On behalf of my country and
in my own behalf, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate
you, Mr. President, on your election to the Presidency of
the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session. The fact
that you belong to our beloved continent, coming as you do
from a country bound with my own by bonds of
brotherhood and relations of friendship and cooperation is
a source of added pride to us in your assumption of this
high office. My delegation is confident that, familiar as
you are with the work of the United Nations, and with your
extensive experience in the field of international relations,
you will be able to steer this session to a successful
conclusion. I should also like to seize this opportunity to
express my delegation’s appreciation of your predecessor,
His Excellency Ambassador Insanally, for the wisdom he
displayed, the efforts he made and the initiatives he took to
reform the United Nations and enhance its role. Further, I
wish to express our gratitude to Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali,
the Secretary-General, for his tireless efforts to strengthen
our Organization so as to enable it to face the numerous
crises that beset the international community.
The international situation witnessed many
developments during the forty-eighth session. The will of
the people of South Africa has triumphed after a long
struggle and great sacrifices. It is indeed heartening to
see in our midst today the delegation of South Africa,
representing a united, democratic and non-racial country.
Brotherly Yemen has survived its transient crisis and
remains one united country, whose citizens are working
with more determination and greater expectations, to build
the modern State of Yemen. Along with these
developments, tangible progress has been recorded in the
implementation of the Peace Accord in Mozambique.
Moreover, the artificial tension in the Korean peninsula is
now subsiding. We are hopeful that the difficulties
relating to the reunification of the Korean peninsula will
be overcome through dialogue to be entered into on equal
footing.
Such developments are a source of satisfaction and
we greatly welcome them. However, they do not mask
the gloomy points of the wider picture of the international
situation. Many disputes still await a solution. The
outbursts of nationalist passions, ethnic chauvinism and
power struggles in the absence of any power among the
people, have led to the outbreak of new regional conflicts.
Although some of these conflicts are getting closer to a
solution, as is the case in Liberia, where the conflict is
heading towards a permanent solution, the international
community must still support national reconciliation
efforts in Afghanistan, overcome the setbacks to the peace
efforts being undertaken in the Balkans, consolidate the
role of the United Nations in establishing peace in that
region and guarantee the legitimate rights of the parties to
the dispute there.
The international community is also called upon to
renew its efforts aimed at reaching a satisfactory solution
to the problem of Cyprus. It must encourage peace talks
on Angola and support work towards a negotiated
solution in sisterly Somalia, in addition to demonstrating
increased solidarity to alleviate the tragedy of the
Rwandan people. It must also make more efforts to solve
the problem of Kashmir on the basis of bilateral
agreements and the relevant United Nations resolutions in
particular.
In the interest of stability in the Persian Gulf region,
my country stresses the importance of the unity and
territorial integrity of Iraq, and calls for an end to all
interference in its internal affairs. We also consider that
the sanctions imposed on Iraq, which cause suffering to
the Iraqi people, should be lifted, since the reasons for
these sanctions are no longer valid. Their continuation
9

can only mean a grave injustice aimed at the destruction of
the Iraqi people and the extermination of large groups of its
population.
The United Nations has adopted many resolutions on
the Question of Palestine, all of which acknowledge the
right of the Palestinian people to return to their homeland
and to exercise the right of self-determination. Although
the United Nations has repeatedly reaffirmed these
resolutions for more than 40 years, the Palestinian question
still awaits a solution, the Palestinian people remain
displaced and their rights are systematically and
continuously violated. This proves that the so-called
ongoing peace process lacks the elements necessary for any
comprehensive settlement. This also shows that the
resolution of the Palestinian question and the establishment
of comprehensive peace in the Middle East cannot be
realized merely by returning Gaza back to its status as a
municipality and adding Jericho to it, but must rather come
about through the liberation of all occupied Arab territories
including the Syrian Golan and the acceptance of a
democratic solution that would meet all the rights of the
Palestinian people, including their right to return to their
homeland and establish their own independent State.
A few months ago, we celebrated the historic victory
of the people of South Africa. It is no coincidence that the
struggle of the Palestinian people is in many ways similar
to that of the people of South Africa, and that many of the
acts of heroism of both peoples echo each other. The
solution that made it possible to build a united, democratic
and non-racial state in South Africa offers a model for
resolving the question of Palestine through the
establishment in Palestine of a democratic non-racial State
with Al Quds as its capital, where Arabs and Jews can live
together. This is the proper solution, without which it
would be impossible to reach a just and lasting peace that
serves the interests of both Jews and the Palestinian Arabs.

The numerous changes witnessed by the world after
the cold war have created opportunities to build a more
stable and secure world. However, the hopes of the
peoples of the world for greater and better understanding
and for wider cooperation have started to wane. The
experience of the past few years has caused deep concern
regarding some developments. Some States have begun to
try to impose their control and to expand their hegemony,
using their power and influence in utilizing international
organs to implement their plans, and using them,
particularly the Security Council, as a tool to punish those
countries which abide by their principles and adopt
independent policies and positions. This was the very
context of the dispute between my country and France,
Britain and the United States of America in what has
become known as the Lockerbie crisis. This problem was
raised, pushed arbitrarily through the Security Council,
and dealt with under Chapter VII of the Charter, which is
not applicable in this case since Libya has not threatened
anybody and has never acted in a manner that jeopardized
international peace and security. The whole issue is
merely the suspicion that two Libyans may be connected
to the Pan Am flight 103 incident.
Aware as it has been all along of the motivation
behind this entire issue, my country has shown sincere
readiness to cooperate in uncovering the truth and
circumstances of that incident. We have taken the
necessary judicial measures consistent with the Charter of
the United Nations and international law, with only one
proviso, that they do not involve any violation of Libya’s
sovereign rights.
Although the Security Council was pushed into the
adoption of resolution 731 (1992), Libya did declare its
readiness effectively to cooperate in the implementation
of that resolution. In that respect Libya took practical
steps that were widely welcomed by numerous
organizations, including the League of Arab States, the
Organization of African Unity, the Organization of the
Islamic Conference, and the Non-Aligned Movement. It
was our hope that the three States concerned would take
that into consideration and respond positively to the
requests of Libyan authorities for cooperation in
completing the investigation. However, the three States
concerned responded in an entirely different way. Instead
of accepting the initiatives calling for dialogue and
negotiation, and showing flexibility in dealing with the
other aspects of the crisis, by reconsidering Security
Council resolution 748 (1992) with a view to lifting the
sanctions imposed on the Libyan people, instead, they
resorted to the Security Council once again and, using
their influence, managed to persuade it to adopt resolution
883 (1993), tightening the sanctions imposed by
resolution 748 (1992).
The argument invoked by the three States concerned
to justify maintaining the sanctions and the threat even to
tighten them further, is that Libya has not complied with
the requirements of Security Council resolution 731
(1992). And when these States are confronted with the
fact that the Jamahiriya has really complied with these
10

requirements, their officials, and particularly British and
American officials, answer with the words "Libya knows
what is required of her". Officials in both countries have
repeatedly used this phrase to such an extent that we are
convinced that the aim behind the raising of the Lockerbie
incident is not to uncover the truth and the circumstances
of the issue but rather to achieve premeditated political
objectives. Indeed, if the aim had really been to bring
Libya to comply with the requirements of resolution 731
(1992), that aim has been fully realized. Libya has taken
the legal measures necessary to pinpoint responsibility for
the terrorist acts perpetrated against both American and
French planes. Libya has requested the three States
concerned to cooperate in completing the investigation in
this respect. Libya has even invited neutral bodies to
follow it up and international and humanitarian
organizations to monitor its fairness. My country has
cooperated with the French judge in charge of the
investigation aimed at determining responsibility for the
explosion aboard French UTA flight 772. Contacts in this
respect still continue. My country has also cooperated with
the Government of the United Kingdom in trying to
uncover certain elements accused by the British
Government of involvement in terrorist acts. To this end,
several meetings were held between the Libyan and British
sides. Today, we are very glad to see that negotiations
have already started between Britain and the political and
military wings of the Irish Republic Army (IRA) and that
an agreement has been signed by the two parties. Now the
leaders of the IRA are being received and welcomed at the
highest level in both London and Washington with a view
to holding negotiations with a view to ending the dispute
and all its side effects.
Libya has condemned international terrorism in all its
forms and declared its readiness to commit itself to
whatever measures are adopted by the international
community to combat this scourge. Libya has also severed
all its relations with all groups and organizations suspected
of being involved in terrorist acts. Libya has emphasized
that it will not allow its territory, citizens or institutions to
be used for such acts whether directly or indirectly. We
have declared our readiness to punish severely whoever is
proved to be involved in any terrorist acts. Libya has also
declared that there are no terrorist training camps on its
soil. It has repeated its invitation to the Security Council,
or any international body mandated by the Council, to
verify this. All these practical measures confirm the extent
of my country’s seriousness in stamping out the
phenomenon of international terrorism. This seriousness
has been reflected in the call by the Jamahiriya for the
convening of a special session of the General Assembly to
be devoted to the study of the causes and dimensions of
this problem and its support of the proposal to convene an
international conference to define terrorism, including
State terrorism, and the means to eradicate it in all its
forms. It is State terrorism with which Libya is now
being threatened at the hands of a State which is a
permanent member of the Security Council. That State
has abducted Libyan prisoners of war from Chad and is
now training them and equipping them to undermine the
security and stability of Libya. This is the same terrorism
to which Libya fell victim in 1973 when Israeli planes
intentionally shot down a Libyan civilian airliner, killing
all 108 passengers aboard; and also when the United
States of America in 1986 bombed Libyan cities while
people were asleep in their beds and caused great loss of
life and damage to property. Later it was revealed that
the acts used by that State as a pretext for its aggression
were unfounded.
The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya has spared no effort in
trying to resolve the dispute, including trying the two
suspects in the Pan Am flight 103 incident, although the
matter has been predetermined by the 1971 Montreal
Convention which gives Libya the right to try the two
suspects itself. However, the refusal by Britain and the
United States of America to abide by this Convention, to
which they are both parties, has prompted Libya to seek
other ways of holding the trial. Thus, Libya offered to
resort to the International Court of Justice or to surrender
the two suspects to the United Nations office in Libya for
investigation. Libya has also proposed that the Secretary-
General of the United Nations should establish a fact-
finding legal commission to verify the seriousness of the
accusations, including carrying out a comprehensive
investigation. Competent Libyan authorities referred the
matter to the basic popular congresses which constitute
our legislative authority and they in turn made the
decision that they had no objection to letting the two
suspects stand trial before a fair tribunal to be agreed
upon. Proceeding from this, my country declared its
readiness to enter into negotiations with the States
concerned under the supervision of the Secretary-General
of the United Nations on the trial to be held in a place
agreed to by all parties concerned where full guarantees
would be available to establish the truth, indeed the very
aim of Security Council resolution 731 (1992).
Recently, new information on the American aircraft
incident has been uncovered, including a book entitled
Tracking the Octopus by Coleman and Donald and the
statements by the manager of a Swiss electronics
company. These new revelations obliterate the central
11

element on which the accusations against the two Libyan
citizens was based. Despite all this, Libya maintained its
cooperation in trying to identify all the circumstances
surrounding the incident. On this basis, Libya accepted the
proposal of the Council of the League of Arab States
contained in its resolution 5373 of 27 March 1994. That
proposal called for trying the two suspects by Scottish
judges under Scottish law at the seat of the International
Court of Justice. Even after new information was revealed
by the Palestinian citizen, Yousef Shaaban, before a
Lebanese Court, Libya did not hesitate to go ahead with the
trial and did not waver in its declared readiness to accept
any verdict emanating from such a trial.
This, once again, underlines the fact that the Libyan
Jamahiriya has no objection to the trial of the two suspects.
All that Libya wants is for the trial to be fair and just, free
from any emotional or media influences, and with the
availability of all guarantees consistent with the norms of
legality and international law, which Libya has observed
and applied. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) can
testify to this, since that Court has considered, over the past
10 years, three cases to which Libya was a party. The ICJ
decided the case relating to the continental shelf between
Libya and Tunisia, and both parties fully implemented the
ruling of the Court. The same happened in the case of the
continental shelf between Libya and Malta; once again the
two parties implemented the ruling of the International
Court of Justice. This year, the Court decided the territorial
dispute between the Jamahiriya and Chad. Though the
ruling rejected Libya’s demands, the Jamahiriya did
implement it in a constructive spirit that was welcomed and
appreciated by both the Security Council and the Secretary-
General. This shows the extent of my country’s
commitment to and respect of international legality,
something that great powers pay lip service to but never
apply. These States refuse even to appear before the ICJ,
since they believe in the legality of force and not the force
of legality.
Most international and regional organizations have
renewed their appeal to the three States to accept the
initiatives calling for dialogue and negotiation, with a view
to reaching a peaceful settlement to the crises. Those
organizations, including the 11th Ministerial Conference of
the States Members of the Non-Aligned Movement and the
60th Session of the Council of Ministers of the
Organization of African Unity, welcomed Libya’s
acceptance of the Arab League’s proposal. This august
Assembly, which includes all States represented in those
organizations, is now called upon to show its appreciation
of Libya’s position, Libya’s steps and initiatives and the
proposals that we have accepted. It should call on the
three States concerned to show flexibility and enter into
dialogue with the Jamahiriya with the aim of reaching a
peaceful settlement to this problem. This Assembly is
also called upon to express its support of these demands,
so that the Security Council will reconsider its resolutions
on the crisis and lift the unjust sanctions. It is absurd and
ignorant to depict the sanctions as being against the
Libyan Government, because in Libya there is no
Government as such. The power is in the hands of the
people, who now suffer the consequences of these
sanctions - for example, the crash of a Libyan civilian
aircraft in 1992, leading to the death of all 157 civilians
aboard, as a result of the ban on spare parts.
Furthermore, 1,622 people have been killed in car
accidents, and 350 people, most of whom were children,
old men and women died as a result of delays in moving
them abroad for medical treatment. These sanctions have
also caused economic damage estimated at $4.5 billion.
These damages are detailed in official document
S/1994/921.
Before the Second World War, and following the
end of that war, the Libyan people suffered and continue
to suffer all sorts of pressure, troubles and pains. We
have been subjected to colonialism in its worst form: a
Fascism that wreaked havoc in our country, killing,
displacing and exiling countless numbers of our citizens.
Against our will, we had to be a theatre of war between
the colonial powers, a war that was fought on our soil
and for which we were the fuel. That war’s mines are
still buried in our soil, in our farms and under our homes.
From time to time, these mines explode and kill innocent
people. In previous sessions of this Assembly, my
country has repeatedly called on the States concerned to
cooperate with us in removing these mines. Today,
7 October, coincides with the commemoration of the
Libyan people of the 25th anniversary of the evacuation
of the last Fascists who had settled in Libya and
oppressed its people. Once again I repeat my call and
urge the States concerned to respond positively to the
resolutions of the General Assembly, instructing them to
provide the necessary information on mines, give
technical assistance in removing them, and pay
compensation for the losses they have caused. This may
also be a good opportunity to remind the imperialist states
that occupied our lands for over 40 years that we have
not forgotten the ruin and destruction they left behind.
I should also like to announce that my country,
through this Assembly and other forums, will seek to
compel colonialist states to pay fair compensation for the
12

resources they have looted and the wealth and money they
have plundered from our country. The peoples of the world
are called upon to adopt a historic resolution, through this
Organization, condemning colonialism and forcing former
colonial powers to compensate their former colonies, in
order to prevent the re-emergence of colonialism and
prevent the powerful from once more blackmailing and
oppressing the weak.
The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya welcomes efforts aimed
at enhancing security and cooperation in the Mediterranean
region. We voice our satisfaction with the initiatives whose
objective is to enhance economic, social, cultural and
environmental cooperation in the region. Libya calls for
taking all measures necessary to remove all causes of
tension in the area, especially through the withdrawal of
foreign military fleets whose continued presence jeopardizes
peace and security in the Mediterranean, which in turn are
closely linked to international peace and security. The
Arab Maghreb Union has achieved tangible progress on the
road towards economic integration among its countries and
towards the consolidation of the underpinnings of
development in these countries. It has also opened new
channels of cooperation with organizations in the areas to
which we belong both geographically and culturally. Libya
welcomes those steps and expresses the hope that the
Maghreb Union will succeed in playing a similar role with
its counterpart organizations on the other side of the
Mediterranean, beginning with the intensification of
contacts and meetings, as well as active dialogue with the
institutions concerned, on a basis of equality and common
interests in a manner capable of responding to the concept
of joint development and the collective responsibility for
maintaining peace and strengthening cooperation on the
shores of the Mediterranean.
In view of the stability of the political system in the
Jamahiriya and its importance as an economic market, it
would be impossible to marginalize or ignore its role in any
cooperation between the shores of the Mediterranean if
such cooperation is achieve its objectives, at the forefront
of which is serving the peoples of the region and achieving
their prosperity.
Some progress has been registered recently in the field
of disarmament. This is a welcome development. Libya
looks forward to more international cooperation with a view
to destroying nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, as
well as other weapons of mass destruction. We look
forward to the banning of the development, stockpiling and
use of all such weapons. My country also hopes that more
efforts will be made to conclude a treaty on making Africa
a nuclear-weapon-free zone and the activation of the
initiative aimed at making the Middle East region free
from weapons of mass destruction. The Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya is a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty. We hope that the preparatory committee for the
1995 review conference will, in its next session, reach an
understanding that takes into consideration the concerns
of all parties to the Treaty, especially as regards its
extension. My country still has some difficulty in
accepting an indefinite extension of the Treaty, because
such an extension does not take into account several of
our concerns, including the unavailability of credible
security guarantees for non-nuclear-weapon states.
Furthermore, the area in which we live suffers from a
security imbalance, resulting from Israel’s acquisition of
nuclear weapons and its non-adherence to the
non-proliferation regime. It has not acceded to the
Treaty, nor has it signed a safeguard agreement with the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). That is
why my country would like to emphasize that it is
essential to address these concerns at the time of
considering the extension of the Non-Proliferation Treaty
in 1995.
Respect for and protection of human rights is one of
the fundamental underpinnings of Libyan policy. This
has been demonstrated in various forms which included
the setting up of the International Committee for the
Qaddafi Human Rights Prize and the adoption of the
green document on human rights and basic human
freedoms. Libya is determined to support and contribute
to all international efforts aimed at guaranteeing the
effective enjoyment of human rights. We thus welcome
the conclusions of the Vienna Conference, which
constitute a step on the road to the support and
enhancement of human rights. That human rights
Conference rejected the manipulation of human rights and
their use as a tool of political pressure. This universally
adopted principle must be respected, especially by States
that selectively raise problems related to human rights.
The international community must stand up to any
attempt by any State or group of States to exploit human
rights as a means of interfering in the internal affairs of
other States. It must also oppose any attempt by any
State or group of States to distort the principles and
values of other peoples or to promote the principles and
values of such States or groups of States as the only
proper values that should be embraced by all peoples.
The international community’s hopes for a secure
and stable world cannot be realized without addressing
economic problems, particularly in the developing
13

countries, where economies continue to face difficulties as
a result of the aggravation of the problem of external debts,
the application of protectionist trade policies, the imposition
of harsh conditions for their importation of advanced
technology, the deteriorating prices of raw materials and the
continued attempts to impose new taxes, such as the carbon
tax, which could hurt not only the economies of the oil-
exporting States but also those of oil-importing countries.
We believe it is impossible to solve these problems
effectively unless the international community deals
seriously with and puts an end to the erroneous practices
that continue to characterize international economic
relations. Such practices include coercive economic
measures, such as the freezing of assets and the
confiscation by certain developing countries of the property
of a number of developing countries, including my own.
Such measures constitute an impediment to growth, aside
from the fact that they run counter to the Charter of the
United Nations, norms of international law and the
resolutions of the General Assembly.
The General Assembly is the natural place for
Member States to exercise their rights and express their
views on the initiatives aimed at reforming the United
Nations. In the course of the last session, we followed with
keen interest everything that was achieved in this regard.
My country expresses its satisfaction at the progress made
towards revitalizing the activities of the General Assembly
and the establishment of an effective working relationship
between the Assembly and the Security Council. We hope
future efforts will result in an increase in the membership
of the Security Council based on equitable geographical
distribution. To our mind, this process must be
accompanied by measures to remove obstacles to the proper
functioning of the Council, such as the privilege of veto
power, and improvements in its working methods so that it
can function in accordance with the principles of the
Charter and, eschewing double standards, deal consistently
with all issues.
If we examine past Security Council practices we shall
find that while the Council showed interest in trying to
secure commitment to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,
it has turned and continues to turn a blind eye to Israel,
which has not acceded to the Treaty and actually possesses
200 nuclear warheads. Furthermore, the Security Council
has insisted on invoking Chapter VII of the Charter in cases
to which it is not applicable, while at the same time failing
to invoke Chapter VII in the case of Israel, despite its
defiance of United Nations resolutions and its continued
occupation of the territories of States Members of the
United Nations. The Council kept silent on the Israeli
refusal to withdraw from southern Lebanon and on the
massacres perpetrated against the Palestinians, such as the
one in Hebron’s Al-Haram Al-Ibrahimi Al-Sharif - the
Mosque of Abraham - where, in an act of terrorism, a
fanatical Zionist settler, trained in an American camp,
killed over 50 Palestinians while they were praying.
My country believes that, in the context of reforming
the Security Council, the Council must be neutral and
give none of its members a chance to dominate it or steer
it towards serving its own interests, as has been the case
in so many instances, the latest of which was the
Council’s granting of permission to one of its permanent
members to invade an independent State Member of the
United Nations, the Republic of Haiti. It has been said
that the objective of that action was to restore democracy
and protect human rights. If this were true, why was
there no such action in the past, when the people of that
country were suffering under the yoke of a repressive
regime, subjected to the most vicious violations of their
human rights? What happened was a flagrant violation of
the Charter, an act of aggression against the inviolability
of an independent country. It also establishes the
dangerous precedent of giving permission to a State,
unhappy about waves of immigrants reaching its shores,
to occupy the land where the immigration originates.
Libya cannot afford to overlook this invasion or
keep silent about it, first, as a matter of principle and,
secondly, because Haiti has a special place in our history.
Forty-five years ago Haiti played a decisive role in a
matter of interest to us. Its deciding vote won the
adoption of the General Assembly resolution on Libya’s
independence.
At this time next year, the celebration of the fiftieth
anniversary of the United Nations will begin. While
developments in recent years have revealed some
weaknesses in some of the United Nations organs’
handling of dispute settlement and crisis management, this
cannot be attributed to the Charter but, rather, to the
tendency by certain Powers, insisting that their approach
alone should be adopted, to impose their hegemony on the
handling of international matters.
This question should be the focus of attention in the
next session because it will mark the demise of the old
order and the building of the new order that will replace
it. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya intends to participate
with others in building this new order to ensure that it
will be an order based on justice and equality that
respects peoples’ political and economic options, secures
14

full commitment to international law and full respect for the
Charter of the United Nations and stands up to those who
would push the United Nations towards the fate of the
League of Nations. The new order we need is one that
enhances and protects human rights and eradicates poverty,
suffering, division, conflicts, disputes and wars. It must be
an order in which no State seeks to impose its hegemony
and abuse its influence, an order that supports the
settlement of disputes among States by peaceful means, not
by arbitrary and coercive means. We need a new order
under whose umbrella all peoples can look optimistically to
a future where security, peace and stability prevail.


Allow me first to extend to
Ambassador Amara Essy heartfelt congratulations on his
unanimous election to preside over the forty-ninth session
of the General Assembly. His election is a fitting tribute
both to him and to his country, Côte d’Ivoire. While
expressing our confidence in his skills and capacity to guide
this session to a successful conclusion, I wish to assure him
of the full cooperation of my delegation in the discharge of
the heavy responsibility he has assumed.
I wish also to join the heads of delegations who spoke
before me in the very pleasant task of welcoming the new
democratic South Africa into the United Nations. The
recent happy events in South Africa mark a turning point in
the history of Africa. They have opened up new vistas for
fruitful economic cooperation across the African continent
and have allowed the international community to be
victorious over institutional racism.
It has now been a few years since the international
community entered into a new era that is relatively free
of ideological polarization. The nuclear confrontation that
had haunted the international community before the end
of the cold war is now more or less behind us. The
demise of the cold war has in this regard contributed to
the lifting of the thick veil that had hindered the
appreciation of our interdependence. None of the major
problems of the present world can be effectively dealt
with in the absence of an approach that takes seriously
the fact that we live in an interdependent world. The
challenges of the environment, the problems of climate
change, the unrestrained growth in population and
questions of economic growth and development, among
others, are all issues that call for greater cooperation
between States.
It is not too early for us to assess to what extent the
international community has taken advantage of new
opportunities and, with the major obstacles to joint action
having now been removed, how much progress the world
has made in addressing the critical problems facing us.
Some of these ostensibly affect only part of humanity,
but, in fact, are directly or indirectly the problems of the
international community as a whole.
The ever-deteriorating economic and social
conditions faced by the majority of the peoples in the
developing world and the abject poverty in which they are
condemned to live are the most critical challenge facing
the world. The effects of this reality reverberate through
all aspects of international life, and they impinge on all
issues now routinely accepted as the common challenges
of the international community. Actions designed to deal
with concerns related to international peace and security,
to the environment, to climate change, to population
growth and development and to a host of other
interrelated concerns will remain only off-target and, at
best, partial measures if most of the developing world is
allowed to continue to wallow in poverty, and if, as a
consequence, despair and hopelessness continue to be the
dominant mood of present and future generations in the
South.
In Africa, for instance, where a genuine fear of
marginalization in international economic cooperation has
in recent years become the prevailing mood, much of the
explanation for the scale, intensity and duration of the
conflicts must be sought in the continent’s continuing
economic decline and in the consequent social malaise
and hopelessness generated by that sad reality. The
economic history of Africa over the last two decades is
21

one of precipitate decline. The 1980s was a lost decade,
but the first half of the present one is proving to be no
better.
Each African conflict may have its own unique local
as well as extra-local features, but all of them, in one way
or another, grow out of the humanly impossible economic
and social situations that provide societies with neither hope
nor a future.
From Liberia to Somalia and from Rwanda to
Burundi, what Africa has been witnessing in recent years is
the virtual collapse, under the weight of unbearable
economic and social difficulties, not only of State structures
but also of traditional values and norms of social
organization.
It seems therefore overdue for the United Nations,
when it comes to addressing conflict situations such as
those in Africa, to think and to act with the clear
assumption that traditional notions of preventive diplomacy,
peace-keeping and peace-making, although important, are
not enough to maintain the peace and to make it durable.
"An Agenda for Peace" will be far from sufficient if it doe
not go side by side with, and made an integral part of, "An
Agenda for Development".
In our part of the world, the Organization of African
Unity (OAU) took up a huge challenge when it decided to
increase its capacity by setting up a mechanism for the
prevention, management and resolution of conflicts. This
is an important step that requires the effective assistance of
the international community, and we are appreciative of the
support already being given to the OAU by some countries.
But we have no illusions: even if the OAU had the
capacity required to carry out its mandate in preventive
diplomacy, it would not necessarily be able to make
substantial inroads in ensuring durable peace in the
continent.
Nor can the United Nations and the international
community do any better unless the challenges faced in
connection with preventive measures in the economic and
social areas are taken up in the most serious manner and
unless the economic and social decline of Africa is
reversed. The bottom line is that no African country can
categorically be said to be immune from the political and
social consequences of the immense level of economic
decline, which can be arrested only with the requisite level
of international economic cooperation and development
partnership. This, incidentally, could also be a way to
arrest and contain all varieties of extremism.
It seems to us that it is only with the foregoing in
mind and with the full appreciation of the very complex
nature of some of the conflict situations in Africa that the
United Nations can be an effective factor for peace in
Africa. This approach would also allow the international
community to appreciate fully actual movement, no
matter how small, in the right direction towards the
resolution of specific conflict situations in Africa. The
validity of this is most clearly to be seen in the prevailing
situation in Somalia.
More than a few still view the situation in Somalia
as having shown no improvement and believe that
conditions in that country have in fact deteriorated. That
view is probably the major reason for the increasing calls
for the speedy withdrawal of the United Nations
Operation in Somalia (UNOSOM) from Somalia. That
view is also certainly behind the latest Security Council
resolution on Somalia.
The situation in Somalia, and most particularly in
some parts of that country, is clearly still far from
normal, and there is no question that the overall situation
in the country is very fluid. The international
community’s frustration at the slow pace of the national-
reconciliation process and at the lack of sufficient
commitment by all sides in Somalia to their responsibility
to sort out their own problems as speedily as possible is
also understandable, and this is also our concern.
But the feeling that conditions in the country have
become hopeless and that the general trend in Somalia
holds no promise is not born of what has been taking
place there since late last year. That the situation in
Somalia today, from the point of view both of the level
of armed clashes and of dialogue between Somalis of all
factions, is far better than it was a year ago, or indeed a
few months ago, cannot seriously be doubted.
No one can pretend to have a ready-made solution
to the problem of power-sharing in Somalia, which has
been one of the major hurdles preventing national
reconciliation. The OAU and the countries of the
subregion have continued to do everything possible to
assist the Somalis to meet this challenge, firmly
convinced that the agenda for peace and national
reconciliation in the country should be set by Somalis
themselves and that the role of extra-Somali parties,
including that of UNOSOM, is to assist in the process.
We believe that this has been a very fruitful approach. It
is the one that has been adopted from the very beginning
by President Meles Zenawi, whose OAU colleagues have
22

given him the responsibility of following developments in
Somalia.
From his station in Mogadishu, President Meles’s
envoy has been maintaining very close contact with the
various Somali factions. Our general assessment is that the
trends in Somalia are encouraging and that the Somalis are
taking the first hesitant steps to sort out their problems.
Although there is no guarantee of success, the general
thrust of developments in Somalia is worthy of the support
of the international community.
At this time last year UNOSOM was engaged in heavy
combat with some Somali factions, and its presence in
Somalia did not enjoy universal acceptance there. Today,
the situation has changed so dramatically that there is
consensus in the country that UNOSOM should stay, one
way or another, until national reconciliation is achieved. It
would indeed be ironic if the international community were
to choose to ignore Somalia precisely when the situation is
changing for the better.
The efforts of the countries of the Horn of Africa in
the search for solutions to situations of conflicts have not
been limited to Somalia. It is little more than a year since
we in the subregion deployed the initiative of the Inter-
Governmental Authority on Drought and Development
(IGADD) with a view to assisting in the resolution of the
long-standing conflict in the Sudan - a conflict which has
created a deep rift in Sudanese society, and whose
implications for peace and security, as well as for the social
and economic development of our region, are very great
indeed.
In the course of the negotiations, the IGADD
Committee’s major goal was to help the parties to identify
and address the central issues that have been the sources of
the conflict in the Sudan - a country characterized by
religious, ethnic and racial diversity. Pursuant to
instructions from our Heads of State, the IGADD
Committee of Foreign Ministers attempted, in a series of
rounds of negotiation, to help the parties to narrow their
differences over the root causes of the conflict and to arrive
at a formula for overcoming the deep crisis affecting their
countries. Because the IGADD process induced the parties
to focus on the critical issues in the conflict, positions have
become well defined. The degree of polarity reflected in
these positions reveals the gravity of the root causes and
explains why the talks have come to deadlock. Thus, the
IGADD peace process is at a crossroads in that the
positions of the parties have hardened, and the mediators
are left to choose between abandoning their efforts and
developing alternative strategies in response to the crisis.
Faced with this situation, the Ministerial Committee
was compelled ultimately to refer the matter back to the
IGADD Committee of Heads of State, which met recently
in Nairobi. The Heads of State, while recognizing the
logjam that has been created in the process of negotiation,
have none the less unanimously decided that there is no
alternative to continuing with the peace effort. The major
consideration here has been the conviction of the Heads
of State that a persisting crisis in the Sudan would be not
only a cause of continuing bloodshed in that country but
also a major source of instability and lack of peace in the
subregion.
In this regard, the importance of the international
community’s input towards breaking the logjam in the
IGADD peace initiative in the Sudan can hardly be
underestimated. A solution to the problem can come only
through the continued efforts of the countries of the
region and the international community’s support for
those efforts.
We in Ethiopia have had more than our share of the
tragedies associated with conflicts. It is three years since
peace was restored to the country following three decades
of civil war and internal strife. Over the past three years
the Transitional Government has focused its attention on
three broad concerns - the restoration of peace and
stability; the democratization of the political process,
including the creation of conditions for enforcing the rule
of law and setting up democratic institutions; and the
liberalization of the economy and the freeing of the
economic sector from the strait-jacket of the command
economy imposed on our peoples by the military
Government.
One of the unique aspects of the democratization
process in Ethiopia has been the very extensive
devolution of power to all regions of the country. In a
country known for its excessive centralization of power -
something that was pushed to absurdity by the previous
Government: the major reason for the absence of peace
in Ethiopia for so long - the new relationship between the
centre and the regions is becoming a promising
arrangement for genuine and meaningful participation of
the people, at the grass-roots level, in the political process
of their country. We believe that once democracy
becomes relevant to the average person and at the grass
roots, it will prove to be durable because the struggle
between autocracy and democratic forms of governance
23

will not then be between very narrow, elite groups, whether
from the military or from other sectors of society.
As we approach the end of the period of transition in
Ethiopia, we can say with full confidence that we have, by
and large, achieved all the major objectives set for that
period. Until three years ago Ethiopia’s name was
associated with political instability and civil war. Today
Ethiopia has not only achieved peace but also become a
factor for peace in its own subregion and beyond, as is
vividly demonstrated by the Ethiopian peace-keeping
contingent in Rwanda.
Moreover, we have been gratified by the recent
successful elections for a Constituent Assembly, which will
be convened very soon to prepare a constitution on the
basis of which a general election will be held to install the
first-ever democratically elected Government in the country.
In the course of the last three years, we in Ethiopia
have benefited immensely from the generous assistance of
the international community, for which we are very
grateful. This assistance was again demonstrated during the
recent drought, which affected over 7 million people.
Thanks to the assistance of the international community, to
the role the Ethiopian people themselves played and to the
timely, effective measures taken by the Government, the
effects of a drought that could have caused massive loss of
life, dislocation and displacement commensurate with those
of the 1984-1985 drought were successfully contained.
Even though Ethiopia has now started to stand on its
own feet, we cannot pretend that we have even remotely
begun to address the major challenges still facing us. The
fledgling democratic process in a country with no
democratic traditions will continue to be a major challenge.
But the political will to solidify grass-roots democracy will
always be there, among other things because the survival of
countries as diverse as Ethiopia can be ensured only on the
basis of democratic governance. However, the linchpin of
the success of democracy in Ethiopia, as is also true for all
similarly situated countries, is sustainable economic growth
and development. Citizens who see no future for
themselves or for their offspring can hardly be counted on
- and for understandable reasons - to be a bedrock for
stable Governments, without which democracy will have
little chance of flourishing.
None the less, even in the economic sector we have
made some notable gains, and our cooperation with the
international financial institutions has so far been very
encouraging. But the challenges ahead of us are immense,
and we will continue to count on the support of the
international community to help us put our country firmly
on the path of sustainable growth and development.
One of the major positive outcomes of the demise of
the cold war has been the new confidence placed in
multilateral approaches to solving the major problems
faced by our interdependent world. The United Nations,
as the finest expression of multilateralism, has thus been
given a new opportunity to make a difference in the
world and to spearhead the efforts of the international
community for peace and development. In this context,
the democratization of the United Nations at all levels,
and greater transparency in the operation of the organs of
the Organization, including that of the Security Council
and of the Secretariat, are some of the required steps
which will guarantee that the United Nations can play to
the fullest its potential appropriate role as the foremost
multilateral organization with the full confidence of
peoples in the North as well as in the South. For our
part, we will continue to do our share, and do all that is
necessary to assist the United Nations in achieving its
noble objectives and goals.


On behalf of the Dominican
Republic and its Constitutional President, Mr. Joaquin
Balaguer, I offer to the President of the General Assembly
at its forty-ninth session, Mr. Amara Essy, Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Côte d’Ivoire, our congratulations on his
well-deserved election.
Likewise, our delegation pays a tribute of gratitude to
Ambassador Samuel Insanally, for his stewardship of the
work of the forty-eighth session of the General Assembly,
and, especially, to the Secretary-General of the United
Nations, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who has dedicated all
his time and effort to ensuring full observance of the
purposes and principles enshrined in the United Nations
Charter.
My Government’s policy towards the pressing need for
development is exemplified by the urgent efforts it is
making on behalf of its people in the changing context of
today’s world.
Forty-nine years ago, when the United Nations system
was created following the end of a second major world-
wide conflagration, the idea and hope prevailed of bringing
about a new world order that would exorcize the spectre of
war and, once and for all, do away with war’s attendant
human degradation and hatred.
However, the victorious emergence of two
ideologically opposed Powers led to the creation of a
bipolar international system that gave birth to the so-called
cold war, marked by lateral confrontation and an arms race
which, because of the ever-present possibility of direct
confrontation, could have led to a nuclear holocaust and the
annihilation of mankind.
Thus it was that the General Assembly became the
stage par excellence for the airing and debate of the most
urgent world-wide problems. While its political
effectiveness may not have met all the requirements of
peace because of the structure of world power that had
prevailed since 1945, it did achieve overwhelming success
in the actions and programmes of its specialized agencies.
Born to foster peace and security and to promote
development, the United Nations was the fruit of the post-
Second-World-War era. At that time peace meant the
absence of war and of the justifiable fear of world-wide
self-destruction.
The hope for a renewed international order based on
new values has gained momentum. Unique and
monumentaL events symbolized by the razing of the "wall
of infamy" have created the propitious conditions and
opportunities for recapturing and relaunching the lofty
goals of the signers of the San Francisco Charter.
Those events summon us to struggle for a world
built on solidarity, respect for the self-determination of
peoples, and the quest for a better standard of living for
all.
A new world and its agonizing challenges require
new answers and clear and unambiguous objectives
combined with an iron will to achieve them. The human
being must be at the centre of all concerns. Our efforts
must thus be aimed at combating poverty and achieving
social justice. We must foster new democratic ways for
the exercise of power and genuine respect for human
rights. In other words, we must ensure that democracy
works, prospers and prevails.
Unquestionably, the present-day world is beset by
economic and political complexities incompatible with the
aspirations of people everywhere to a decent life.
Globalization of the economy, intense financial
competition, national cultural diversity, and the various
tensions between groups, countries and regions, typified
by the ethnic and religious regional conflicts of recent
years, constitute the features of the new reality.
The answers to these challenges and problems are no
longer to be found in the use of arms. They lie in the
will to build a consensus and in the ability to promote
development through fair competition regulated by rules
that are accepted by all participants.
Unless world peace is at stake, the threat or use of
force is no longer a viable instrument for achieving the
decent life to which all peoples are entitled.
11

How, then, can we defend democracy and ensure that,
rather than perish, it becomes stronger and more effective
in dealing with starvation, unemployment, drug trafficking,
the depletion of natural resources, forced migration and the
new forms of trade protectionism that undermine
development?
If, indeed, we are to protect human rights and
strengthen democracy, we must undertake a thorough
review of this whole issue and of the very concept of
development on the basis of equitable access to markets,
capital and new technologies.
The Dominican Republic is one of the most solid and
deeply rooted democracies on the American continent. It
is one of the few Latin American democracies in modern
times with a record of lasting and commendable political
stability. It is an example of harmonious and civilized
coexistence in a society marked by contrasts. We have
shown to the world that our democracy is participatory,
with reconciliation and dialogue as the channels for the
solution of the major political and economic crises that we
have experienced.
In the economic arena, global interdependence poses
challenges, and yet offers opportunities. We must therefore
make progress in harmonizing financial, technological and
production policies in order to achieve growth at all levels.
The development of the most industrialized nations
may be inadequate without the growth of developing
nations. The greatest growth in outlets for the commodities
of industrialized countries will be found in the markets of
developing countries.
We are witnessing a transition towards trade
liberalization that can lead to freer trade and the eradication
of poverty through the creation of more and better jobs.
However, certain threats appear on the horizon. One
of them is neoprotectionism. Even though the "barbed-
wire" hostility of former protectionist tariffs is being
dismantled, the re-emerging protectionism may not be based
on tariffs, but it conceals certain invisible, yet genuine
enemies: environmental regulations, customs barriers,
quotas, anti-"dumping" rules, social clauses and others. In
this way the aspirations to free trade may become mere
rhetoric.
Impoverishment is another threat. Are we fully aware
that opening up our economies can cause us to overlook the
need to properly administer their attendant social costs?
Unemployment and the acceleration of social
investment plans threaten to negate the efforts we have
made over many years to democratize our political
systems. While the formation of economic blocs is an
established fact, it gives us pause nevertheless: To what
extent might this phenomenon constitute a stumbling
block for a world based on the democratic rules of free
trade and on equal conditions for all?
As members know, more emphasis is placed on
selling than on producing. However, we do not have
adequate means of production or fair access to them; yet
we are supposed to compete on an equal basis with the
more industrialized countries of the world. These are not
invalid complaints and claims. New rules must be
worked out to permit developing countries to gain access
to technology and finance their infrastructures on
favourable terms - in other words, to attain practical and
acceptable levels of competitiveness.
How can we meet these new challenges? To begin
with, any development policy must attempt to modernize
our sources of production. If we have little or nothing to
sell, what is the point of continuing to open up our
markets? This is closely linked to the development of a
proper transport and communication infrastructure and to
the optimum use of energy sources.
We must thus create new conditions of productivity,
particularly in the fields of technology social
development. If human beings are to be the focus of all
development policy, the fostering of effective programmes
becomes the best possible business. An investment in
health, education and housing is profitable not only
socially but economically.
All these initiatives and actions to meet the new
challenges that stem from the globalization of the
economy must be viewed in that context. Therefore we
need a new kind of cooperation, which must be the
keynote of international activities. Among other things,
we must adjust national policies to global objectives. We
should be able to achieve a new idea of cooperation.
Cooperation is the alternative to intervention, the way to
fulfil the international community’s desires for peace,
stability and democracy.
In this new age, we must be keenly aware of the
trends that are shaping the end of this century and the
beginning of the next. The world is becoming smaller,
more interdependent and globalized; the survival of
human life is gravely threatened by the deterioration of
12

the environment and by short-sighted, uncoordinated
policies to stem the tide of problems besetting the planet.
We in the Dominican Republic, have our share of
problems, but one stands out: we live geographically next
door to the poorest nation of the hemisphere. Haiti has
written glorious pages in the history of the struggle for
freedom and equality. Its past, heavy with confrontation
and long periods of authoritarian rule, has unfortunately
turned it into a nation requiring international assistance.
There must therefore be a determined and generous show
of cooperation on the part of the international community
so that the Haitian people may pursue its destiny -
economic and social, as well as political. The Dominican
Republic has always been ready to cooperate in effective
initiatives for the betterment and viability of needy
countries, whose peoples have every right to live in dignity,
with all the opportunities offered to others.
The problem of drug trafficking and narcotics
consumption continues to be a scourge of world-wide
dimensions. It is the Dominican Republic’s State policy to
deal most severely, in keeping with our legal provisions,
with the trafficking, consumption and possession of narcotic
drugs. What is more, our country has offered, and will
continue to offer, its cooperation to other nations in the
apprehension, prosecution or extradition of those who have
made this criminal trade the most lucrative activity of our
new times.
Although the developed countries are the most
attractive market for the sale of narcotic drugs, the
underdeveloped countries, whether or not they are
producers of narcotic drugs, have seen an increase in drug
addiction too. The entire international community must
continue resolutely to deal with this scourge so that drug
abuse does not become the side effect of a seductively
excessive well-being or the amnesia-inducing product that
helps some to cope with poverty.
The Dominican Republic, a nation of pacifist
traditions, will continue to support the efforts of the United
Nations in preventing armed conflicts and in the
establishment, maintenance and consolidation of
international peace and the internal peace of all nations.
In another field of endeavour, the Dominican Republic
retains the concern voiced at last year’s session of the
Assembly on the proposal made by the Secretary-General
to merge the United Nations International Research and
Training Institute for the Advancement of Women
(INSTRAW) and the United Nations Development Fund for
Women (UNIFEM). INSTRAW was conceived at the first
World Conference of the International Women’s Year,
held in Mexico City, and was created pursuant to the
decision of the Economic and Social Council.
The Dominican Republic takes this occasion to
reiterate its request that INSTRAW and UNIFEM not be
merged. We also request retention of the commitments
entered into under Economic and Social Council
resolution 1998/LX, of 12 May 1976, which establishes
the permanent headquarters of INSTRAW in the
Dominican Republic, so that our great city in the
Americas may continue to host that important organ.
We are deluding ourselves if we think that peace,
security and development can be pursued as separate
goals at either the national level or the international level.
The new order and new balance that are coming into
being call for new ways of thinking and new priorities.
They require a reappraisal of current international realities
in the light of established norms with regard to the
sovereignty of all nations and recognition of the pluralism
of the world’s peoples.
The new era demands that confrontation turn into
dialogue and that calls for justice be replaced by shared
commitments of peoples.
The promising, peaceful future of which we all
speak in meetings and assemblies will come about if,
above all, we, the Governments of our region, do our bit,
without haggling or imposing conditions, according to our
material and leadership potential.


Mr. President, please allow me at the outset to congratulate
you on your assumption of the Presidency of the forty-ninth
session of the General Assembly. Your unanimous election
to this high office attests to the respect accorded by the
international community to your friendly country, Côte
d’Ivoire. We are confident, in view of your qualifications
credentials and diplomatic skills, that you will steer the
work of this session to a successful conclusion which will
further the noble causes and principles of the United
Nations, which are aimed at bringing peace and prosperity
to the world. I would like to assure you of my delegation’s
cooperation with your endeavours to achieve this common
goal.
I should like also to take this opportunity to express
our appreciation to His Excellency Samuel R. Insanally,
the Permanent Representative of the friendly country of
Guyana, for the exemplary manner in which he presided
over the work of the previous session of the General
Assembly. Furthermore, on behalf of the Government of
the Sultanate of Oman, I should like to pay special tribute
to the Secretary-General of the United Nations,
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for his dedicated and
continued efforts aimed at resolving complicated conflicts
by peaceful means.
This forty-ninth session is being held amid
increasing prospects for and optimism about the creation
of a world in which atmosphere of peace, interdependence
and peaceful settlement of disputes will prevail. Our
Arab region is currently witnessing radical and important
changes where hatred and animosities between the Arabs
and Israel are slowly vanishing and giving place to a new
climate of understanding, dialogue and coexistence.
We are totally convinced that there is no alternative
means by which the Arabs and Israel may resolve their
differences other than negotiation. While some promising
and positive results have been achieved, we are still at the
beginning of a long process and we have a long way to
go towards resolving deep-seated differences. We
therefore appeal to the international community to
continue to lend its support to the efforts aimed at
bringing peace and security to the region.
In South Africa, my country has participated with
many other countries of the world in the inauguration
ceremony of President Nelson Mandela. That historic
event could not have taken place were it not for the
courageous policies of both President Mandela and Vice
President de Klerk in their approach to power-sharing
based on equality.
Thanks to the positive steps taken and the wise
policies pursued by President Mandela in forming a
National Coalition government that embraces various
political parties, South Africa has been able to resume its
rightful place in this Assembly, and can now play its
natural role in regional and international forums.
In Mozambique, the peace process is making
significant progress. Moreover, we are witnessing an
increasing normalization of relations amongst Asian
16

countries. We also witness more integration and
interdependence in the economic relations in Europe and in
North America. And last but not least, we note with
satisfaction the peaceful resolution of conflicts in Latin
America and the unprecedented tendency of its peoples to
opt for peace, development, and social and economic
betterment in their countries.
We have to cover a lot of ground before we achieve
the building of the world envisaged by the Charter of this
Organization. The prevailing climate of concord affords us
an opportunity to enable this Organization to face up to the
challenges and unresolved problems and to address such
problems in the light of the new realities.
My country views with satisfaction the steps that have
been achieved so far on the Palestinian-lsraeli track. We
have always called for a just, lasting and peaceful solution
to the situation between the Arabs and Israel through direct
negotiations. Therefore, my country has welcomed the
outcome of the Palestinian-lsraeli negotiations which
culminated in the signing of the Cairo Agreement on the
implementation of self-rule in the Gaza Strip and Jericho.
This Agreement is now being implemented, the Palestinian
Authority is now a concrete reality and is exercising its
different functions in such areas as education, health,
taxation, tourism and social affairs. There are other
functions stipulated in the Agreement which, we hope, will
be exercised at the earliest possible time, by the Palestinian
Authority. The expansion of the competence of the
Palestinian Authority to other Palestinian areas in the West
Bank will undoubtedly strengthen the peace process and
contribute positively to security and stability in the area.
Such significant steps could never have been achieved
had not the Palestinian Liberation Organization honoured its
obligations under the Declaration of Principles signed in
Washington and under the Cairo Agreement. In order to
achieve peace and enable the Palestinian people to take
advantage and reap the benefits of the vigorous efforts
exerted in this context, the international community should
extend the necessary assistance to the Palestinian Authority
so that it may be able to discharge its many responsibilities
and rebuild the infrastructure, which has been severely
damaged. Support for the Authority will not only serve the
cause of security and stability in the self-rule areas alone
but in the region of the Middle East in its entirety.
The desired just and lasting peace will prevail only
through complete withdrawal by Israel from the entirety of
the occupied Arab territories, in accordance with Security
Council resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and
425 (1978), and in application of the land-for-peace
principle.
My country has followed with interest another
significant step in the peace process, namely that on the
Jordan-lsraeli track, which was highlighted by the signing
by His Majesty King Hussein of Jordan and the Israeli
Prime Minister of a declaration that ends the state of war
between the two countries and masks the movement
towards the establishment of a comprehensive peace. My
country has supported these positive and important steps.
Mindful of the fact that comprehensive peace is an
aspiration of the present and future generations, we
emphasize the critical importance of a complete Israeli
withdrawal from the occupied Jordanian territories. We
believe that it is crucial for Israel to demonstrate the
necessary flexibility to reach an agreement on the
question of water in order for both countries to move
forward towards the long-awaited lasting peace.
We look forward to similar positive and important
steps in the peace process on both the Syrian-Israeli and
Lebanese-Israeli tracks. We are confident that the co-
sponsors of the Middle East peace process as well as the
parties concerned are fully aware of the fact that unless
significant and substantive progress is made on those two
tracks, the peace process will remain incomplete and will
make the region’s peoples prey to suspicions, mistrust and
instability. Therefore, efforts must be made in the
coming phase, to achieve concrete progress in this
direction. Israel must declare its readiness to withdraw
completely from the Syrian Golan Heights and from the
Lebanese territories it now occupies. We are confident
that if Israel were to take such an undoubtedly positive
step in the peace process, the peoples of the Middle East
would be able to work together towards the consolidation
of peace and the promotion of economic development on
a large scale in the region.
Mindful of the need to support the peace process and
given the awareness that national and regional security are
inseparable, the Sultanate of Oman has actively
participated in the meetings of the five working groups
emanating from the multilateral negotiations. Although
the latter are no substitute for bilateral negotiations, they
constitute a significant tributary that has the potential of
giving a rather significant boost to the process in the
direction of the desired just and comprehensive peace in
the Middle East.
17

Given the pivotal importance of water resources for
the future security and peace of the Middle East, the
Sultanate of Oman accords a very high priority to the
discovery and development of new water resources side by
side with the promotion of sea-water desalination
technology in order to make such technology more cost
effective. Within the framework of multilateral negotiations
in the Middle East, my country hosted the fifth meeting of
the Working Group on Water Resources held from 17 to 20
April 1994. The meeting resulted, inter alia, in the
endorsement of the Omani proposal to establish in Muscat,
the Omani capital, a regional centre for the research aimed
at the development of desalination technology.
Given the great significance we attach to the
establishment of that centre, as it will have a decidedly
positive impact on the economic development of the States
of the Middle East, we look forward to the cooperation of
all in this regard in order to make the transfer of water-
resources technology cost effective to the region so as to
help in raising the standards of social and economic
development and, thereby, in consolidating the peace and
stability of the region.
We in the Gulf region are committed to the
achievement of the highest level of stability, cooperation
and development in all our countries and to the
development of our multilateral and bilateral relations. This
naturally embraces the settlement of all bilateral differences.
Consequently, we view with satisfaction the agreement
between the State of Bahrain and the State of Qatar to have
recourse to the International Court of Justice with regard to
their differences over the disputed islands and the maritime
borders. We also hope that the Islamic Republic of Iran
and the United Arab Emirates would settle their differences
regarding the islands of Abu Moussa, the Greater Tumb and
the Lesser Tumb as soon as possible, in an amicable and
peaceful fashion. This could include having recourse to
international arbitration in view of the mutual interests the
two countries share in various spheres. There is no doubt
that such regional efforts will contribute to the
consolidation of regional security and serve the cause of
international peace.
We have noted recently that there has been
considerable progress in Iraq’s implementation of the
resolutions relating to the destruction of weapons of mass
destruction, particularly the agreement on the installation of
a long-term monitoring system, which should now be put
into effect for a suitable period. In the meantime, the
Security Council should proceed to make the necessary
contacts with both Iraq and Kuwait to implement its
resolution 833 (1993) regarding the demarcation of
international borders between the two countries through
the acceptance and legal ratification by the parties in
accordance with established international norms and
practices in matters relating to international borders.
We believe that it is an opportune time to take more
positive steps to enable Iraq to perform its regional and
international role in a peaceful context and to help the
brotherly Iraqi people to put behind it the years of
embargo and to make up for what it has lost in terms of
social and economic development.
The future of the region should be based on the
conviction that it is imperative for States to develop and
further their relations and to overcome their outstanding
differences in a manner that safeguards the interests of all
parties.
The interdependent nature of today’s world makes it
impossible for States to pursue an individualistic approach
that disregards the interests of others. We therefore
believe that the peaceful conduct of relations and the
pursuit of constructive political dialogue are the best
guarantees for present and future security and stability in
the region.
We aspire after a more stable, more developed world
that would be totally free from ethnic and regional
conflicts, a world that would be able to ensure the
progress of mankind towards a better way of life by
channelling the disposable economic resources to the
financing of scientific research which may benefit social
and economic development. While we are fully aware of
the fact that the international community has made real
progress in changing to the better in many important
areas, it is nevertheless regrettable that there remain many
factors which make other parts of the world prey to
political, ethnic and regional conflicts. It is now
abundantly clear that the United Nations is losing its
ability to address all these crises. While we sympathize
with the sufferings of many peoples that are victims of
such crises, we believe it is high time the international
community set up a new and unambiguous rule that
should be followed in dealing with such problems. It is
evident that the present mechanisms available to the
United Nations and other international organizations are
no longer able to perform their humanitarian role. It is
not possible for the United Nations to go on feeding
whole peoples indefinitely, and it is, therefore, high time
for the leaders of countries immersed in such tensions and
conflicts to realize that the United Nations will not be
18

responsible for their actions towards their peoples, and that
the States of the international community are no longer able
to rebuild for them what they themselves have destroyed.
Funds should not be made available to rebuild countries
which destroy their own infrastructures with their own
hands. All peoples should contribute effectively to the
development of the world economy rather than be a burden
on it.
The United Nations cannot play a peace-keeping role
in each and every conflict that erupts in the world. Peace-
keeping forces should not be dragged into regional conflicts
except to the extent to which regional organizations and
States are willing to shoulder their full responsibility in this
regard. If deemed necessary, this should take place only
following the consent of the parties to conflict and on the
basis of clear goals and mandates linked to a definite time-
frame.
Regional organizations have a vital role to play in the
resolution of the disputes that exist in many parts of the
world. Although that role parallels and is complementary
to the efforts of the United Nations, we have noted that,
regardless of how important and necessary it is, it is almost
non-existent in the political arena. While we value the
efforts of the peace-keeping forces in Somalia, we believe
it would have been possible to avoid the negative aspects
that became evident in that operation had full use been
made of the Organization of African Unity, the competent
regional organization qualified to bring about national
reconciliation and the establishment of national authority.
The United Nations could have lent a helping hand by
providing expertise and advice, as well as political,
financial and humanitarian support.
Regional arrangements, whether in Asia, Africa or in
any other continent, in no way detract from the role of the
Security Council as the principal body responsible for the
maintenance of international peace and security. Rather,
such regional arrangements could help lighten the Council’s
workload and instil a sense of partnership and a spirit of
caring into international affairs.
As the possibility of the failure of some peace-keeping
operations cannot be ruled out, it is necessary to face the
facts and to draw object lessons from them if the United
Nations is to avoid sliding into the repetition of the same
mistakes.
Tragic events are taking place in Rwanda as a result
of the continuing political and ethnic strife that has led to
the outbreak of violence, to the horrendous massacres,
which claimed hundreds of thousands of innocent lives,
and to the destruction of the infrastructure of that
country’s economy. Great numbers of Rwanda’s people
are now living in refugee camps in neighbouring countries
under unimaginably tragic circumstances. Hunger and
disease claim the lives of hundreds daily. In view of this
horrendous suffering, my country calls upon the
Rwandese parties to stop the bloodshed and work towards
national reconciliation in accordance with the Arusha
Peace Agreement so that peace and stability may be
restored in Rwanda.
The mediation efforts undertaken so far to bring
about peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina have proven to be
insufficient, due mainly to the imbalance of power
between the Bosnian parties. The main cause of
imbalance in this regard is the denial to the people of
Bosnia and Herzegovina of their right to fight for their
existence through the imposition of a comprehensive arms
embargo on that small State, in total disregard of its right
of self-defence enshrined in Article 51 of the United
Nations Charter. The arms embargo should be imposed
on the aggressor. And who is the aggressor in the
Bosnian case? All the facts available to the United
Nations and its agencies regarding the situation in
Sarajevo and in other Bosnian cities prove that the Serbs
are the aggressors, and in the most inhuman terms.
While my country welcomes the structural reforms
undertaken with a view to ensuring the optimum
utilization of the resources available to the United Nations
with the greatest degree of efficiency and flexibility, it
feels that the ability of the Organization to discharge its
duties and perform its role depends to a very large extent
on the willingness of the Member States to live up to one
of the main responsibilities of membership - the prompt
payment of their financial contributions, including their
prompt contribution to peace-keeping operations.
As we approach the second summit meeting of the
Security Council, we ought to accord due attention to the
issue of the expansion of the Council’s membership in
accordance with the different trends prevailing in the
world, while constantly preserving the principle of
equitable geographic balance without prejudice to the
level of decision-making in the Council. We therefore
subscribe to the view that no hasty decision should be
taken in this respect and that more time should be given
to the regional groups to expound their views in this
regard.
19

My country has noted with satisfaction the successful
conclusion of the Uruguay Round and the long-range
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in 1994 and the
establishment of the World Trade Organization. This has
helped prevent the world economic order’s turning into a
hotbed of tension and strife between the various regions.
However, my country and the developing countries in
general, some of which have acceded to those agreements
or are in the process of so doing, request that their
particular circumstances be taken into consideration when
implementing the new agreements.
It is expected that our developing countries will have
to make sacrifices in order to support the world economic
order arising out of the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs
and Trade, particularly in the short and medium terms.
Therefore, we hope to find support from the new World
Trade Organization that would be proportionate to what we
have to offer. We are particularly interested in the
developmental aspect of these agreements, as we are
interested in strengthening and developing the service sector
in our countries through the assistance offered by the
advanced economies and the international organizations.
In the area of disarmament, we hope that the
international support to the Convention on the Prohibition
of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of
Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction will give
impetus to the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to
draft a comprehensive test-ban treaty that would be an
important step towards ridding the world of nuclear terror.
In this context, we support the efforts aimed at establishing
nuclear-weapon-free zones, particularly in the Middle East,
which is one of the world’s most sensitive regions.
At present, thanks to the prevailing spirit of concord
and the ending of the cold war between the East and West,
we witness a robust movement towards the consolidation of
peace and security. The world is beginning to realize that
a climate of concord and harmony is the most viable means
of establishing an international community characterized by
constructive cooperation and mutual benefit, and that such
a development will be in the interest of mankind and its
well-being.
Today, on the threshold of the fiftieth anniversary of
the founding of the United Nations, we hope that the
outcome of this session will be more compatible with the
principle of international partnership and solidarity so that
humanity may be able to lessen and cure the ailments that
sill undermine the twentieth century and thus ensure that
the twenty-first century will be a century of hope, peace
and security for all human beings wherever they may be
on the face of the Earth.