Exactly 500 years ago, in 1492,
two worlds collided. That collision completely altered the fate of human
civilization and the destinies of the two peoples involved. One people
achieved ascending heights; the other virtually disappeared. What remains of
the indigenous populations of the Caribbean, or much of the "new world",
serves as a measurement of man's ability to be brutish in the pursuit of
wealth. My Caribbean island country has been more than a witness of change in
the 500-year decline, transformation and recreation of the region. From
conquest through slavery, from colonial hegemony to political independence,
Antigua and Barbuda has been a maker of history in the Caribbean and, indeed,
in the larger region.
In 1992, however, our country stands, with the rest of the world, on the
threshold of yet another momentous collision. This time the collision is
between human civilization and nature; this time there are no ascending
heights; this time humanity itself could disappear.
For 500 years, from Columbus to Rio, our forests and our oceans, our air
and our lands - the Earth's gifts to humanity have been wrongly regarded as
inexhaustible and unchanging. "If Columbus uncovered our Earth's expanse, Rio
revealed its limits." Humanity, all agree, cannot march along on its present
course for another 500 years. In fact, humanity cannot proceed with business
as usual for even another 100 years. Island countries, like my own and others
in the Caribbean and in the Pacific, stand in real danger of being submerged
by swollen oceans. Moreover, global warming, insidious climate change,
ozone-layer depletion, the loss of forests and other dangers threaten
humanity's very existence.
Dramatic changes in the systems of production, distribution and disposal
are required of the industrialized countries if we are to save ourselves.

Developed countries cannot consume the Earth's resources at current rates;
developing countries cannot be made to languish in the dusty exhaust of
rapidly accelerating technological societies. Sustainable development that
takes account of environmental costs must begin to guide humanity's
technological future. Only the United Nations and its General Assembly can
construct the new world which, in Rio, this family of nations agreed to
commence building immediately.
It is thus fitting that, in 1992, a representative of Bulgaria has been
selected to preside over the General Assembly at its forth-seventh session.
His nation is taking part in a great regional experiment, the outcome of which
is sure to influence the course of human civilization worldwide. Antigua and
Barbuda hails Bulgaria for its courage, and I pledge the full support of my
delegation for the President throughout the forty-seventh session of the
General Assembly.
Permit me to applaud the outgoing President, Mr. Samir Shihabi of Saudi
Arabia, for his unfailing efforts to bring reform to the United Nations and
for his diligence during Saudi Arabia's year-long tenure. This community owes
Mr. Shihabi a debt that can be repaid only through a continuous effort to
strengthen the General Assembly during the coming years. We must focus our
efforts on economic, social and humanitarian matters with no less vigour than
is currently directed at political and security concerns. Antigua and Barbuda
can be relied upon to promote the multilateral approach to problem solving,
confident that multilateralism will always prove to be superior.
In that regard, it may be recalled that when we commenced the forty-sixth
session of the General Assembly one year ago Haiti was free. The first

democratically elected President of Haiti stood at this podium. The United
Nations had contributed to the ending of tyranny in the Caribbean's oldest but
poorest Republic, and all delegations celebrated with President Aristide.
Ten days after President Aristide"s triumphant declaration in this Hall,
tyranny once again raised its ugly head in our sister Caribbean isle. The
military plotters who brutally seized power in Haiti one year ago are still on
their perch. But this Assembly will never rest until democracy is restored
and Haiti's people are again free.
Antigua and Barbuda, working within the framework established by the
Organization of American States, will continue to press for the expansion of
sanctions in order to isolate further the military regime in Haiti and to
return Haiti to democracy. If we do not succeed quickly in Haiti, the United
Nations will risk tarnishing its well-earned reputation for being able to
tackle exceedingly complex problems in extremely violent situations in other
corners of the globe.
In South Africa, for example. United Nations sanctions have assisted in
bringing the apartheid regime to the negotiating table. It was 46 years ago,
in 1946, that India brought the question of apartheid in South Africa to the
attention of the United Nations; today, 179 Member States are anxious to see
legalized racism exorcized from the body politic.
Twelve weeks ago, when the Security Council convened to seek a solution
to the violence in South Africa, my delegation gave notice to the racist
regime that any attempt on its part to delay the establishment of democracy in
South Africa by fomenting violence would cause us to press for the
reintroduction of the sanctions that had been relaxed. We repeat our pledge

today. While they praise the courage of those who have entered into
constitutional talks, my countrymen will never lose sight of the fact that
apartheid is an evil whose demise the world's peoples eagerly await. Until
apartheid is eliminated. South Africa will continue to be excluded from this
family of nations.
Antigua and Barbuda takes this opportunity to welcome to our family the
12 newly independent nations that have emerged with the end of the cold war
and the collapse of an empire. Island countries in the Caribbean gained their
independence, beginning 30 years ago, during the decline of another empire.
It is thus with a shared sense of exhilaration that we welcome Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
the Republic of Moldova, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan to
membership of the United Nations. It may be too late to caution our new
Members to avoid the pitfalls of fierce nationalism and unharnessed ethnic
rivalry. Both inevitably lead to fractious and violent turmoil, which, we
know, surely end without victors. All multiracial and multi-ethnic societies
must learn to settle historic and current differences peacefully.

Notwithstanding the domestic discord which may obtain following the
arrival of independence, small nations which dwell in the geopolitical shadow
of a giant must be forever diligent in protecting their sovereignty. The
United Nations, fostering as it does respect for international law, remains
the most certain guarantor of a small nation's independence.
Knowing the importance of the United Nations, therefore, we work towards
fashioning a system which responds favourably to the interests of even the
least among equals. Our world parliament cannot become, and must not ever
appear to have become, the handmaiden of a few powerful Member States. The
integrity of the United Nations lies in the ability of even its smallest
Member to participate meaningfully in shaping United Nations policy.
Antigua and Barbuda thus welcomes San Marino to membership in this our
family of nations. As our smallest Member State, San Marino bears a special
responsibility to pronounce on the responsiveness of the United Nations to the
initiatives of the less powerful. Antigua and Barbuda pledges its fullest
co-operation with the delegation of San Marino, now and in the future.
We also congratulate the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, on
demonstrating a willingness to speak boldly concerning matters to which
insufficient attention has been paid. United Nations leadership must chart a
course which promotes peace, justice and freedom wherever these cherished
human values are in danger of disappearing.
The danger to cherished human values is also manifested in
underdevelopment. Island developing countries, and other small countries,
must look increasingly to the multilateral institutions for varied assistance
in finding solutions to vexing problems. The United Nations system cannot

reduce its economic and social development roles without adversely affecting
prevailing material conditions.
Notwithstanding this admonition, our experience confirms that development
is also greatly influenced by good governance and the intelligent use of
scarce resources, including investment capital. While we have relied and will
continue to rely on ourselves to provide good governance, our investment
capital has to be imported. Our small size, however, puts us at the mercy of
the major capital markets, over which Antigua and Barbuda, like other small
countries, exercises not one iota of control. The United Nations, aware of
the special disadvantages that are inherent in the small island developing
country, must respond in a manner which appropriately reflects these
circumstances.
My delegation thus takes this opportunity to commend highly the United
Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Its funding of, and support for, a
number of beneficial projects within my region earns it great applause.
However, we continue to object to the use of the per capita gross national
product (GNP) device for determining development status and funding
eligibility of small island countries. For large countries, the device is
perfect. It was devised with large countries in mind. But when applied to a
small island country, the per capita GNP device results in a distortion.
The measurement device fails to take into account the much higher cost
per person which small populations incur for routine services that are
provided at minimal cost to large populations, even large populations in poor
countries. It fails to reflect the inherent inability of our embryonic
manufacturing industries to penetrate major markets because their production

levels reflect small size. It fails to reward good governance and sacrifice,
preferring instead to believe the fiction that a well-run small island
developing country has graduated, is developed and, hence, in need of no
assistance because a distorted per capita GNP device so determines. We are
flattered to be regarded as developed, but that characterization is
inaccurate. We reject the per capita GNP device and therefore call for the
use of more reliable indicators when assistance to small island developing
countries is contemplated.
In projects relating to improvement of the environment, small island
developing countries have been successful in persuading their larger partners
to accept the fact that their unique vulnerabilities require special
consideration. In this regard, Antigua and Barbuda, in its country report to
the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED),
identified high-priority areas pertaining to its heritage resources that
require special assistance. It is our hope that the UNDP and its capacity 21
funding mechanism will be persuaded to acknowledge our special needs.
Antigua and Barbuda applauds the United Nations Development Fund for
Women (UNIFEM) for its very compelling promotion of the rights of women. It
takes no special effort for my small island developing country to recognize
that successful development requires the unhindered contribution of every
able-bodied adult, regardless of gender. The elimination of de facto
discrimination against women is therefore of paramount importance in my
country and my region. UNIFEM, an active partner in the development process,
can rely upon Antigua and Barbuda's solid commitment to its universal
objective of empowering women in order to strengthen development and to ensure
that justice is gender-blind.

The injustices heaped upon the heads of the world's indigenous peoples
must also quickly cease. To that end, the United Nations has declared 1993
the International Year for the World's Indigenous People. In December 1993
progress made will be measured by deeds, not words. National legislation and
funded projects which are intended to ensure the continued survival of the
indigenous peoples that inhabit remote corners of the Earth must be in place.
Having lost the indigenous Arawaks and Caribs of Antigua and Barbuda beginning
in 1492, my country is duty-bound to ensure that powerless indigenous people
who have inhabited the lands of their ancestors for many millennia are
adequately protected by the United Nations.
Each year, Antigua and Barbuda brings to the attention of the Assembly
the state of affairs prevailing on Earth's last uninhabited continent
Antarctica. Last year, we applauded when the 26 voting members of the
Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties entered into a binding agreement
forbidding mining and oil exploration on Antarctica for 50 years, until the
year 2040. Although the agreement successfully curbs this generation's
cupidity, we believe that Antarctica must never become the possession of large
States only. Transforming Antarctica into a world park or protected area
under the umbrella of United Nations control would be a more certain guarantee
of its preservation.
During the past year, more human beings died of starvation and violence
in Somalia than the entire population of my country. Tens of thousands more
will die in the coming months by self-inflicted violence complicated by the
ravages of nature. The United Nations, recognizing the desperation of
Somalia's 4.5 million people, must further increase its efforts to find a
solution to the crisis.

On the question of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the United Nations has spared
no effort to end the crisis. The European Community is apparently determined
that some crises require more than a regional response. Those of us from
Latin America and the Caribbean, whose regional organization has addressed the
intractable question of Haiti with little success, have the benefit of the
European experience as a guide.

My country rejoices with the Central American countries as peace blankets
their region. The sound of working hands has replaced the sound of working
guns, we are told. If future civil war is to be prevented, however, the
economic systems which prevail in Central America must become far more
inclusive: the sharing of wealth must result in more than a trickle going to
the poor.
The trickling flow of peace in the Middle East is most heart-warming.
Antigua and Barbuda applauds the Israelis and the Palestinians for finally
sitting down together and negotiating their future. It is our hope that,
soon, Israel will be allowed to exist within secure and accepted borders and
that the Palestinians will have a sovereign State of their own.
We rejoice at the wave of peace which has engulfed Lebanon. Despite the
unresolved problems, which the electoral system has attempted to address,
Lebanon is facing the future with a certainty of peace that has eluded it for
more than a decade. A land as beautiful, as culturally diverse and as full of
so many warm people as is Lebanon must pledge to enter the twenty-first
century at peace with itself.
My delegation concludes by recalling that the modern history of our
peaceful Caribbean began 500 years ago when another world collided with it.
The pursuit of accumulated wealth which propelled one world towards the other
remains the motive force of the dominant civilization of today. Yet, complex
webs have been weaved into this underlying theme, which even a small country,
a small place, like mine can take credit in reshaping.

For example, on 3 October 1736, exactly 256 years ago this year, an
unsuccessful slave revolution took place in Antigua. The leaders of that
revolution are the heroes of the freedom-loving people of Antigua and
Barbuda. In 1736, our heroes attempted to destroy a wicked system which
guaranteed the most certain accumulation of wealth at the expense of human
misery. By our own choosing, therefore, Antiguans and Barbudans of today, the
descendants of those slaves and those slave-masters, have declared that in our
hierarchy of values freedom is superior to all else.
In 1992, the human being, not wealth accumulation, is at the centre of
development and civilization. Yet, our countries are now engaged in a great
debate about the future, and the United Nations General Assembly is the
platform. The importance of keeping the entire United Nations system from
becoming homogenized in its thinking is most important at a time when the
emerging new world order is being shaped increasingly by a single Power.
Our task is not merely to express a differing point of view, but to
demonstrate in a concrete manner that the raison d'etre of the civilization of
the next 500 years has not yet been decided. In fact, given the threat to the
very existence of small islands from rising sea levels, violent hurricanes,
hazardous-waste disposal and other looming environmental calamities, the
burden of defining the future may very likely fall upon the thinkers and
actors from these most vulnerable, small countries.
Indeed, our Prime Minister, the Right Honourable V. C. Bird, has
frequently said that small size does not mean small minds or the absence of
grand ideas. And so, my countrymen and I, having learned well the lessons of
our history, shall continue to do all in our power at this United Nations and
elsewhere to influence the future. We shall rely upon our collective wisdom.

the strength of our institutions, the vitality of our youth, and the will of
our leadership to exercise that influence. Our very existence requires
success; and so we shall succeed.


As the first representative of the Independent
Republic of Tajikistan, I wish to congratulate you. Sir, on your election to
the presidency of the Assembly and to express my Government's confidence in
your guidance of the deliberations of the General Assembly at its
forty-seventh session to a successful conclusion.

I should also like to convey the felicitations of my Government to
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, under whose able leadership we are confident the
United Nations will stand up to the new challenges in the years to come.
The breakup of the Soviet Union more than a year ago gave birth to new
independent States, which are making their mark on the world map. Although
some of these States obtained their independence fairly easily, most of them
are experiencing a great deal of difficulty in forming new States.
The formation of a new Tajikistan is currently at a difficult and
sensitive stage, which could be cause for concern. Tajikistan, like some
other former Soviet States, is in the midst of an economic crisis. Since the
reasons for this crisis are quite obvious, I should like to point out several
other factors that exacerbate the severity of our situation.
First, as an agricultural country, we were recently devastated by heavy
rains and floods, which ruined our crops. Our economic losses are estimated
at more than 10 billion roubles. In this context, allow me, on behalf of the
people and Government of Tajikistan, to extend our appreciation to the people
and Governments of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and the
United States of America for their assistance. However, I must add that this
relief assistance has fallen far short of our proportionately large needs. I
therefore call upon all international humanitarian organizations to send
emergency relief assistance and foodstuffs to Tajikistan as soon as possible.
Secondly, our geographical location puts us at a disadvantage in terms of
transportation and accessibility. As far as transportation is concerned, up
until the past few weeks there was even a threat of a blockade of the Republic.
Lastly, Tajikistan has been experiencing some political unrest during the
course of the past year.

Despite these problems, since its independence Tajikistan has been
recognized by 115 countries; established diplomatic relations with 37
countries and opened the doors of the embassies of seven countries in our
capital, Dushanbe; and has become a member of such great world organizations
as the United Nations, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe,
and the Economic Cooperation Organization. I humbly submit that this is an
ongoing process.
At this point, I should like to outline the foreign policy of the
Republic of Tajikistan. As members know, from the very first days of its
independence Tajikistan chose democracy as a system for its new development;
despite economic and social difficulties, and even the death of its own sons,
it has remained and will remain firm in its choice. It is no secret that the
tension in our country was caused mainly by the former Government's attempts
to breach certain regulations concerning freedom of the media and human
rights. But these attempts failed and we will not allow them to surface
again. At present, there is no power in Tajikistan that can stop the movement
of democracy, but we need the support of the world community to ensure that
democracy prevails in our Republic.
Unfortunately, owing to the sensitivity of the situation, we cannot
disclose information concerning certain events in our country. We believe
that such information, if known, could only intensify the problem. But we
wish the world community to know that we have no objection to the kind of
freedom of the media that conveys true facts from various points of view and
within the framework of integrity and professional ethics. We have had no
case in which a journalist has been refused entry into Tajikistan or in which
we have interfered with his or her activities.

Nevertheless, we are often unhappy with the activity of the media from
some countries that distort the facts and actual events. For instance, for a
year certain media sources have been claiming that Tajikistan is building a
fundamental Islamic State. They support this claim by alleging that
Tajikistan is going to adopt an Islamic ideology in the place of communism;
that Tajikistan is the only Islamic republic of the former Soviet Union where
a political Islamic party exists legally and has grown into a unique political
force; and that Tajikistan's foreign policy extends preferential treatments to
Islamic countries. I declare before the General Assembly that none of these
allegations is accurate and that we reject them all.
The communist system and the communist ideology failed, and their
influence is insignificant now. To believe that the people of Tajikistan
would wish to replace communism with an Islamic ideology would be a great
mistake. On the basis of freedom of speech and assembly, peoples of different
political persuasions including democratic, nationalist and Islamic groups
are legally active, in unison, in today's Tajikistan. This is the first sign
of the democratization process in Tajikistan. We call upon the international
community to assist us in our process of democratization. A relapse into
communist dictatorship is impossible in our country. The people of Tajikistan
are against any totalitarian regime. There is no foundation in Tajikistan for
establishing such a totalitarian government. However, we are extremely
concerned that the critical state of our economy can lead our country off its
chosen course. Therefore, I appeal to the representatives of the world
community to evaluate the situation in Tajikistan and to support the new
democracy.

As I have already indicated, all political parties in Tajikistan function
within the law. Any conclusion to the contrary would be ill-founded and
unrealistic.
On the question of friendly relations between Tajikistan and the Islamic
Republic of Iran and the Islamic State of Afghanistan, I should say that for
us these are not merely two neighbouring Muslim countries. Tajikistan, Iran,
and Afghanistan recall for one another the historic memory of a single
nation. All of us constitute a single cultural, ethnic and linguistic unit.
We rejoice in our independence, which allows us to establish friendly and
good-neighbourly relations with our brothers and sisters in Iran and
Afghanistan. We are proud of our heritage, our history and our culture, and
hope that the significance of these factors in our lives will never diminish.
Once one has strayed from one's origins, one must seek a state of reunion.
I also want to emphasize that the goal of our foreign policy is to create
a democratic society that will live in peace with its neighbours. This is the
ultimate objective we pursue in our internal and foreign policies. Our
foreign policy is, in fact, designed to secure this noble goal. The
underlying objective of our foreign policy is to create a positive environment
for Tajikistan in the international community. In this process, we will
endeavour to adopt the type of measures and policies that benefit the people
of Tajikistan while at the same time not constituting a threat or disservice
to the interests of other nations. We support the guidelines established and
recognized by the world community with respect to the norms of international
relations, which stand against violations of human rights, oppression and
racism. We support the peaceful settlement of all regional and international
conflicts.

Tajikistan supports the development of large-scale relations with all
members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). We fully recognize
and respect the inviolability of existing borders between the members of the
Commonwealth of Independence States. We protect the human and cultural rights
of all people living in the territory of our Republic and wish and hope that
the same conditions hold true for the Tajiks living in other States of the
CIS. At the same time, we recognize that political borders in the Central
Asian republics are not based on ethnic origin and that this reality demands
the exercise of much responsibility on all sides.
Tajikistan's foreign policy is based on peaceful coexistence,
good-neighbourly relations and non-interference in other countries' internal
affairs. Hence, we wish to establish political, economic and cultural
relations with our contiguous and non-contiguous neighbouring countries, such
as China, India, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.
Tajikistan is situated in a region where Islamic culture and spirituality
are deeply rooted. We therefore establish relations with countries and
Islamic organizations according to our spiritual and cultural requirements.
Islam is a holy and divine religion and, in our view, certain Western media
have created an inaccurate picture of it.
For more than a century we lived under the Russian Tsars and later we
lived under the Soviet Union. At this period of our history we are not making
any judgement, positive or negative. What is past is past. Through our ties
with Russia and Russian intellectuals, we learned and became familiar with
European civilization. Today we are able to establish our own ties with
Europe and come even closer to its civilization. We believe that the peoples
of Western Europe will show us their support and assist the Tajik people in

their noble struggle. We feel that our tremendous hydro-power, agriculture
and mining industry offers great potential for cooperation with European
countries.
As a newly established democracy, Tajikistan greatly values friendly
relations with all States in Europe, the Americas, Africa, the Near and
Far East and South-East Asia on the basis of mutual respect. We invite the
representatives of all countries in the world to visit Tajikistan and to
witness our open-door policy for friendly relations and mutual cooperation.

We wish to assure the world community that the leadership in Tajikistan
is doing its utmost to stop gun-smuggling of all kinds on its southern borders
and to prevent its recurrence. The Government has devised a scheme for

conciliation and for the disarming of parties to the conflict. Conditions in
our territory are gradually normalizing. In this context, progress has been
achieved; the conflict limited in any case to the central portion of one of
the provinces has de-escalated and a cease-fire has been agreed upon and
announced. Ninety per cent of our territory is in a peaceful state. This is
not a temporary calm, but the beginning of continued peace and durable
stability throughout Tajikistan. We want to assure the world that we have no
intention of becoming one of the globe's hot spots.
I invite representatives to visit Tajikistan, one of the oldest human
civilizations in the world, to begin a new era of friendship and cooperation.

Our goal is to become an economically developed country with friendly trade
relations with our neighbours and with other countries in the world community.
Tajikistan respects and fully observes the United Nation Charter and the
rule of international law. We support the constructive programmes designed by
the United Nations for the settlement of conflicts and problems throughout the
world.
We wish to state that Tajikistan has designated a Permanent
Representative to the United Nations and that he has already begun to fulfil
his duties. We believe that this will contribute to a strengthening of our
ties with the United Nations and the rest of the world.


It is an honour and
privilege for me to address this forty-seventh session of the United Nations
General Assembly.
On behalf of the Government and people of Solomon Islands, I should like
to express our sincere congratulations to you. Sir, on your election to the
presidency of the Assembly. I am confident that under your able leadership
much will be achieved. I should also like to convey our sincere thanks and
appreciation to your predecessor, Mr. Samir Shihabi, for his outstanding
leadership during the forty-sixth session.
Solomon Islands joins the United Nations community in congratulating and
welcoming Mr. Boutros-Ghali, our new Secretary-General. Mr. Boutros-Ghali has
indeed an important and challenging task ahead. I assure the
Secretary-General of my Government's continued support and cooperation.
Much has happened since the last session of the General Assembly. Like
the rest of the world community, Solomon Islands has viewed with interest the
political developments in Eastern Europe since the latter half of 1991.

Self-determination has certainly taken its course. The former republics and
States of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia have now gained their freedom to
govern and pursue their own destinies. We observe with concern, however, that
these changes have had some negative results.
It is worth noting that as a result of these changes a number of former
republics and States have now become Members of this world body. In the same
spirit as previous speakers, Solomon Islands would like to congratulate the
newly independent States of Georgia, Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia and
Herzegovina. The presence of those countries with us in this world forum not
only binds us closely, but brings home a message of unity, hope and peace.

Despite this message, Solomon Islands has learned with dismay about the
recent killings of the civilian population and United Nations personnel in
Bosnia and Herzegovina. We condemn this atrocious act. In this connection,
Solomon Islands fully supports the various measures undertaken by the United
Nations.
I now turn to the Middle East. Solomon Islands would like to register
its recognition of the countries which have played a prominent role in the
Middle East peace initiative. We appreciate the complexities of the conflict
and acknowledge the initiatives taken by the parties involved to find a
peaceful and lasting solution. Solomon Islands urges those with the necessary
resources and the will to do so, to continue to play a mediating and
supportive role in this process. In this context, Solomon Islands would like
to raise the questions where and how the United Nations can best play its role
in facilitating this effort. Given the emerging trend towards peace, Solomon
Islands calls on the United Nations to be both sensitive and responsive in
adopting resolutions. We look forward to more positive participation by the
United Nations in this regard.
We should like to highlight issues that are of concern closer to home,
the South Pacific. As the current Chairman of the South Pacific Forum,
Solomon Islands has an obligation to convey to this body the aspirations and
concerns of the region. At the twenty-third meeting of the South Pacific
Forum in Solomon Islands i 1 July this year, a number of issues of concern to
the region were discussed. These included environmental, trade and economic,
political and security issues.
The South Pacific region is unique because the marine environment is an
integral part of our existence. Our people, perhaps more than others around

the globe, depend on the sea, the land, the rivers and the forests for their
immediate livelihood. But poor development planning and global environmental
problems, such as climate change and the associated raising of the sea level,
are becoming a threat to our resources and aspirations. For this reason, our
region places environmental issues high on our agenda. Solomon Islands fully
recognizes the important outcome of the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development, including the Rio de Janeiro Declaration,
Agenda 21, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the
Convention on Biological Diversity and the statement of principles on
forests. We also endorse the concept of sustainable development, in which
environmental protection constitutes an integral part of the development
process. We are concerned, however, that the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change has not sufficiently addressed the issue of global
warming. We therefore earnestly urge the early commencement of the
negotiations on protocols to implement and elaborate upon the Convention and
we humbly request that this be treated as a matter of urgency.
Solomon Islands welcomes the decision of France to suspend its nuclear
testing in our region. The suspension has led to an improvement in the
relations between France and the countries in the region. It is hoped that
France will endeavour to cease nuclear testing activities in the South Pacific
for all time.
Solomon Islands believes that environmental education and the need to
create public awareness of environmental and related issues should form the
foundation for an implementation strategy for Agenda 21. My Government is
convinced that without educating the youth of today, who will be the adults of
tomorrow, we will merely by paying lip-service to these conventions.

declarations and principles on environment. In other words, sustainable
development of the environment and its protection demand relevant and
cost-effective educational programmes aimed at both the formal and the
non-formal sectors of our education systems.
As a step towards implementing Agenda 21, the primary and secondary
curriculums in Solomon Islands are being reviewed with a view to introducing
and improving the quality of environmental science education in schools.
While we might have the initiative and the motivation to enhance environmental
education programmes, the success of these undertakings is contingent on
financial and technical assistance from the richer nations. It was heartening
to hear, during the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
in Brazil, that developed countries have committed themselves to providing
"new and additional" financial assistance to enable developing countries to
meet their obligations as stipulated under the conventions.
On economic and trade matters, Solomon Islands recognizes the adverse
impact which the global macro-economic trends have on its economy, which is
both open to, and susceptible to, external change. We realize that while the
initiative to begin economic reforms must come from the country itself,
regional and international co-operation in such efforts is also very vital.
Solomon Islands is at present pursuing a programme of structural
adjustment. This programme emphasizes, first, active and effective
private-sector participation; secondly, sustainable utilization of both human
and natural resources; thirdly, privatization of government-owned companies;
and fourthly, streamlining of the public service within the government. Being
small, however, Solomon Islands cannot pursue such a programme effectively on
its own. Success must depend on strategic regional development planning.

proper coordination of development programmes, and the mobilization of
resources to meet the needs. It also depends on the willingness and the
commitment of those with financial resources to be involved. In view of these
reforms, it is our sincere hope that the international financial institutions
and donor countries will support our efforts to achieve our goals and
objectives.
The vulnerability of small island countries to external and internal
security threats is not a new issue in this forum. It has been a major
subject of extensive discussion and debate over the past years. We are
raising the issue again because, despite the end of the cold war, there has
been little improvement in the situation in our region. Undesirable, criminal
and atrocious activities and behaviour, both from within and outside the
region, continue to threaten the sovereignty, security and economic integrity
of the South Pacific countries.
At the twenty-third meeting of the South Pacific Forum in Honiara,
Solomon Islands, in July 1992, the Forum agreed on a Declaration on Law
Enforcement Cooperation. This Declaration identifies priority areas and
establishes a framework within which security activities are to be pursued.
But these undesirable activities cannot be addressed at the regional level
alone.

For the long-term peace and stability of the South Pacific region, or any
other region for that matter, the involvement of and collaboration with
relevant international agencies is vital.
On decolonization, the Solomon Islands notes with appreciation the
positive measures pursued in New Caledonia by the French authorities in the
implementation of the Matignon Accord. We encourage a continuing dialogue
among all political parties in the territory. This is to ensure that
self-determination consistent with the principles and practices of the
United Nations Charter, in a framework within which all options, including
that of independence, is achieved. We encourage regular contacts and
interactions by the Kanaks and other New Caledonians with their South Pacific
neighbours to give them courage and confidence as they prepare themselves to
take on greater roles in their affairs.
As a small nation, Solomon Islands sees the United Nations system as an
effective insurance framework for our peace and security, fully realizing, of
course, that we have no military forces or military hardware. To this
important extent, we hail with gratification the Secretary-General's "Agenda
for Peace", which highlights preventive diplomacy, peace-keeping, peacemaking
and peace-building as a fresh challenge to our Organization in the future. We
recognize these measures as they are defined in his report to be worthy of the
attention of all Member States.
To conclude, may I on behalf of the Government and people of
Solomon Islands thank the United Nations for its continued interest and
assistance in the development of our country.

I should like to place on record my Government's appreciation to the
United Nations and the United Nations Missions in New York for their tributes
and messages of condolence in honour of our former Permanent Representative to
the United Nations, the late Mr. Francis Bugotu.


The memory of the cold war is fading rapidly
in people's minds. Yet, the efforts for adaptation to a world not structured
by the East-West divide have not yet been undertaken. As the images of
violence, famine and destruction flicker on our television sets the urge that
something must be done quickly seizes the consciousness and imagination of
people everywhere.
The world community turns to the United Nations the only universal
forum at its disposal full of expectations that it will succeed in putting
an end to the violence, the senseless destruction of human life and economic
resources which, at this very moment, are plunging millions of people in every
part of the world into despair.
The end of the cold war confrontation opened the way for increased
cooperation. The triumph of democracy and the cooperation of the major Powers
created possibilities for the resolution of conflicts which had originated in,
or were maintained by, the earlier East-West confrontation. The universal
aspiration for a world of peace, liberated from the bondage of insecurity, was
thus quite rightly roused.
During this post-cold-war period we have witnessed positive developments
in many regional problems, particularly Cambodia, Southern Africa, Central
America and elsewhere. At the same time, an effort has been undertaken to
find lasting peace in the Middle East through the convening of a peace
conference. We welcome this positive and important development in the hope
that it will lead to a comprehensive solution, safeguarding the legitimate
rights of the Palestinian people while, at the same time, ensuring the
implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). For
it is our position that all United Nations resolutions must be implemented,
whichever country they concern, be it Iraq, Cyprus or former Yugoslavia.
Furthermore we welcome the developments in South Africa that should lead
to the end of the abhorrent regime of apartheid, in the hope that never again
will any human beings on the face of this Earth be forced to live in
conditions of racial, ethnic, religious or other separation from their fellow
human beings.
The fact that today we welcome 20 new Members in this universal
Organization is sufficient evidence of the tremendous forces at work following
the end of the East-West divide. Welcoming each and every one of these
countries, and all of them as a whole, I express our desire to work and
cooperate with them to uphold the principles of the Charter of the United
Nations, in the interest of peace, security and the well-being of all.
The conditions are favourable for the United Nations, as the process for
a much stronger and effective Organization matures and gains momentum.
However, the challenges that the Organization and its Members are called upon
to meet are also crucial, for, as the old order crumbled, unparalleled forces
of destruction were also unleashed.
The aspirations of humanity for a better world meet with disappointment
in every part of the world. The proliferation of conflicts, due to a variety
of reasons, is the other face of Janus. Along with the conflicts come the
long lines of refugees, the dead, the starving children, looking desperately
to each one of us.
Eighteen years after Cyprus suffered the devastating effects of "ethnic
cleansing" following the Turkish invasion of 1974, we are again witnessing the
restaging of similar tragedies in other parts of the world. In 1974, Turkey,
a strong neighbour of small Cyprus, invaded and occupied 37 per cent of the
territory of the Republic. One third of the Greek Cypriots were evicted from
their ancestral homes and properties in order to create "ethnically clean
areas". Being weak and defenseless, we turned to the United Nations. It is
to the United Nations that a great part of humanity is at this very moment
also turning for help.
The demands are greater now and they are tending to increase. The fact
that the world Organization is free of the fetters imposed by the adversarial
relations of the super-Powers in the cold war era enhances its possibilities.
The burden, however, will be unbearable if the process towards a more
effective United Nations, with the necessary resources and increased
capabilities not only in the field of peace-keeping, but particularly in the
fields of peace-making and conflict prevention, as analysed in the Secretary-
General's Agenda for Peace - is not quickly realized.
Cyprus can again be brought up as a case-study and example.
Following the invasion in 1974, the United Nations system was mobilised'
The Security Council and the General Assembly adopted resolutions demanding
respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Cyprus and an
immediate end to foreign military intervention and called urgently for a
cease-fire. The United Nations Peace-keeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP)
supervised the cease-fire and assured the peace-keeping operation. It has
fulfilled this role as well as other humanitarian functions admirably. And we
are grateful to all the men who served in UNFICYP for their contribution. But
18 years later, the Cyprus problem is still not solved and as a consequence
UNFICYP is confronted with serious financial problems.
If even a small number of the peace-keeping operations the United Nations
is now undertaking have the duration of UNFICYP, given their scale and scope,
very soon the Organization will not be able to cope with the financial and
other burdens.
The Cyprus example is, I believe, sufficient evidence that an intense
peace-making effort must be pursued in parallel with every peace-keeping
operation. For the cost can be limited not by simply eliminating the role,
but by opening the way for just and viable solutions.
In the case of Cyprus, despite the lack of results because of the
negative attitude of the Turkish side during the long negotiations aimed at
finding a solution, the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali,
correctly seized the moment and pursued an intense, renewed effort to this
end. The Security Council, already actively involved in the process, put its
weight behind those efforts and engaged itself in an unprecedented way.
We took our share of responsibility and engaged in those talks in the
spirit of good will and conciliation. For we want to put an end to the
forcible division of our country and the resulting suffering of so many,
particularly of the families of the missing persons. In brief, we want to see
an end to the status quo, characterized by the Security Council as not
acceptable.
Unfortunately, the Turkish side remained intransigent on its aims of
perpetuating the division of Cyprus into two "ethnically clean" regions, in
utter violation of human rights and basic rules of international law. Even
today we hear voices from Turkey speaking against federation, claiming that
since two different communities live on Cyprus the island should be
partitioned. Just imagine how the world would look if this principle were
applied universally.
As the Secretary-General underlined in an interview a few days ago, the
new danger that will appear in the world in the next 10 years is more
fragmentation. Rather than 100 or 200 countries, said the Secretary-General,
there may be at the end of the century 400 countries. By way of example he
went on to say that in Africa there are 5,000 tribes, and if each tribe
claimed the right to self-determination we would end up with many small States
of 50,000 to 100,000 people each. We can all imagine the effects that this
would have on the hopes of humanity for sustainable development. That is why
what happens in Cyprus and the solution of the Cyprus problem based on United
Nations resolutions must be of concern to the international community.
The report of the Secretary-General on Cyprus (S/24472) clearly shows why
no progress was made in the July and August talks. Furthermore, the "Set of
ideas" and the map which are annexed to the report have been endorsed by the
Security Council in resolution 774 (1992) as the basis for reaching a
solution. We should like, in this context, to express our appreciation and
thanks to the Secretary-General and the Security Council for all their support
and involvement in our case.
The resolution also calls for resumption of the talks on 26 October. As
always, we intend to cooperate fully with the Secretary-General and negotiate
with good will. We sincerely hope that the Turkish side, despite its so-far
negative public statements, will at long last cooperate.
If, despite the efforts of the Secretary-General, our good will and the
involvement of the Security Council, the talks in October become a repetition
of the unpleasant exercise we experienced this summer, we are confident that
the Security Council and the Assembly will assure the conditions for progress.
For it would be tragic further to delay, or even frustrate, the effort
for a solution in Cyprus. The people of Cyprus, Turkish Cypriots and Greek
Cypriots alike, want to put the past behind them and advance towards a better
future. The reunification of Cyprus will open a new era of prosperity and
progress to the benefit of all Cypriots in particular, of Turkish Cypriots
and our region. I am certain that the solution of the Cyprus problem is the
only way, and a necessary condition, for the economic and social development
of all Cypriots. In this competitive world of ours, only if Turkish Cypriots
and Greek Cypriots are united and join forces will they be able to win the
place they deserve in the world.
The Secretary-General's "Agenda for Peace" introduces peace-building and
preventive diplomacy as concepts of the utmost importance. The conceptual
framework of the "Agenda" is indeed remarkable in its ramifications and the
linkages it establishes between peace and security, international law,
democracy, human rights and sustainable development.
Cyprus, which accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International
Court of Justice, welcomes and supports the Secretary-General's proposals in
the field of international law, as set out in the report.
Our long-term efforts should be aimed at creating such conditions as will
make the possibility of war unthinkable, even between nations that have a
history of enmity. In order to achieve such a result on a global basis the
United Nations must adapt itself swiftly to the changing conditions. A better
balance and coordination between the various bodies that form the Organization
and the specialized agencies are needed. A more effective and more democratic
United Nations is an essential component of a stable and democratic world
order. Furthermore, as the Secretary-General pointedly underlines in his
report to the General Assembly, we must render our Organization
"capable of dealing comprehensively with the economic, social,
environmental and political dimensions of human development." (A/47/1.
para. 9)
The General Assembly, representing all the Members of the United Nations,
has a major role to play in the realization of this major objective. And I am
certain that under the able leadership of our President, my good friend the
Foreign Minister of Bulgaria, Mr. Ganev, it will rise to these challenges. I
also take this opportunity to pay tribute, Mr. President, to your predecessor,
Mr. Samir Shihabi of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, for the skilful manner in
which he steered the work of the forty-sixth session.
Prominent among the challenges we have to meet is the protection of human
rights in all their dimensions, civil and political as well as social,
economic and cultural. The progress achieved in this field during recent
years, encouraging though it is, should not mislead us. Much progress still
needs to be achieved. That is why we look forward to the World Conference on
Human Rights, which will present us with a great opportunity not only to
assess the progress achieved so far, but also, and mainly, to define the means
for rendering our collective action for the protection of human rights more
effective.
The issue of human rights is crucial, for it relates not only to
peace-making and peace-building, but also to preventive diplomacy. The first
victims of galloping nationalism and micronationalism everywhere, as we can
clearly see, are the human rights of citizens. We in Cyprus, unfortunately,
have bitter experience of this fact.
Tolerance and respect for the beliefs and particularities of others
within societies and peaceful relations among nations are the conditions
for the prevalence of the rule of law and thus of human rights. And as
peace is no longer the end product of mutual fear, it will be maintained
only through the prevalence of mutual understanding, communication and
confidence. In this respect, the process of disarmament has a key
function to play.
In spite of the progress we all welcome, and in particular the
agreement reached within the Conference on Disarmament on a draft
convention for the elimination of chemical weapons, disarmament is still
of the utmost priority in our quest for general stability. The positive
developments in the field of nuclear weapons constitute an asset that has
to be safeguarded. However, the risk of intense arms races between
regional Powers is more than a threat: it is a reality.
It is only through eliminating the roots of insecurity, which makes
the acquisition of arms a vital need for States, and through creating the
institutional framework that will enhance the feeling of security and
thereby diminish to the maximum the need for self-help in case of
aggression, that real progress can be achieved.
We know how painful it is to spend precious resources on arms and we
hurt when we have to pay a few million dollars just to buy a new tank.
But what other choice are we left with when on a small island like Cyprus
the Turkish army outnumbers us in this field by a ratio of 7 to 1,
constantly threatening our physical existence? Time and again we have
proposed the demilitarization of Cyprus, together with the withdrawal of
the Turkish forces from Cyprus. We are committed to using the resources
thus saved for development purposes - most of them directed to projects
that will have an immediate effect on the standard of living of the
Turkish Cypriots. Thus, the peace-building process will be further
strengthened and the people of Cyprus as a whole will benefit.
Human rights and democracy will amount to little if social misery,
starvation and underdevelopment are the lot of the great majority of the
population of this planet. The fragile flower of democracy cannot bloom
on the arid soil of poverty. What sense can the right to vote have if one
is condemned to remain hungry, roofless and without the very basic
necessities?
As the Jakarta Declaration, adopted during the tenth non-aligned
summit only some weeks ago, clearly states:
"A shift of forces in international relations towards strengthening
multilateral cooperation for development has become indispensable."
The division between rich and poor, developed and developing, should
not be allowed to become a new source of instability and tension that
would undermine the foundations of international society. It is an
illusion to think that any country, however rich or great, can survive
isolated, surrounded by an archipelago of poverty.
If we want peace and social stability we must address the issues of
growth and sustainable development in their human and social dimensions.
Indebtedness, mainly due to the collapse of commodity prices and the
subsequent transfer of resources from poor to rich countries, continues to
hurt the developing world. Barriers to trade raise formidable obstacles
to the efforts of developing countries to reach the markets of the highly
industrialized North and limit their possibilities for growth while having
an adverse effect on the export prices of their products. That is why we
are anxious about the delay in concluding the Uruguay Round of
Multilateral Trade Negotiations and express the hope that the target for
completing the negotiations - that is, the end of 1992 will be achieved
this time. Developing nations' access to technology is still very
restricted and this adds to the already existing inequalities that hamper
growth on a global level.
Technology is not an end in itself. The transfer of technologies
from developed to developing countries is a pre-condition for sustainable
development on a global scale. The problem is also directly linked to
that of the flow of financial resources for productive investment in
developing countries. What is at stake here is not only the solidarity
that developed countries should demonstrate. It is also a rational
response that will guarantee their own ability to continue to progress in
a world which progresses as a whole.
It is now widely acknowledged that in our quest for development in
the past we regarded environment solely as a commodity ripe for
exploitation. Now we have come to realize that it is man who belongs to
the environment and not the environment to man. It is therefore necessary
to define a new synthesis between environment and development. The Rio
Conference was a major step in that direction. The world summit gave the
correct message; it shaped the international will and marked a new
beginning. Concrete and effective measures must follow. The Rio
Declaration must not remain a dead letter. We have to translate into
action its provisions, which should guide us in every policy decision.
The 1990s is a decade of dramatic changes. The contradictory forces
and undercurrents that shape the outcome of events must be shaped and
guided towards the creation of a peaceful and democratic world order. The
United Nations is the soul itself, the consciousness of humanity as a
collective entity. As such, it demonstrates a flexibility and a capacity
for adaptation which are admirable. People of worth, dedicated men and
women, work in every part of the world fulfilling impossible missions. We
thank them all.
We have reached a moment when, as Member States, we must assume
further responsibilities and, faithful to the principles of the Charter of
this Organization, work in unison in helping the United Nations to achieve
its objectives. Humanity has conquered mighty and formidable peaks. We
cannot turn back. We are committed to shaping and channelling the hopes
and aspirations of mankind for a more free, democratic and tolerant world,
with a better quality of life for all.


Let me start by
offering you, Mr. President, my congratulations and best wishes. With your
election an outstanding representative of the new democracies in Eastern
Europe has been chosen to preside over this Assembly. I should also like to
convey our appreciation to your predecessor. Ambassador Shihabi of Saudi
Arabia.
I wish to pay special tribute to the Secretary-General. His report
entitled "An Agenda for Peace" contains timely suggestions for a world in
which the very nature of conflicts has changed and which therefore has
outgrown the traditional means of conflict management. Austria supports the
Secretary-General in his quest to develop better instruments for the United
Nations to discharge its ever-growing world-wide responsibilities to prevent
and resolve conflicts.
Many of the Secretary-General's proposals reflect the need for more
efficient conflict prevention. In the case of the former Yugoslavia we have
seen the devastating effects of doing too little too late. Let me recall
Austria's proposal last year to dispatch peace-keeping forces to Bosnia and

Herzegovina when there was still a peace to keep. Always, be it in Somalia,
the Balkans or elsewhere, time-lags between the appearance of the first signs
of a crisis and resolute decisions for preventive action prove to be costly
in human lives, in destruction of property and in the loss of credibility of
the international community.

Peace-keeping operations must go beyond the mere observation of a
cease-fire. In order to meet today's challenges, peace-keeping has to play a
major role in conflict-prevention. Therefore, we support the
Secretary-General's proposal envisaging the deployment of observers at the
request of only one party to a conflict.
Preventive diplomacy, peace-keeping operations, peace-making and
peace-building will increasingly be among the main tasks of this
Organization. Inter-ethnic strife will, unfortunately, continue to be the
source of many conflicts in the future. We must all combine our efforts to
improve the Secretariat's capacity to deal effectively with these challenges.
The demands on the United Nations for peace-keeping and peace-building
are increasing in numbers of operations and personnel, as well as in the scope
of their mandates. We share the Secretary-General's concern about the need
for Member States to make the necessary resources available.
Austria, one of the largest troop-contributors over the years, is willing
to increase its contribution, both for traditional tasks, in the form of
providing military personnel, and for new tasks, in the form of assisting
difficult transition processes, through the dispatch of civilian police,
administrators and monitors of democracy. We have initiated a programme of
meetings and seminars on inter-ethnic peace-keeping and training for
peace-keeping, peace-making and conflict-prevention. Austria is now
organizing a seminar on assisting and monitoring elections, with the aim of
training officials for participation in future such United Nations missions.

At a time of excessive demands on limited United Nations resources and of
the increasing political importance of regional arrangements, the
Secretary-General's innovative approach of intensifying cooperation and
coordination with regional organizations should be wholeheartedly pursued.
Strengthening the bonds between the United Nations Secretariat and the
relevant regional bodies calls for continuous contact and communication.
In Europe the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE)
recently constituted itself a "regional arrangement" for matters of collective
security, in conformity with the Charter. Its Vienna-based Conflict
Prevention Centre will play an important role in future CSCE peace-keeping
operations. The negotiations in Vienna within the framework of the CSCE Forum
for Security Cooperation are particularly important for the development of
confidence and for security-building and disarmament. In view of the
proximity of the CSCE Secretariat in Prague and the Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights in Warsaw, both the United Nations and the CSCE
would greatly benefit from the creation in Vienna of a mechanism for liaison
between the European regional arrangements and the United Nations
Secretariat. Such an institution, a foundation of peace-keeping operations,
could make the combined efforts of all organizations more effective.
At a time of limited resources it seems necessary for the Organization to
make full use of all the facilities at its disposal world wide.
Decentralization of the Secretariat must be seen as an asset for the
Organization.
No conflict illustrates more dramatically the utmost urgency of the need
for implementation of the Secretary-General's proposals with regard to the
continuing aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a State

Member of our Organization. The most fundamental principles on which the
Charter is based are challenged: collective security, the non-use of force
against territorial integrity and political independence, inviolability of
borders, the rule of law, democracy, fundamental freedoms and human rights
especially minority rights.
In this regard, Bosnia and Herzegovina is a test case. If today
aggression and "ethnic cleansing" are permitted there, tomorrow they may work
in Sandzak, Kosovo, Vojvodina and Macedonia, and even in other parts of the
world. The consequences would be unimaginable.
Certainly, the international community has reacted to this aggression, to
the atrocities and to the needs of the victims. Both the CSCE and the
Security Council have clearly stated in various declarations and resolutions
the responsibility of the Serbian Government for these acts and have demanded
that they be brought to an immediate end. Cease-fires have been brokered,
crucial humanitarian assistance has been organized, sanctions have been
imposed and a political framework for a resolution of the conflict has been
created.
We owe a special tribute to all those courageous men who participate at
enormous personal risk in the peace-keeping operations. We deeply regret the
loss of human lives that has already occurred. It goes without saying that
attacks against peace-keeping forces warrant our utmost condemnation, whether
or not we know who might be responsible for such atrocious acts.
During the last year many forums and organizations have adopted important
declarations and resolutions dealing with this crisis. The London Conference
produced a comprehensive plan of action, which could serve as a basis for a
settlement. But have these plans and resolutions been implemented? What is

needed is pressure, serious pressure, to make the aggressor desist from his
acts in flagrant violation of international law in particular, humanitarian
law and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide. We must effectively rule out any possibility of not complying with
the political commitments undertaken in London. This holds true for all the
parties involved. The longer the conflict lasts, the greater the danger of
violation of the most basic standards of human rights.

In the context of this and other conflicts we should heed the
Secretary-General, who on a general basis commends Article 42 of the Charter
to the attention of all States; he says that under this Article
"... the Security Council has the authority to take military action to
maintain or restore international peace and security." (A/47/277.
para. 43)
Certainly, all peaceful means have to be employed to solve a conflict,
but if they prove to be of no avail, and in the case of clear, gross
violations of fundamental principles of the Charter, full application of all
the Charter's provisions must be envisaged. That is the core and essence of a
functioning system of collective security.
The disappearance of the East-West confrontation that paralyses our
Organization for so long gives us the chance to resurrect this system of
collective security as envisaged by the founding fathers of the Organization.
For the sake of mankind in the North and in the South, in the East and in the
West of our globe we must not miss this chance.
The objective fact of the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia has been
established in the convincing legal opinion handed down by the arbitration
commission, chaired by President Robert Badinter. Consequently, Austria,
along with many other countries, favours termination of the membership of
"Yugoslavia" in all international organizations. We welcome the admission of
Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina to the United Nations.
Ultimately all the successor States, including Serbia and Montenegro, have the
right to be admitted as Members, provided that they comply with the
established obligations of the Charter. Once the criteria established for the

successor States of the former Yugoslavia by the Charter of Paris and by the
peace conference have been met, the conditions will be in place for the
admission of that State to the United Nations. We will continue to judge the
real willingness of the authorities in Belgrade and other Serbian forces to
honour their commitments and international obligations not by their words but
by their actions.
The international community will have to act most vigorously to oppose
effectively the intolerable practice of "ethnic cleansing". I welcome the
decisions of the Security Council, which has taken steps towards the
establishment of security zones in Bosnia and Herzegovina to contain the mass
expulsions, to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian assistance and to
secure the functioning of the legitimate Government. We must continue to work
in this direction. The establishment of a no-fly zone over Bosnia and
Herzegovina, as proposed by France, would supplement that measure and end the
air attacks by the Serbian air force.
The horrible effects of "ethnic cleansing" will have to be reversed. The
aggressor cannot be allowed to enjoy the fruits of his aggression. The
international community will have to do more than care for refugees and
displaced persons: our goal must be to create conditions which would allow
those who were expelled or displaced to return to their homes and to regain
their belongings or be compensated for property destroyed.
Mr. Tadeusz Mazowiecki, a hero of the liberation of Central and Eastern
Europe, submitted, in his capacity as Special Rapporteur of the Commission on
Human Rights, a report containing a number of proposals, which should be
implemented as quickly as possible. I am thinking of the immediate necessity

to disarm irregular armed forces and civilians, and the expansion of the
mandate of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) to the whole of
Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to be able to collect information on human
rights violations and to deal with them. Another of Mr. Mazowiecki's
important ideas is the creation of an investigative commission to determine
the fate of the thousands of missing persons.
At this point, let me express my firm conviction that ordinary people,
both Serbs and Montenegrins, want prosperity and, first and foremost, peace.
The abhorrent acts carried out under "ethnic cleansing", the torturing of
innocent men and women in camps, the shelling of defenceless citizens: all
these crimes are being ordered and carried out by individuals who cannot claim
to act in the name of their people. Appropriate machinery must be established
to enforce Security Council resolution 771 (1992) and to provide for
- proceedings against all individual perpetrators punishable under international
law, such as by creating an international penal tribunal for war crimes.
Earlier this year the international fact-finding commission established
under Additional Protocol I to the Fourth Geneva Convention on the Protection
of the Victims of Armed Conflicts became operational. This commission could
 also assume an important role to ensure the full implementation of the rules
of international humanitarian law.
Today the former Yugoslavia is suffering from the horrible ravages of
 war. In a long-term perspective, economic recovery and concerted economic
assistance will have to be a part of any peaceful solution for the region.
Let me add here that Austria, long before the beginning of the process of the
it disintegration of Yugoslavia, strongly advocated international assistance for

the economic development of our neighboring country through various European
organizations in order to promote reform, prosperity and democracy. Then as
now our actions were motivated by a deep-felt desire to support economic and
political reform for the sake of the well-being of all peoples living in the
Balkan region, to which Austria is bound by strong ties of history. That is
why I feel that I must make an urgent appeal for the mobilization of further
financial means to bolster the humanitarian assistance necessary for the
survival of the suffering populations. There can be no doubt that, with good
will on both sides, questions and tensions arising from the cohabitation of
different ethnic groups in the same area can be resolved in a process of
cooperation.

It is with the greatest satisfaction that I am today in a position to
inform the General Assembly of the resolution, through political dialogue, of
the controversy between Austria and Italy concerning the protection of the
Austrian population in South Tyrol. This dispute originated in the different
interpretations of the agreement signed by the two countries on
5 September 1946 in Paris. The issue was then addressed by the General
Assembly in its resolutions 1497 (XV) and 1661 (XVI), in 1960 and 1961. On
this basis, Austria and Italy reached agreement on a package of 137 measures
designed to benefit the population of South Tyrol - measures that Italy
pledged to enact. At the beginning of this year further legal measures were
adopted. On 19 June the two countries were able to inform the
Secretary-General that the dispute which had been pending with the United
Nations since 1960 had been settled.
Austria and Italy have thus been able to provide the community of nations
with a good example of how to resolve an ethnic conflict and how to guarantee
and protect the rights and identities of minorities. The measures taken do
indeed promise to provide a safe basis for the cultural, economic and social
development of the German- and Ladin-speaking groups in South Tyrol, as they
include sufficient legal safeguards at the national and international levels.
The resolution of this controversy was greatly facilitated by a positive
development in the political attitudes of all the parties involved in
particular, by increased confidence between the State authorities and the
ethnic groups. Although the protection of ethnic groups is clearly a dynamic
process, the minority has to be assured that the Italian republic will respect
its separate identity and will maintain the laws and regulations that have
been created for the advancement of ethnic groups. Furthermore, the minority

must be assured that its cultural bonds, based on common ethnic affiliation
beyond the Italian frontier, will not be impeded in the future. If such
confidence exists, the State will secure the loyalty of the minority.
Confidence will also create an atmosphere conducive to better and intensified
cooperation across the borders.
Respect for human rights is a crucial requirement for the settlement of
today's conflicts. The Austrian Government will take pride in hosting the
World Conference on Human Rights to be convened in Vienna in June 1993. The
invitation to host such an important event highlights Austria's dedication to
the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The
principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations and in other
international human-rights instruments have undeniably become universal
standards. It is imperative that all members of the international community
fulfil their voluntarily accepted obligations to promote and respect human
rights, humanitarian law and democratic values. Human rights, democracy and
development are inextricably linked and are of the utmost importance in an
increasingly interdependent world. We shall continue to promote a
comprehensive concept of human rights based also on different cultural
traditions and encompassing civil and political, as well as economic and
social, rights. There must not be a new North-South divide in the
interpretation and application of human rights. Our unitary world requires
consensus on this vital issue. In preparing for the Vienna conference, we
shall strive for such consensus. I can assure the Assembly that the Austrian
Government will spare no effort to contribute substantially to the preparatory
process and that it will provide excellent facilities for the Conference.

The Secretary-General has introduced the concept of an integrated
approach by the United Nations to political, economic and social issues.
Adequate economic and social development are prerequisites for international
peace and security. The current and future status of the world social
situation, the inclusion of vulnerable and socially disadvantaged groups in
development, drug-abuse control and crime prevention rank high on the
international agenda of an increasingly interdependent world. Peace and
security are closely linked with economic and social development. We must
take advantage of the end of the cold war to put more emphasis on issues of
social and economic development.
As the Secretary-General has said, the convening of a well prepared world
social summit will remove a key aspect of current threats to global security.
This summit should concentrate on three concrete issues: poverty,
unemployment and social disintegration. The Austrian Government supports such
a social summit. Good governance as a result of sound economic management and
comprehensive social and environmental policies, as well as respect for human
rights and democratic values, should be the basic objective of political
leadership.
While the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development did
not fully succeed in producing a comprehensive Earth charter or a clear
commitment to protection of the world's forests, the agreements reached at Rio
do represent a positive achievement. We must all share responsibility for
care of our planet, and the developed countries must take the lead. This
realization should give rise to a new quality in North-South relations.

At Rio it became apparent that, in the long term, environmental
protection and economic prosperity cannot be achieved at each other's
expense. Ecology and the economy are not intrinsic foes; for the sake of our
common well-being, and for the sake of future generations, they need to become
very close allies. After Rio it is impossible to speak of protection of the
environment without also addressing the development challenge. Nor is it
possible to focus on development without taking into account the ecological
dimension.
Regarding the issue of international conflicts in the environmental
sphere, I am very pleased to note that the Austrian proposal for the
establishment of Green Helmets, submitted during the forty-fourth session of
the General Assembly, has been favourably received. That Austrian initiative
is reflected by the machinery provided for in the main Rio documents for
preventing and settling such disputes.
Rio demonstrated that the global problems of mankind cannot be solved by
governments alone. Hence Austria welcomes the mobilization and the manifold
contributions of the non-governmental organizations and the media. This level
of involvement of groups and individuals must continue.
The end of the East-West conflict and the growing awareness of the
interdependence between North and South are leading to a new era for mankind.
Regional cooperation offers new dimensions. There is a keen desire for
preventive diplomacy. The resolution of ethnic conflicts is one of the
greatest challenges of our time. Awareness of the interrelationship between
development, environmental protection and the guaranteeing of human rights in
the broadest sense of the term are on the increase. Let us work together to
take advantage of all these opportunities.


The
Government of Mexico congratulates Mr. Stoyan Ganev on his election as
President to guide the work of the General Assembly. It also congratulates
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali on his decision to engage in active diplomacy, to
initiate the changes called for in the Secretariat and to devise new ways of
strengthening the Organization.

Mexico extends a most cordial welcome to the 13 new Member States.
The new conditions in the world, the long-standing aspirations of peoples
and the pressures of all kinds facing this forty-seventh session of the
General Assembly require us to chart a clear course. The disappearance of the
blocs has not led to the emergence of the peaceful world of which we dreamed.
Uncertainty prevails. In many societies, one political order has disappeared
and the order which has taken its place is in the midst of a difficult process
of shaping itself. World trends are extremely contradictory. Some countries'
efforts to integrate are in contrast to the disintegration of other
countries. It would appear that the potential for conflict, now free of
ideological bonds, has increased in various regions of the world.
Despite the fact that bipolarity has vanished, international peace and
security continue to be threatened by aggressive nationalisms, political and
religious fanaticism and, above all, the conditions of critical poverty and
inequality of opportunities that separate some peoples from others. As this
session of the General Assembly takes place, thousands of people are
continuing to die in the fratricidal wars in former Yugoslavia and other parts
of the world. In Africa, the life of whole populations is threatened by
hunger. The life of more than half of the world's population is dominated by
unemployment and the impossibility of attaining decent levels of health,
education, food and housing.
Decisive progress in economic, social and human development and
root-and-branch rectification of the structural imbalances in international
society are necessary conditions for genuine and lasting peace. One fifth of
the world's population, 1 billion people inhabiting the most industrialized
countries, consume 70 per cent of the planet's resources. In income terms.

the polarization of inequalities is even greater. The richest fifth of the
world's population accounts for 83 per cent of total income, while the poorest
fifth has to make do with 1.4 per cent. Future prospects are no less tragic:
the World Bank estimates that the income of the population with the fewest
resources will fall from $370 a year to only $225 by the year 2000.
Now that the cold war is over, there is no argument strong enough to
justify the persistence of these imbalances. Plenty and overabundance for a
few cannot coexist with poverty and deprivation for the majorities. We can
already see the global impact of these inequalities: The increase in
migrations to the more prosperous countries is unprecedented. Millions of
people throughout the world are forming legions of refugees and displaced
persons. It would be a dangerous illusion for the rich societies to believe
that their security is not in jeopardy from the intensification of these
imbalances.
It must be recognized that it will not be possible to cure
underdevelopment and the resulting poverty and marginalization in many
countries by the use of market forces alone. What is needed is a major
internal correction effort involving both the State and private individuals,
or involving mainly the State, when private individuals are unwilling, do not
know how or do not have the resources to act. A favourable international
environment is also required to more effectively encourage a comprehensive
solution to the serious problems of underdevelopment.
The Government of President Carlos Salinas de Gortari is promoting the
expansion of markets and the need for flows of goods and services to grow
without artificial barriers of a political or economic nature. We therefore
already have a free trade agreement with Chile, and we have just negotiated a

treaty to establish the North American free trade area, which will be the most
potent trading zone in the world. With an open trading system, without
discrimination and protectionist barriers, the developing countries could earn
around $44 billion more from exports. That would undoubtedly increase the
viability of the structural reforms these nations have undertaken, and would
reflect international solidarity with these countries.
Mexico has been active in promoting reform of the United Nations. It has
joined the consensus that there is a vital need to redistribute functions and
responsibilities among its organs, increase coordination and democratize its
procedures. Our Organization is overworked and underfinanced. Its renewal
must include the fulfilment by all Members of their financial commitments.
That there is an endemic financial crisis at the United Nations, in the face
of the extensive tasks the community is seeking to assign to it, is an
incongruency which must be resolved without delay.
Mexico recognizes the relevance of the Secretary-General's report
entitled "An Agenda for Peace", submitted for the consideration of Member
States. It is a rigorous document, and proposes the innovative measures that
are needed in order to enable our Organization to respond to the challenges of
a new era. The ideas that it puts before us for achieving a better balance
between the principal organs of the United Nations appear to us to be on the
right lines.
We need to give the General Assembly the primacy it should enjoy as the
Organization's universal and pluralistic organ par excellence. We have to
achieve better coordination between it and the Security Council, above all in
matters of international peace and security. We agree with the strengthening
of the Secretary-General's capacity for action. We consider that the

Secretary-General should be authorized to seek advisory opinions from the
International Court of Justice on condition, of course, that the States
concerned have requested his involvement.
Mexico has also indicated the need for a better balance in the treatment
of the items on the international agenda. We pay too much attention to the
so-called new global issues at the expense of development problems, combating
extreme poverty and strengthening international cooperation. The best
preventive diplomacy is one in which programmes in support of development are
an essential element. These are the best guarantees of stable and lasting
peace.
The economic and social sector of the Organization needs to be
revitalized. Now is the time to increase the efficiency of the organs on
which rests the main responsibility for economic and social activities: the
Economic and Social Council and the Second and Third Committees of the
Assembly.
My country has reiterated that the internal transformation of the United
Nations organs, as well as of relationships between them, needs to be
supplemented by the democratization of decision-making. This will entail
reviewing, in due course, the anachronistic veto system. We must dispel the
risk of the Security Council's becoming merely an instrument for lending the
appearance of joint action to the designs of a few powerful countries. The
deliberative and decision-making processes must be transparent. The tendency
for the taking of decisions by consensus to become more widespread must not
pose an obstacle to participation by Council members, nor must it impede
in-depth debate among them.

Some of the measures proposed in the Secretary-General's report need to
be studied thoroughly and carefully, as they might prove to be
counterproductive. Deployment of troops along the borders of a State that
feels threatened might aggravate the problem it was designed to forestall.
The proposal for the conduct of preventive deployment operations in
conditions of national crisis gives grounds for concern. A measure of this
kind could involve the Organization in issues that are strictly within the
internal jurisdiction of States.
Similarly, what is known as "support for the transformation of deficient
national structures and capabilities, and for the strengthening of new
democratic institutions" (A/47/277, para. 59). should be examined with great
care, since these matters fall within the exclusive sovereignty of States.
The report also echoes positions that Mexico has supported. We agree
that States should accept the jurisdiction of the International Court of
Justice. Honduras and El Salvador have set the world an example of their
desire for harmony and peace by submitting their territorial dispute to the
International Court for resolution.
Mexico welcomes the insistence of the Secretary-General that diplomatic
action should be exhausted before use is made of the coercive measures for the
maintenance of international peace and security referred to in Chapter VII of
the Charter.
Despite the disquieting signs in the international environment, obvious
advances have been made which enable us to look with hope to the potential of
the United Nations to work towards a more stable and a more secure world.
Long-drawn-out conflicts that had been deadlocked for years are today on the
way to resolution. The peace process in El Salvador is perhaps the most

successful of those in which the Organization has participated. It is up to
the parties and the Organization itself to do everything in their power to
ensure the implementation, within the time-frame scheduled, of the commitments
entered into. Mexico appeals to the international community to provide, as
soon as possible, the economic assistance promised for the cause of peace in
El Salvador.
In the realm of disarmament, definite progress has been achieved in the
quantitative reduction of nuclear arsenals but we are far from having
eliminated the danger of a nuclear catastrophe. There has been an increase in
the number of States that possess nuclear weapons, and the doctrine of nuclear
deterrence continues to serve as grounds for justifying the existence and
improvement of such weapons.
In the face of these dangers, we must put an end to nuclear testing. We
therefore express our gratitude to those countries that have decided to
institute moratoriums. Mexico will continue to work to see to it that at this
session we are able to make progress together towards the total elimination of
nuclear weapons from the planet.
Therefore, the Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons deserves our full attention. We are
gratified at the progress in respect of the Treaty of Tlatelolco. We welcome
the ratification by France of Additional Protocol I and the process leading to
the full incorporation of Argentina, Brazil and Chile in the
nuclear-weapon-free zone in Latin America. We hope that Cuba will also soon
be incorporated into this regime, as well as Guyana and St. Kitts and Nevis.
Mention also needs to be made of the Convention on chemical weapons, the
outcome of 10 years' work by the Ad Hoc Committee of the Conference on

Disarmament. Although the Convention is undoubtedly subject to improvement,
Mexico hopes that it will lead to the elimination of one of the most
reprehensible means of mass destruction.
The Rio de Janeiro Conference, held last June, was a basic step towards
greater awareness at the world level of the relationship between the problems
of the environment and those of development. The General Assembly has the
responsibility of creating institutional machinery to follow up, promote and
perfect the implementation of "Agenda 21", approved at Rio. The establishment
of the Commission on Sustainable Development is a central item on our agenda.
In this regard, I should like to make three points: the first is that
this Commission should not confine itself to reviewing the progress made in
Rio, but should become a high-level forum for updating and introducing new
proposals designed to promote development and the protection of the
environment.
The second point relates to its mandate of supervising and broadening the
commitment with regard to financing. We shall achieve little in the struggle
for sustainable development of the planet if the countries that possess the
most and have contributed the most to pollution do not increase the resources
allocated to halting the destruction of the environment. The Commission to be
appointed by this General Assembly must ensure that it is the polluter who
pays.
Finally, following up on the Rio agreements calls for a competent
secretariat. We are expecting a small but high-level group with direct access
to the Secretary-General and a clear mandate to avoid duplication of functions
with other bodies.

We are living through a phase characterized by profound respect for human
rights and democracy as the foundations of peace, freedom and human dignity.
The defence of human rights has always been at the centre of our
Organization's attention.
Nevertheless, we are concerned at the desire to focus greater attention
on some aspects of human rights to the detriment of others. Only a
comprehensive view of human rights can ensure that their protection will not
be partial or motivated by veiled aspirations towards interference.
The Organization has the opportunity of becoming the cornerstone of a new
world order worthy of that name. It is our responsibility towards future
generations to bequeath to them a forum in which peace is guaranteed and in
which the conditions required for the development of all nations are created.
International cooperation for development cannot be approached from one
standpoint alone. We must not view it solely as a complement to actions to
resolve conflicts or to reduce it to technical assistance programmes, nor can
it be confined to general recommendations regarding the liberalization of
trade and internal and international competitiveness.
The priorities are clear: putting an end to extreme poverty and creating
the conditions in which all human beings will find real opportunities for
development. To this end, a tremendous and serious effort to coordinate
economic policies and the explicit will to make international law the
compulsory reference point governing relations among peoples are essential.
International- law is the binding force that will make it possible to
build a true international order at the end of this century. Our Organization
must assume with clear vision, dedication and courage world leadership in the

defence of international law. Respect for the internal jurisdiction of States
is the basis for our civilized and peaceful coexistence.
Mexico categorically rejects the claim of any State to have the right to
apply its laws beyond its own frontiers. Nor can acts that violate the
juridical order of another country on the pretext of ensuring respect for
one's law be legal. All States must conform in their actions to the rules
that have been accepted by the sovereign will of nations and agreements. This
is the only lasting foundation on which to base changes in a world order that
is in a state of transition.
Here in this universal forum, Mexico emphasizes its unswerving commitment
to the need to strengthen international law.