all States. Since his election as Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar has continually sought, with courage and selflessness, to strengthen the role of the United Nations, by his many initiatives and by suggesting measures which could give the United Nations the means to react more effectively, to both threatened and actual armed conflicts.
We hope that the Secretary-General will accept, at the end of his first term, the assurance of our trust and our gratitude for his services to the community of nations. He may be sure that we shall continue to extend our co-operation to him.
The commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations provided us last year with an opportunity to take stock of the achievements of our Organization and analyse the shortcomings and flaws which prevent it from attaining the goals and objectives we have set ourselves. It is encouraging that we have unanimously reaffirmed the continuing validity of the principles of the Charter and clearly asserted our desire to promote the strengthening of our institution to enable it to respond better in future to the requirements of our time.
To this end, the General Assembly has devoted great-attention to the question of improving the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of our Organization. Thus, we have expressed our collective belief that the United Nations would be better able to make its contribution to solving the many problems disrupting our world if its structures and methods of work were rationalized and its financial situation definitively improved. The Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts set up for this purpose has just submitted detailed recommendations, which deserve our careful consideration, with the need to strengthen confidence in the United Nations uppermost in our minds.
The Moroccan delegation, foe its part, is eager to make its full contribution towards the adoption of rational, objective decisions which will increase the efficiency of the Organization and its ability to cope with the political, economic and social problems for which it is responsible.
We have unanimously proclaimed the year 1986 the International Year of Peace. We have thus shown our determination to initiate Fresh ideas and action in favor of peace, which remains the primary objective of our Organization. In proclaiming an International Year of Peace, we were guided by the conviction that the promotion of international peace and security requires a commitment on the part of all States to resolute action on non-recourse to the use of force, the peaceful settlement of disputes, non-intervention, disarmament, decolonization, respect for the principle of self-determination, and the elimination of all forms of discrimination. The promotion of peace also requires a collective and sustained effort in favor of development.
Of course, many demonstrations have been held throughout the world which have helped to increase public awareness of the urgent need to think and to act in a systematic and innovative way with a view to achieving the goals of the United Nations. However, it must be noted that the international scene continues, as in the past, to present a disturbing image because of the persistence of many flash-points of tension, the exacerbation of certain conflicts, the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor nations and the continuation of the uncontrolled arms race.
In southern Africa one of the most explosive situations continues to confront the international community. Pursuing its reactionary and anachronistic policy, the Pretoria regime is maintaining and stepping up its oppression of the people of South Africa. Despite all the initiatives taken to bring about the advent of a democratic multiracial society, the Government of South Africa is continuing to strengthen the shameless system of apartheid. Its proclamation of the state of emergency and its long list of crimes and violations of the most fundamental rights
of the human person provide, once again, proof of the intransigence of the Pretoria regime and its refusal to respond to the general indignation aroused throughout the world by its policy of racial discrimination.
Turning its back on the inevitable course of history and the most sacred values of civilization, the South African regime has opted for an adventurous policy of headlong onslaught and is engaged in repeated acts of aggression against its front-line neighbors, thereby sowing the seeds of a general conflagration in southern Africa.
Supporting the people of South Africa and the other peoples of that part of our continent, the Kingdom of Morocco will continue to provide them, as in the past, with unreserved assistance in their struggle against the apartheid regime.
Universal awareness of the seriousness of the situation prevailing in southern Africa and the dangers inherent in it has led to the rallying of the entire international community around the idea of imposing sanctions on South Africa. We express the hope that our Assembly will be able during this session to decide on appropriate sanctions to compel the Government of South Africa to respect the rule of the majority and the fundamental rights of the human person.
Eight years have elapsed since the Security Council adopted resolution 435 (1978), which established a plan for the peaceful and democratic settlement of the Namibian problem. Here again, the Pretoria regime has contrived to erect obstacles to prevent the implementation of the United Nations plan which was to lead Namibia to independence. The Kingdom of Morocco reiterates its unreserved support for our Namibian brothers and calls upon the international community to redouble its efforts to hasten the liberation of Namibia from South Africa's illegal occupation.
For 40 years the Middle Bast has been the theater of bloody conflicts seriously endangering international peace and security. However, that region, the cradle of the revealed religions and the part of the world where civilization has flourished from time immemorial, has always been a land of coexistence among all the children of Abraham. Jews and Arabs have lived there on perfectly good terms, contributing through their common genius to the enrichment and flourishing of the heritage of human civilization. This model of harmonious relations between Jews and Arabs prevailed for centuries, throughout the Arab-Islamic world. I n Morocco particularly, this coexistence was strengthened over the centuries and has been maintained intact to this day, with tolerance and respect for the differences between Jews and Muslims in Morocco, bound by their common commitment to being Moroccan and to the sacred values of the nation.
Thus we can only deplore the fact that the tragedy created in the Middle East over the past 40 years and the vicissitudes experienced in the region in that time have exacerbated the antagonisms to the point where people have come to believe that any coexistence between Jews and Arabs is out of the question. However, an effort of imagination should make it possible to overcome existing obstacles and to lead to a return to the original harmony which formerly permitted the children of Abraham to contribute together to the building of one of the most brilliant civilizations of the Mediterranean world.
For this to happen, Israel must come to its senses and realize that its own interests impel it to put an end to its intransigent attitude, which undermines the path to peace. It is undeniable that this objective can be attained only if Israel recognizes all the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, in particular its right to return to its homeland and its right to the establishment of its own State.
It is also undeniable that the establishment of peace requires withdrawal from all the occupied Arab territories. The solution of the tragic problem of the Middle East would enable the peoples of the region to recover the spirit of understanding and the foundations of their ancestral symbiosis, a source of progress and renewed prosperity in that part of the world. This vision of the future is embodied in the Arab peace plan adopted unanimously at Fez in 1982, which established the most appropriate principles for a just and lasting settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Hence we regret that this realistic and constructive step, which has met with broad approval, has so far, unfortunately, been blocked by Israel.
We consider that it is the duty of the international community to pursue its efforts to bring about an age of peace in that part of the world. To achieve this, several formulas have been put forward in search of a comprehensive solution for the Israeli-Arab problem. Reference has been made to an international conference or a preparatory committee, as well as the possibility of an international forum. As far as we are concerned, we believe that pragmatism and realism should guide us in our quest for peace and stability in that troubled region. Any solution which has the support of the-parties and the principal Powers concerned will enjoy our full support.
We feel that an international conference bringing together the countries concerned, the Palestine Liberation Organization, which as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people is alone able to make the necessary commitments, and also the Powers with vital interests in the region and world responsibilities would constitute an appropriate forum for the search for and implementation of a comprehensive peace plan for the Middle East.Morocco and Lebanon are linked by so many ties and affinities. We share with that brother Arab country common roots in history and the same commitment to the values of democracy and respect for fundamental freedoms. Therefore we must reiterate once again our grave concern at the tragic situation and upheaval that have prevailed in Lebanon for a decade. The tragedy experienced by this brother country is exacerbated by foreign interference and the presence of foreign troops.
We are convinced that the Lebanese people are capable of finding a solution to their problems within a national framework that they are capable of recovering their cohesion and unity, provided that an end is put to all occupation of the territory by foreign armed forces.
The continuation of the fratricidal war between two members of our Organization, Iraq and Iran, is a matter of grave source to us. That conflict, which has lasted all too long, has already cost considerable loss of life and threatens at any time to spread its destruction to the entire Gulf region. Nevertheless, there has been no lack of attempts at mediation to put an end to it. The United Nations, the Islamic Conference and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries have endeavored to convince the two warring parties of the need for an immediate end to hostilities and for a peaceful settlement to their dispute. We must acknowledge that Iraq has shown its good will and has agreed on many occasions to commit itself to a process of negotiated settlement. We hope that the Islamic Republic of Iran will finally heed the many appeals made to it. Wisdom, the voice of reason and the enlightened self-interest of all peoples in the region so require.
The denial to some countries of their right to choose freely their political, economic and social system manifested in outside interference and foreign occupation, is yet another source of tension in international relations.
The Kingdom of Morocco- which stalwartly defends full respect for independence, territorial integrity and the sovereign equality of States, makes an urgent appeal for the evacuation of foreign troops from Afghanistan so that that country say regain its original role as a non-aligned, free and sovereign country. The efforts of the Secretary-General of our Organization to bring about a peaceful settlement of that problem deserve our encouragement and support.
My country deeply deplores the continued occupation of the territory of Democratic Kampuchea. We remain convinced of the need for the withdrawal of the Vietnamese troops so as to allow for a peaceful settlement of that problem and for the establishment of a lasting peace in South-Bast Asia.
External interference has also seriously disturbed stability in Central America. Morocco hails the efforts of the countries concerned to establish regional joint efforts and eliminate interference in their internal affairs. It is incumbent upon the international community to support and encourage the efforts of the Contadora Group to set up the machinery for a peaceful solution, based on respect for national sovereignty and for the territorial integrity of all States in the region.
As regards what has come to be called the Question of the Western Sahara, my delegation has on many occasions in the past 10 years presented to this Assembly the various aspects of that problem. I should like, however, to recall the most recent developments in that issue, and more specifically, the peace initiative undertaken by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. For indeed the Kingdom of Morocco, like all the other parties concerned, received a letter, dated 20 March 1986, in which Mr. Perez de Cuellar proposed:
 "to begin in New York mi 9 April 1986, under his own auspices and with the presence of the personal representative of His Excellency Mr. Abc'ou Diouf, President of Senegal and current President of the Organization of African Unity, negotiations with a view to establishing a cease-t -- re and organizing a referendum in the Western Sahara, pursuant to the relevant resolutions of the Organization of African Unity and the United Nations. It is to be understood that those negotiations will take place separately between the parties to the conflict,"
All the parties concerned responded favorably and in writing to this appeal by agreeing to th i framework and to the objective proposed.
Consequently, the United Nations began to deal with that problem and on that basis two series of negotiations took place in New York in April and May of 1986 in the Office of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, following which Mr. Perez de Cuellar submitted to the parties a memorandum setting forth precise questions concerning the overall aspects of a referendum. I should like to inform this Assembly that the Kingdom of Morocco has officially and solemnly agreed to the organization of a referendum for self-determination, monitored and safeguarded by the united Nations.
The Kingdom of Morocco has therefore participated, and will continue to participate, sincerely and in a constructive spirit, in the process of good offices undertaken by the Secretary-General. His Majesty King Hassan solemnly confirmed to him, during the Secretary-General's visit to Morocco on 15 and 16 July of this year, that that was the case. Morocco believes that this process deserves the support of all peace-loving countries, for it is part and parcel of the basic principles of our Organization, to wit, the peaceful settlement of disputes and the right of peoples to self-determination. We should then encourage the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the current President of the Organization of African Unity to continue their efforts to bring about a just and fined solution to that problem. He hope that solution will lead to harmony and dialog, which have always been inherent in sub-Saharan relations and without which our region will remain prey to upheavals and foreign designs.
As a Mediterranean country, bordering on the important maritime navigation route of the Gibraltar Straits, Morocco attaches special importance to the maintenance of peace and stability in the Mediterranean. My country will spare no effort to transform the Mediterranean region into a zone of peace, security and co-operation, free from any tension or confrontation. In our view, co-operation and joint efforts among the countries in the north and those to the south of the Mediterranean are an excellent way to achieve that objective.
Over recent years terrorism has continued to wreak havoc the world over. That criminal scourge endangers and destroys innocent human lives. It seriously endangers the fundamental freedoms of the human person and the stability of States. Morocco, which has always opposed all practices contrary to the universal values of human civilization, condemns the use of terrorism whatever its provenance.
My delegation welcomes the increased awareness the world over of a need to combat this evil. We would recall in this connection that Arab leaders meeting at the special Summit Meeting in Casablanca in August 1985 vigorously denounced terrorism in all its forms and origins. We are pleased that last year the international community expressed its belief in the need to heighten the awareness of world public opinion as to the dangers of this grave scourge and to increase international co-operation so as to put an end to acts of terrorism and their underlying causes.
Since its inception the United Nations has attached great importance to the issue of disarmament. Aware of the close links which exist between security of States, development and disarmament, we have continued to work for the adoption of concrete measures which might put an end to the unbridled arms race.
It is regrettable to note that the stockpiling of armaments, already at levels which threaten the very survival of mankind, is increasing, and this only heightens our legitimate concern.
The frenetic arms race causes colossal expenditures amounting annually to hundreds of billions of dollars, at a time when two thirds of the world population is living in poverty, squalor and underdevelopment. In this connection, we regret the fact that the International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, scheduled for last July, was not held. We note, unfortunately, that the aim of general and complete disarmament under effective international control, which we set for ourselves, is nowhere near achievement.
The Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, the only body for multilateral negotiations, is deadlocked and finds itself unable to produce an international instrument on priority questions of disarmament, particularly in the sphere of nuclear disarmament and chemical weapons.
Within the framework of bilateral negotiations we are now witnessing an exchange of proposals and counter-proposals on both sides, especially in the sphere of nuclear disarmament.
The contacts and meetings which took place recently between representatives of the two major Powers, especially those held in Geneva and Moscow, give us further hope for a forthcoming Soviet-American summit meeting with tangible results in the sphere of disarmament*
When we consider the international economic situation we observe that the world is going through a period of great confusion. A cumulative process of long-lasting crisis is developing without any agreement being reached either on the gravity of the symptoms or on the adequate therapeutic means to be applied.
Therefore, the objective of the new international order has become a subject of contempt, the Charter of economic rights and duties of States has been opposed; the inter national development strategy disregarded; multilateral co-operation weakened; the very uniqueness of underdevelopment as a typical phenomenon of modern times has been systematically denied. Even though we live in a shrinking and increasingly interdependent world, the major developed countries continue to prefer piecemeal measures to global and lasting solutions.
Their trade and technological competition goes hand in hand with the divergence of their monitoring initiatives and budgetary Programs, with the resulting adoption of economic policies incompatible with development requirements.
It is widely recognized that the economic crisis is world wide. It is neither a cyclical phenomenon nor mere happenstance but rather the result of deeply rooted structural inadequacies. It is rooted in the close relationship which exists between monetary, financial, trade relations and development prospects. It is characterized especially by the unbearable weight of a growing and virtually irresoluble indebtedness, by the considerable drop in the price of commodities, the grave deterioration in the terms of trade, increased protectionist policies and a reverse transfer of resources.
The crisis of external indebtedness, in particular, will not be satisfactorily solved for the developed creditors or the developing debtors and international financial and banking institutions without, first, a massive transfer of resources of all types towards the developing countries} secondly, without a common campaign against protectionism and restrictive business practices; thirdly, without adequate stabilization in commodity markets; and fourthly, without new forms of debt rescheduling and terms and conditions based on growth and the development strategies of the debtor countries.
Finally, we must add that the debt crisis cannot be reduced without a new substantial decrease in interest rates in real terms, which in the past decade have reached record figures, and without a stabilization of exchange rates whose excessive fluctuations have been exacerbating the uncertainty of the J or Id economic environment.
As long as these questions are not considered in a comprehensive and integrated way, the activities of some will be constantly offset by the reaction of others, without the slightest chance of a renewal of growth, investment and development.
The Kingdom of Morocco therefore believes that the Co-ordination of economic policies among developed countries and the compatibility cf such policies with development requirements would be greatly facilitated by the establishment of a multilateral monitoring machinery which would, in a symmetrical and equitable way, find comprehensive and joint solutions to the distressing problem of widespread crisis, growth and development. Despite the crisis of multilateralism, there is no reason for the United Nations, in its work and deliberations being unable to help decide on broad ways and means for the convening of a conference on a reform of the international financial and monetary system which might guarantee the interest of all and more specifically those of the developing world.
Prosperity for one region at the expense of another is less and less possible without jeopardizing the foundations of our common future.
As for the thirteenth special session of the General Assembly on the Critical Economic Situation in Africa, even though it may be too early to evaluate all of its implications, our feeling remains that a cautious policy of support and vague promises made by the international community were not on a par with our common responsibility, nor with the tragedy of a sorely tried continent. The enormous commitment in concrete, precise terms, which is the African act of faith, has not had an impact on the needs of a continent wallowing in its debts which must face the most serious obstacles at each and every step of its development process. The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) predicts that in this region, by the year 2000:
"There might be massive and repeated famine; imports of foodstuffs might reduce even the most prosperous African States to bankruptcy and many countries will find themselves at the limit of survival." At a time when some do not hesitate to call Africa "the lost continent", we, on the contrary, would like to hail the courageous efforts made by our continent in its struggle for recovery, development and dignity. Morocco, at any rate, hopes that international commitments will meet African needs, as regards the mobilization of financial resources, the development of technical capacity, the relieving of the external debt burden and its servicing within an appropriate international institution. Our world Organization is the only one in the world where peoples can forge a pact of solidarity to overcome the dangers and tragedies facing mankind.
Our differences and the variety of our problems and ideas should not be an obstacle to our living together and to the establishment of true co-operation a song nations. He must draw upon the principles and ideals of the Charter for the materials with which we must build a better, more supportive and more humane world where peace, security and progress for all mankind can prevail.