Allow me at the outset, Sir, to express my delegation's
satisfaction at seeing you preside over the work of the
General Assembly at this fifty-fifth session. You may
count on my delegation's support.
I should also like to pay an unqualified tribute to
your predecessor, Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, for the
quality of the work accomplished during his term of
office, and to commend Secretary-General Kofi Annan,
a great African of whom we are all proud, for his
commitment to strengthening the universal role and the
credibility of our Organization.
The United Nations family is growing day by day,
for which we all rejoice. That is why my delegation
welcomes the Republic of Tuvalu.
Before addressing the situation prevailing in my
country, I wish to share some of our concerns about the
international situation.
The challenges of the third millennium are not
new. They have been broadly outlined by the
Secretary-General in his report, entitled “We the
peoples: the role of the United Nations in the twenty-
first century”. For the delegation of Côte d'Ivoire,
given the difficulties facing the international
community, the issue is above all the need to draw up
new solutions in adhering to carefully established
priorities.
As the Secretary-General stresses in his
millennium report,
“the 1 billion people living in developed
countries earn 60 per cent of the world's income,
while the 3.5 billion people in low-income
countries earn less than 20 per cent”. (A/54/2000,
para. 69)
Furthermore, the technological progress that has been
achieved in computer science and communications,
which we welcome, has unfortunately also created a
digital gap that has further marginalized the poor
countries.
If, for the time being, we acknowledge the
advantages of globalization, it does seem to us that it is
not taking sufficient account of the concerns of
developing countries, particularly those in Africa. In
fact, the rate of Africa's participation in international
27

trade is still below two per cent. In sub-Saharan Africa,
particularly, the degree of poverty is almost the same as
it was 20 years ago. This is why we would earnestly
appeal for Africa's integration and involvement in
those efforts to build a new architecture of the world
economy. Poverty and deprivation, which are the daily
lot of peoples in the developing countries, are further
exacerbated by the debt burden on their economies.
In the particular case of my country, I would like
to emphasize that, even under the current difficult
circumstances, my Government continues to allocate
52 per cent of its budgetary earnings to paying off its
external debt, and, quite naturally, this is to the
detriment of the priority programmes relating to health,
education and food self-sufficiency. Adding to this, we
must not overlook inflation and speculation, which lead
to fluctuations in our commodity prices.
In addition to our main preoccupation, which is
combating poverty, Côte d'Ivoire believes that to
resolve conflicts, preventive diplomacy must be
strengthened and seen as a complementary dimension
to peacekeeping operations in the field. The conflicts
that beset the world have meant that peacekeeping
operations, which have become more and more
complex, are now in the forefront of United Nations
activities. Preparing for, organizing, setting up in the
field and financing these operations requires
considerable effort and considerable means. Those
conducted in recent years throughout the world,
particularly in Africa, have unfortunately not had the
results we had hoped for. The experience of the “Blue
Helmets” in Sierra Leone is illustrative of this.
We hope that the excellent report of Ambassador
Brahimi, who has put forward new guidelines for
United Nations peacekeeping operations in the twenty-
first century, will be given the attention by States
Members that they deserve, so that acting on these
recommendations will endow our Organization with the
means it needs to play the role which it should in
preserving international peace and security.
We very much welcome the conclusions of
Beijing Plus Five and the commitments which have
been entered into in order to bring about the
advancement of women. We are convinced that these
commitments will make it possible for women to fully
exercise all their rights and to finally achieve full and
complete equality. Côte d'Ivoire, which was actively
involved in the work of this important meeting,
commits itself, for its part, to working for the
implementation of the targets set.
May I, at this juncture in my statement, refer to
the question of the much-needed structural reform of
the United Nations, particularly that of the Security
Council. In these new circumstances, Côte d'Ivoire
would like to reaffirm the position held by the
Organization of African Unity (OAU), which is
claiming two permanent seats and two new non-
permanent seats in the Council.
To return to matters in Côte d'Ivoire, and the
situation prevailing there, I would like to recall that on
24 December 1999, my country underwent its first
experience of an institutional change taking place apart
from the balloting boxes. In fact, on the day before
that, a military mutiny, on the part of soldiers who were
claiming better living conditions, resulted in the
toppling of the existing constitutional order. This
unexpected speeding up of events in my country
aroused, and continues to arouse, major concern within
the international community, a concern and an anxiety
which points to the interest that the international
community attaches to my country. Up until now, Côte
d'Ivoire, considered as a haven of peace and an oasis
of stability, and recognized as a driving force in the
economy of the subregion, particularly of those
countries that constitute the West African Economic
and Monetary Union, has been playing an important
and irreplaceable part as a regulatory force in West
Africa. The millions of our brothers who have come
from countries in the subregion, and who live in my
country, are substantially responsible for generating the
money circulating in their countries of origin. If this
country, Côte d'Ivoire, were to implode, it would have
unforeseen consequences for the process of solidarity
and sharing.
On 23 July, the Ivorian people expressed
themselves through a referendum on the new draft
constitution and electoral code placed before it by the
transitional Government. It should be recalled that the
military arm was involved neither in the drafting of the
new constitution nor in that of the new electoral code.
The political parties, social and professional
organizations, the administrative regions of the
country, religious organizations, women's and youth
associations and non-governmental organizations — in
other words, civil society — were those who, through
their freely appointed representatives, drafted and
submitted to the Government these new fundamental
28

texts that the Government, in turn, simply placed
before the populace for its approval.
This consultation, the transparency of which was
very much heralded by the international community,
was characterized by a massive turn-out of the
electorate of 86.23 per cent. We believe that this result
should, in itself, be enough to put an end to the
discussions and speculations that preceded and
followed the referendum, the tone of which, in many
respects, was not to the liking of the people of the Côte
d'Ivoire and their friends.
We welcome the efforts made by the United
Nations, the European Union, the OAU and the
Economic Community of West African States
(ECOWAS) in order to try and bring about common
ground among the political circles in Côte d'Ivoire and
to support the transitional process. Therefore, the
international community should be reassured that the
people of Côte d'Ivoire will, on 22 October of this
year, express their wishes through fair and transparent
elections for candidates whose eligibility has been
established by the Constitutional Chamber of the
Supreme Court.
To spend time today still talking about the
requirements for eligibility, as contained in the texts
that have been adopted, would be an attempt
tantamount to trying to perpetuate a discussion whose
fate has already been definitely, once and for all, sealed
by the people of Côte d'Ivoire.
Trained in the school of the founding father of
modern Côte d'Ivoire, President Félix Houphouët-
Boigny, the apostle of peace, and belonging as we do to
a subregion that has been beset by conflicts, some of
which have taken place at the very gates of Ivorian
territory, the people of Côte of d'Ivoire are only too
well aware of the importance of peace. The people are
determined to preserve peace without backsliding or
compromise.
My country is not xenophobic, nor is it a place of
exclusion. Côte d'Ivoire is still the only country in the
world where foreigners account for more than 40 per
cent of the total population. The problems of all kinds
that arise from this unparalleled immigration — social,
economic and even political — are real. The country is
addressing and coping with them as best it can. We do
not wish our brothers and sisters, who are living on
very good terms with the Ivorian population, to leave.
In this respect, we are very proud of being the
most integrationist country of the Economic
Community of West African States and we intend to
remain so. That is why we believe that the desire of the
Ivorian people to offer one single political post, that of
President of the Republic, to a citizen of established
background should not serve as a pretext for spreading
malicious rumours about our country and its people.
In this connection, we are counting on the
understanding and support of the international
community to help us successfully through this
transition and, within our self-imposed schedule, to
achieve the state of constitutional normality that our
people so earnestly desires.


At the outset, I would like to congratulate
Mr. Holkeri on his election as President of the General
Assembly at its fifty-fifth session. At the same time, I
would like to express our appreciation to the President
of the General Assembly at its fifty-fourth session,
Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, for the results achieved during
his presidency.
On this occasion, I would also like to express our
gratitude to Secretary-General Kofi Annan for his
efficient and relevant leadership of the Organization.
The Republic of Macedonia will continue actively to
contribute to the realization of the goals of the United
Nations.
I also welcome the admission of Tuvalu to the
United Nations, wishing it success in its contribution to
United Nations activities and expressing our wish to
establish diplomatic relations. At the same time, the
Republic of Macedonia expresses its readiness and
calls for the acceleration of the process of establishing
diplomatic relations with all other States Members of
the United Nations with which we have not yet done
so.
In the region where the Republic of Macedonia is
located, the situation has to some extent improved after
the huge humanitarian crisis that took place in Kosovo.
The heavy consequences of the crisis, which posed a
serious threat to the stability and security of the
Balkans and more widely in Europe, have not been
fully overcome.
The Republic of Macedonia has and will have in
the future a vital role to play for peace and stability in
South-East Europe and beyond. The risks confronting
the Republic of Macedonia were enormous. The
Macedonian Government and our citizens have done
everything within their capacity to respond to the
problems. However, as was the case in the previous
crises that occurred in the Balkans and during the
Kosovo conflict last year as well, as one of the
countries that most directly felt and bore the brunt of
the damage, the Republic of Macedonia has shown and
confirmed its long-term commitment to acting as a
factor for peace and stability in the region. The
Government, even in such conditions, persisted in its
policy to preserve the stability of the Macedonian State
and at the same time to reaffirm its capability to
respond to all challenges and risks confronting it, in
particular in the economic and social fields.
One of the main priorities of the foreign policy of
the Republic of Macedonia is to further improve good-
neighbourly relations with all its neighbours. This
commitment has been confirmed through a number of
our initiatives, resulting in more advanced and
developed relations in bilateral cooperation and
intensified cooperation within the framework of a
number of regional initiatives. My country is aware
that stability and prosperity, in the medium and long
terms, can be ensured only if stability is spread
throughout South-East Europe, with intensive mutual
communications and good-neighbourly cooperation
among all States of the region.
My country has managed, with almost all its
neighbours — Greece, Albania and Bulgaria, but not
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, with which we
continue to negotiate the demarcation of our common
border — to have outstanding relations and to develop
cooperation in many areas of common interest. We
have significantly improved relations with our southern
neighbour, Greece. We continue to hold talks on our
differences over the name of my country, under the
auspices of the Secretary-General, expressing our will
and interest in resolving this issue as soon as possible,
taking into account the reality and dignity of the
country and all its citizens.
22

Despite the huge expectations and initial support,
the project that is most expected to contribute to the
lasting stabilization of the region — the Stability
Pact — has not managed to ensure the implementation
of a large number of ideas and plans that have been
submitted and accepted. The Pact, a significant
example of the joint engagement and functioning of a
large number of international organizations and States,
is intended to hasten the revitalization of the countries
of South-East Europe and their integration into
European structures. I appeal to all participants
engaged in this process, especially the donors and the
wider international community, to make the utmost
efforts to speed its urgent and timely implementation
through the accelerated and full realization of these
projects. This will provide for the economic prosperity
of the countries of South-East Europe and strengthen
democratic processes, respect for human rights and
stability in the region. The implementation of the Pact
constitutes a natural upgrading of our activities within
the context of regional initiatives to promote good-
neighbourly relations and the possibility of the
realization of the foreign policy priorities of my
country: its full integration into the European and
Euro-Atlantic structures.
In addition to its foreign policy activities, the
Government of the Republic of Macedonia is fully
committed to carrying out fundamental reforms based
on European standards — political, economic and
democratic — with maximum respect for human rights,
including minority rights. The Government of my
country is continuously working on the improvement
of inter-ethnic relations. A law on higher education
was recently adopted that paves the way for private
higher education in minority languages. Therefore, as a
result of our commitment, concrete steps and
achievements, by the end of this year my country will
be the first in the region to conclude the Stabilization
and Association Agreement with the European Union.
The efforts of the international community to
stabilize the region, to which the Republic of
Macedonia has contributed widely, are beginning to
show results. Despite the limitations, it should be taken
into consideration that the seriousness and complexity
of the situation in Kosovo, and in the Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia as a whole, mean that the consequences
of this situation cannot be alleviated with the speed
desired by all of us, especially by the countries of the
region.
In regard to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
our view is that its democratization is one of the key
factors for the comprehensive stabilization of the
situation in the region. Our joint efforts should be
directed at support for the democratic forces in that
country and at joint actions to start the democratic
process, followed by the provision of opportunities for
economic prosperity. It is important to reassess the
overall effects of the sanctions, which should not be
directed at the citizens. We hope that the upcoming
elections in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia will be
fair and democratic, in accordance with European and
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
standards, and be a step towards that country's
democratization.
Regarding the situation in the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia, I would like, in my capacity as Chairman
of the South-East European Cooperation Process, to
inform the Assembly about the joint declaration
recently adopted by the Foreign Ministers of the
participating States in New York. In the declaration we,
the Foreign Ministers, expressed our concern about the
latest developments in the situation in the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia as regards the upcoming
presidential and parliamentary elections, and confirmed
our support for the democratic forces in that country
and for its efforts to start the democratic process.
All of this might contribute to the integration of
that country into the international community and to its
participation in the work of international organizations,
following the path that all the other successor States of
the former Yugoslavia have taken. Furthermore, the
resolution of the succession issue of the former
Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on the basis
of the equality of all successors — as acknowledged by
the decisions of the European Union/United Nations
International Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, as
well as by the relevant Security Council and General
Assembly resolutions — is a prerequisite for stability
and peace in the region.
Concerning the issue of succession, I would like
to point out that during the Millennium Summit and
Millennium Assembly, the four successor States have
once again reaffirmed their joint position and proposed
to work more intensively to settle this issue.
Furthermore, I would like to express our support
for the stability and the reform processes undertaken in
Montenegro and for the efforts of the democratically
23

elected Government there to continue pursuing
economic and democratic development. We also
support that Government's greater involvement in the
work of international bodies and organizations and in
other regional cooperation processes.
The consistent position of my country, which was
stated well before the outbreak of the Kosovo crisis
and adoption of the Security Council resolution 1244
(1999), was to support a peaceful and political solution
to the Kosovo crisis through substantial autonomy in
the framework of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
respect for the human rights of all living in Kosovo,
respect for the inviolability of the existing borders and,
finally, the economic reconstruction and stabilization
of Kosovo and of the region.
We support the activities of the United Nations
Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo and the
Kosovo Force (KFOR). We are convinced of the need
to build democratic institutions and a multi-ethnic
society in Kosovo, and to find a model of civil society
that does away with any propensity to create ethnically
cleansed territories. The local elections in Kosovo are
of paramount importance for its future.
The Republic of Macedonia is concerned about
the reported violence and the increased number of
inter-ethnic incidents and tensions in Kosovo. We
consider that KFOR should strengthen its border
control activities, with the aim of preventing violence
from spilling over into the neighbouring countries,
including my country. I am stressing this because there
have been several serious incidents at the border of the
Republic of Macedonia.
In the hope that the developments in Kosovo will
be the last serious challenge in the Balkans, we will
have to defend together more successfully democratic
principles and values and develop long-term preventive
strategies. Regional stability can be provided only by
economic prosperity, democracy and respect for human
rights and the rights of national minorities, as well as
through intensive regional and bilateral cooperation.
However, the most serious guarantee for the security of
the region and its transformation into an area of
democracy, development, stability and cooperation
remains the early integration and full-fledged
membership of the countries from the region in the
European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO).
This year's Millennium Assembly presents a
genuine opportunity to analyse the work of our
Organization and to evaluate its efficiency in resolving
issues of international interest. We all hope that the
directions for future development will also be
underscored, with the aim of further promoting the
achieved results and practices.
One of the main characteristics of the modern
world is that now more than ever there is a great deal
of interdependence. This represents a new challenge,
and at the same time is a new feature of international
relations. Moreover, when everybody is talking about
the enormous significance of the ever more important
multilateral character of the international scene and
about globalization, the question of the equal
participation of all the world's actors is being raised.
That is, at issue is the official representation of the
voices of all peoples. In this regard, I would like to
express our support for the efforts of the Republic of
China on Taiwan to become integrated into the
international community, taking into consideration the
interests of that country and also its significant
contribution to international cooperation and the
solidarity it has shown. It is in the interest of our
Organization that the 23 million people of the Republic
of China participate in its activities.
The negative effects of crises, threats to peace,
security and economic development, and the pollution
of the environment are felt globally. In accordance with
the new situation in international relations, needs and
visions, an obvious demand exists to strengthen the
role of the United Nations. Our Organization can
successfully carry out its activities only if the Member
States fully contribute to their realization.
In order to allow the Organization to be able to
play a successful role in the twenty-first century, it is
necessary to adequately reform it. We welcome the
efforts made by the Secretary-General thus far to this
effect, and at the same time we would like to urge him
and the Member States to continue. Furthermore, I
would like to underline that the reform of the United
Nations will be successful only if strengthening the
role of the General Assembly follows the reform of the
Security Council. In our view, it is necessary to
increase the number of permanent and non-permanent
members of the Security Council on the basis of the
new reality in international relations. These new
members should come from both the developing and
developed countries.
24

What needs to be done so that the United Nations
can adequately respond to the challenges of this
century? The Millennium Summit offered part of the
answer. The adopted Millennium Summit Declaration
creates obligations for all Member States in their future
endeavours. We share the opinion that, although the
Declaration is a political document, it is first of all an
action plan of our Organization for the period to come.
Stressing the importance of the adopted document, I
would like to urge the General Assembly to begin
implementing it. In these efforts, the Republic of
Macedonia will actively contribute.
The Republic of Macedonia will also continue to
contribute to the strengthening of international peace
and security. I emphasize that part of our contribution
to the realization of the issues will be elaborated under
the three agenda items as a follow-up to the resolutions
submitted by the Republic of Macedonia.
The maintenance of international peace and
security worldwide will continue to be the priority of
our Organization in the twenty-first century. As the
Secretary-General stated in his report, the world, and
our Organization in particular, will be faced with the
need to be fully involved in conflict prevention,
conflict resolution and the development of the affected
States. Therefore, prevention should become one of the
primary instruments of our Organization. In regard to
our contribution to prevention activities and policy, I
would like to inform the Assembly that in the Republic
of Macedonia an international centre for conflict
prevention and resolution is being established.
Of great importance to stability and security, in
our view, is the control of small arms and light
weapons, which pose a large threat to peace in many
regions of the world. In that connection, the United
Nations, in cooperation with other regional
organizations, such as the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), can have a
serious impact on preventing the proliferation of small
arms and light weapons.
We urge the international community to take
strong measures in its efforts to stop arms trafficking,
especially of small arms and light weapons. In that
respect, we hope that that the international conference
on this issue, which will take place next year, will
contribute to more efficient actions.
Among the reasons for the eruption of a large
number of local conflicts worldwide are economic and
social factors. Globalization, apart from its positive
effects, has a number of negative implications for the
small and least developed economies. Financial
resources for development are necessary; realistically,
the United Nations is not able to provide them. We
support the appeal for the necessary voluntary
contributions from Member States, but also the idea of
involving other participants, such as international
financial institutions, the private sector and other
bodies. In this respect, we welcome next year's
international Conference on Financing for
Development. I underline that writing off the debts, or
part of them, of countries affected by objective external
influences would have a very positive impact. It would
also help to diminish global poverty and
unemployment and aid the overall economic
development of the indebted countries.
The General Assembly is the proper place for
evaluating achievements in the promotion and
protection of human rights and freedoms. There has
been an impressive development of international
human rights law in the last 50 years. Today we can
proudly state that the United Nations, with the adoption
of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
other instruments, succeeded in affirming the
international consensus — that human dignity is to be
the basic standard and the main goal for all people and
nations.
Last year we marked the tenth anniversary of the
adoption of the Convention on the Rights of the Child,
and next year there will be a world summit on this
issue. I take this opportunity to announce the intention
of the Republic of Macedonia to sign in the very near
future the two Optional Protocols to the Convention,
the first on the involvement of children in armed
conflict and the second on the sale of children, child
prostitution and child pornography.
Before I conclude, I would like to single out a
few issues to which my Government attaches crucial
importance: first the situation in Africa, both political
and economic; secondly, the Middle East peace
process; thirdly, the financial situation of our
Organization — all Member States should fulfil their
obligations; and, finally peacekeeping operations,
which contribute to the affirmation of our Organization
on a global scale. This is the right moment for their
25

restructuring and strengthening on the basis of the
report (A/55/305) prepared by the Brahimi Panel.
Many challenges await us in the twenty-first
century. Our obligation is to make the world a better
and happier place to live in. In the realization of that
aim, the United Nations has a significant place and
role. The significance and existence of our universal
Organization lies in its skilfulness in adapting to real
situations and future challenges.
We expect this year's Millennium Assembly to
contribute to the realization of this aim. I assure the
Assembly of the Republic of Macedonia's contribution
to its successful fulfilment.


It is an honour for me to address the General
Assembly, which will complement the recent
Millennium Summit by providing a fundamental
contribution to the current stage of transition towards a
United Nations in tune with reality.
International peace and security, along with
cooperation and solidarity for sustainable human
development, must become the fundamental
instruments of our new Organization in the new
millennium. Peace and security require a renewed
commitment to international law, full respect for and
faithful, prompt compliance with the decisions of the
International Court of Justice, national compliance
with the standards imposed by treaties and good faith
in the application of laws, uncompromised by domestic
political agendas.
Honduras, a founding Member of the United
Nations, considers that the decisions of the
International Court of Justice are a solid basis for the
resolution of international conflicts and that they
represent the fundamental norms for coexistence
among States, with the support of the Security Council
as the guarantor of their implementation.
Peace and security among nations require the
delimitation of land and maritime areas, in keeping
with the rules of international law. They require respect
for historical rights and the non-use of force. Only with
defined boundaries can we determine clearly what
contribution everyone can make to our common causes
and promote the development of borders of solidarity
on the basis of a culture of peace.
The 1,000 years that now lie behind us produced
extraordinary advances in the history of humanity. But
they also left us tasks to be completed relating to
problems such as racism, xenophobia, an arsenal of
weapons of various magnitudes and the effects of a
culture of violence and destruction. This is why we
firmly support the consolidation of the peace process in
the Middle East. We welcome the constructive dialogue
launched by the two Koreas in an effort to normalize
22

their relations, as we welcome peaceful solutions for
any divided society.
As regards globalization, we must tackle not only
the economic aspect, but also social well-being.
Education is a passport to the future, but only if the
education provided is the same for all, and not just for
a minority, and only if education is life-affirming and
promotes change so as to teach all human beings on the
earth to live together.
For this purpose, as the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization  has
pointed out, we must learn to know, we must learn to
do, we must learn to be. In this area, we believe that
the Economic and Social Council of our Organization
must promote and pursue its initiative for greater
dissemination of technological information, as
proposed by its members during the high-level segment
this year. It must try to prevent disparities in
technological development that benefit only
industrialized countries.
Millions of human beings are noting with
amazement that there exist realities very different from
their own harsh conditions. When they try to travel to
that fantastic world, to that dream of hope, they find
out that borders do exist and that they are free only to
continue dreaming.
Globalization is a coin with two faces. On the one
hand, it creates wealth, benefits, possibilities, but on
the other, poverty, problems, inequity and even new
forms of exclusion. Instead, globalization should create
for the benefit of all a world without any exclusions.
Our responsibility is to bring about the globalization of
the development of the human being.
Honduras is participating in the Central American
integration process. We see this as a way of having a
greater presence and being more active in this
globalized world. This is why we actively support the
strengthening of the institutional process of Central
American integration.
Despite the advances that occurred in the past
millennium, the terms of trade continue to work against
the development of many of our countries. The
increase in oil prices has a devastating effect on the
weakest economies, and, paradoxically, the more we
increase production, the more we open our doors to
international trade and eliminate barriers, the more
obstacles we encounter to gaining access to
international markets. This creates a crisis for our
export capacity. Trade globalization must produce
benefits in both directions.
In addition to the asymmetries and disparities to
which I have referred, there are also threats of different
types that no State, however powerful or strong, can
successfully confront in isolation. The report of the
Secretary-General to the Millennium Summit attached
as much importance to the topic of the environment as
it did to peace and development. This demonstrates that
in the year 2000 we recognize that, in addition to
achieving peace and economic development, we must
take care of our environment. If we do not, the future
of humanity will continue to be threatened. Every day
we are increasingly threatened by the lack of drinking
water, desertification, the destruction of the ozone
layer and climate change. These processes have
produced an increase in natural disasters. Honduras,
my country, was the victim of a disaster of catastrophic
proportions. This is why we attach such priority to
caring for the environment and to education on how to
promote and preserve it.
The need to control the production of greenhouse
gases, the widening of the hole in the ozone layer, the
drop in oxygen production, the pollution of fresh and
salt water, the extinction of thousands of species  all
these form part of that greater concern that we must
confront jointly.
Similarly, terrorism, organized crime and drug
trafficking can be combated effectively only if we act
jointly and in coordination. If we do not, we will be
jointly responsible as accomplices in the destruction of
the hopes of the future youth and children.
Our Organization should make a greater effort to
overcome the disparity between abundance and want,
of which very concrete examples abound. For instance,
today hundreds of thousands of medicines are
produced, but the millions of human beings affected by
HIV/AIDS need access to these medicines if their pain
is to be relieved. It is truly horrifying that the world
produces thousands of metric tons more food than is
needed to feed its population, and yet people are dying
of hunger and malnutrition. The poverty and hunger of
millions of human beings is an insult to humanity and
an affront to the dignity of individuals. Here there is
room for improved coordination.
Our Organization continues its important efforts
to prevent world conflicts. There have been many
23

achievements in implementing machinery for world
order and peace, including peacekeeping activities and
the work of the international tribunals. We have also
seen progress in disarmament, particularly in terms of
weapons of mass destruction. Aware of its international
responsibilities, Honduras, to the extent that its
resources permit, has also contributed to international
peace and security, participating in the missions in
Haiti and Western Sahara.
The United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP) has also acted as a partner in the development
process in many countries around the world. It has
worked with national Governments, with society and
local communities. UNDP is a trustworthy, active
partner in the elaboration and implementation of
medium- and long-term national strategies to
contribute to the reduction of poverty. The Executive
Board meeting of UNDP, held yesterday, was very
successful in advancing UNDP reform. Honduras is
actively participating in this process.
The world of bipolar confrontation is no longer,
and the era of cooperation is under way. Nevertheless,
our Organization is still leaving out States that have
contributed to development, that represent millions of
beings and that participate actively in the world
economy. For these and other reasons, which we have
often cited in this General Assembly and in other
international forums, these States should be
participating in our debates and decisions. One such
State is the Republic of China.
At the dawning of the new millennium we must
strengthen our membership, expand our representation
of peoples and nations and ensure fairer and more
balanced representation in the discussions and
decisions of the Security Council. To this end,
Honduras believes that the Security Council should
make room for important development partners and
representatives of the developing world, on the basis of
equitable geographical representation and with the
consensus of the existing regional groups.
We also believe that the right to exercise the veto
presently enjoyed by a limited number of States should
be confined to specific topics and circumstances, so
that it is not used merely to protect vested interests.
The new vision we have of a renewed United
Nations requires that our Organization become more
competent, more agile and more responsible; that it be
better administered, with a healthy financial system;
and that it produce more tangible results for the
peoples of the world. This is why we support the
results of the Working Group of the General Assembly
and believe that reforming and expanding the Council
must be based on the broadest possible consensus and
be in keeping with fair and equitable geographical
representation, by which developing countries will be
able to make substantial contributions to the decision-
making process so as to solidify world peace and
security.
Our Organization must engage in self-criticism
and be the first to propose changes to its working
methods. Thematic dialogues designed to produce
consensus and plans of action should replace the long,
costly world conferences, the concrete results of which
are not always easy to see. These lofty conferences
should be replaced by a genuine debate in the General
Assembly, and the procedures should be simplified so
as to save the Organization the large sums that we are
presently wasting because of duplication of efforts.
I conclude by referring to the Millennium Summit
held just last week. I would like to recall the idea of the
President of the Republic of Honduras, Mr. Carlos
Flores, that the United Nations can and must work to
bring about the required coexistence of the poor and
the rich, the large and the small, by means of a
platform of sovereign equality and human solidarity.
And our President said,
`More than a world pained by poverty and
inequity for the overwhelming majority, the world
should be the sum of its peoples with at least their
basic needs and essential requirements met.


First let me warmly
congratulate you, Sir, on your election, which is doubly
significant, as few Prime Ministers have held the post
of President of the General Assembly. Your unique
practical experience in both domestic and international
affairs will stand us in good stead as we try to reform
the United Nations. I also thank your distinguished
predecessor, Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, for the excellent
work he has done and for ushering the United Nations
successfully into the new millennium.
As a fellow small State, Singapore is also
delighted to extend a warm welcome to Tuvalu, the
United Nations newest Member. We hope that Tuvalu
will also join the Forum of Small States.
As the text of my speech has been circulated, in
the interest of saving time I will not read the entire
text.
The recently concluded Millennium Summit
confirmed that the United Nations, whatever its
imperfections, remains an indispensable organization.
The overriding theme of the speeches in plenary
meetings was the need for the United Nations to be
revitalized and better equipped to deal with the
challenges of the twenty-first century. Our immediate
challenge is to respond with concrete follow-up. This
may be stating the obvious but doing it will not be easy
nor is it assured. The United Nations record of
implementation, it must be conceded, has not always
inspired confidence.
In his report to the Millennium Summit, the
Secretary-General drew attention to a 1999 Gallup poll
of some 57,000 individuals in 60 countries. One
conclusion was that, globally, less than half of those
interviewed judged the performance of the United
Nations to be satisfactory. We need to reflect on this.
But it is also an unfortunate fact that the United
Nations has not usually got credit for what it has done
successfully, while continuing to attract criticism for
what it has not yet done. Thus, a critical political
factor — hitherto inadequately addressed — is how to
manage expectations.
Managing expectations is a key to success. The
window of opportunity opened for the United Nations
by the end of the cold war was perhaps squandered by
an overly ambitious agenda, leading almost inevitably
to disillusionment. We should not repeat this mistake
after the Millennium Summit. To resolutely implement
the Summit's results, we must not only accurately
identify them, but engage in a realistic assessment of
what is and is not possible. Otherwise, we risk
undermining the political will and support needed for
the United Nations to be effective.
The United Nations serves two essential functions
for our community of nations. It provides all of us with
a valuable instrument to advance our common interests,
including the setting of norms for relations between
nations and on human rights. It also provides each of
us with an important avenue to advance or defend our
national interests. There is no necessary contradiction
between these two functions. That which is in the
interest of humanity ought to be in our individual
national interests. But the practical problem is in
identifying what is common and reconciling different
national interests.
The twentieth century has seen a creative tension
between two apparently contradictory sets of ideals:
the sovereignty of nation States and the progressive
elaboration of international law and organization.
Sovereignty implies the right of each State to
determine for itself its own rules. Yet today States
interact within a web of complex relationships,
international institutions and regimes, covering an
ever-widening range of matters, which implies a
serious limitation of sovereignty. We live with this
apparent contradiction every day.
But we do not have to choose between the two
ideals of absolute sovereignty or absolute international
law and organization. The real question is how to strike
an appropriate balance to move forward.
It was therefore timely for the Secretary-General
to convene the Millennium Summit. We now have a
broad consensus on what to do to meet the challenges
of the twenty-first century.
The question then is: how do we proceed from
here. Taking a narrower but more focused approach
may be the only practical solution to many seemingly
intractable issues. But I do not underestimate the
complexities of putting this into practice. Let me
illustrate the complexities with reference to two of the
core functions of the United Nations: development and
security.
14

On development, earlier calls for a new
international economic order fell on deaf ears. The
stalemate in North-South negotiations over the last
three decades or so was the direct consequence of the
resistance on the part of certain developed countries to
admit the necessity of changing the functioning of the
world economy.
However, I believe that resistance can be more
easily overcome and the urgent remedial action that is
needed may be easier to take if there is a mind-set shift
by both developing and developed countries. The
candid debate the leaders had at the recent interactive
round table discussions saw a common
acknowledgement that both the North and the South
must find collective solutions to the problems of
development. There was agreement that developing
countries must be given help to build up capacity to
benefit from the forces of globalization. The developed
economies have also pointed out that they too face
serious problems that can be attributed to the pressures
of globalization. But there can be no doubt that the
problems of the South are of a far greater magnitude
and deserve far more attention. Domestic problems at
home should not give the North any excuse to ignore
their important international obligations.
Today, it is commonly accepted that no country,
whatever its development status, can afford to opt out
of the global economy or go it alone. The issue for all
is to develop the national capacity to take advantage of
the benefits of globalization while mitigating its
downsides.
The United Nations is now in its fourth
development decade. A new discipline for both
developed and developing countries is needed if the
results are to be less disappointing than the first three.
The issue for the United Nations is to help the
developing countries acquire the capabilities to deal
with the pressures of globalization and to plug it.
In this process, difficult domestic structural
changes will be necessary to ensure that policies and
institutions meet international best practices. These
standards are today largely Western, but can and ought
to be internationally negotiated. And it is imperative
that the developed countries avoid a sterile “one-size-
fits-all” prescription. As suggested by the Secretary-
General, the United Nations can play a mediating role
in the negotiations so that it will not be undertaken on
the basis of categories biased towards zero-sum
solutions. Instead, the United Nations can help develop
“win-win” solutions for both developed and developing
countries.
However, the United Nations cannot work in
isolation. The United Nations has a role to play to
ensure that the international financial institutions like
the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and
the World Trade Organization coordinate their efforts
and work as one team. No other institution is better
placed than the United Nations to do this. The United
Nations is the natural forum for regular dialogues
among the multilateral organizations to coordinate
programmes that would help developing nations build
capacity. The United Nations could also help make the
decision-making processes of these organizations more
transparent, consultative and inclusive.
Turning next to security, the end of the cold war
has obviously not meant the end to international
conflict. In the eleven years since the end of 1989,
when the Berlin Wall fell, the Security Council
authorized some 40 peacekeeping operations. But in
the preceding 42 years, it had authorized only 17. It has
been estimated that the total cumulative amount of the
United Nations peacekeeping budget from 1948 to
1989 was $3 billion. But since 1989, it has escalated to
about $18 billion. Not only have the numbers and the
costs of peacekeeping operations risen sharply, but
their scope has also changed. Of the 40 peacekeeping
operations authorized since 1989, only five were
clearly in response to clear inter-State conflicts.
Throughout history we have witnessed oppressive
internal conflicts and human rights atrocities
perpetuated by a State against its own people. The
difference today is that with the advent of technology,
instant communication through television, the Internet
and the role of non-governmental organizations, these
conflicts and atrocities are made known to the whole
world instantaneously. Very few are regarded as purely
local or regional situations. Most are regarded as
internationalized. This galvanizing of public outrage
leads to expectations that the international community
must act. Often this increases the pressures on the
United Nations and the Security Council to take
interventionist actions, severely testing the United
Nations capacity and stretching its resources. The
dilemma is: how can the United Nations be responsive
to these pressures if its Members are unwilling to give
it the required resources. And if the United Nations
15

tries to be selective, how can it prevent itself from
being accused of practising double standards?
In 1995 Professor Paul Kennedy of Yale
University, who headed a team of scholars retained by
the United Nations Secretariat to study the future of the
Organization, concluded that Member States faced an
urgent decision: either to reduce their demands on the
United Nations, thereby giving it a decent chance to
carry on at a lower level of activity within existing
resources, or to expand available resources so that the
United Nations could meet what Professor Kennedy
saw as inexorably growing demands from Member
States unable to cope with the technological pace,
population growth and environmental pressures of the
twenty-first century. He concluded that, in the light of
global circumstances, opting for expanded resources
would be the wiser choice.
There is now a growing consensus that it is
important to ensure that the United Nations has
adequate resources for its current and future
peacekeeping activities. Discussions on how this can
best be effected are already under way and Singapore
supports them. Nevertheless, let us not forget that
every prudent accounting must deal squarely with how
decisions are made on peacekeeping operations. We
have to be honest here. There is no level playing field.
Most of the time, most decisions are in reality made by
the permanent members of the Security Council. The
rest of us have to pay our dues, but have a minimal say
in the decisions.
Hence, when we review the current peacekeeping
scale of assessments, we hope that the Security Council
will also review its current decision-making
procedures.
Recent developments in Africa serve as a
sobering reminder of the need to undertake an urgent
overhaul of United Nations peacekeeping. The Security
Council met at the level of heads of State and
Government during the Millennium Summit to discuss
the need to ensure an effective role for it in maintaining
international peace and security, particularly in Africa.
Sadly, apart from a general description, the Security
Council summit did not produce any new concrete
proposals for or commitments to further action. The
Council could and I believe should do better than this.
Fortunately, the Brahimi Panel has come up with
a set of concrete recommendations, which when put in
place will significantly revamp United Nations
peacekeeping. In a nutshell, the Panel advocated that
should the United Nations decide to send a
peacekeeping force to uphold peace, the peacekeepers
must be rapidly deployed with a credible deterrence,
and be authorized, with robust mandates, to carry out
their mission and defend themselves. Only then can the
tragedies of past peacekeeping operations be avoided.
What this entails is that United Nations peacekeeping
missions must be given the necessary resources,
including better trained and better equipped
peacekeepers, and receive better support from United
Nations Headquarters — in particular, an enlarged
Department of Peacekeeping Operations. In turn,
Member States must have the political will to support
the United Nations politically, financially and
operationally.
I think I have said enough to underscore the point
that a focused approach is not necessarily an easier or
less complex one, but I believe that it is the only
practical way forward.
The Secretary-General's report to the Millennium
Summit was designed as a guide to action, and it
should be actively used as such and not simply praised
and then forgotten. We took the first step at the
Millennium Summit by endorsing and adopting many
of the proposals of the report in the form of a
Millennium Declaration. The real challenge now is to
fulfil the ambitious and wide-ranging promises that we
have made to the world.
Where are the material, financial and human
resources to come from to fulfil our promises? The
United Nations Secretariat and agencies by themselves
obviously do not have them. The United Nations
cannot do everything on its own. As the millennium
report makes clear, the necessary long-term effort to
deliver the solution will have to be shared — shared
among national Governments, the United Nations,
other international institutions and other important
actors, such as corporations and non-governmental
organizations. Then, and only then, will there be any
chance of success.
The Millennium Summit has provided a good
basis on which to begin the process of practical
negotiations that will lead to real solutions, rather than
political posturing, which will only complicate already
complex issues. We must start somewhere. I suggest
that we start here and now.
16


It
gives me great delight and honour to address the
General Assembly's first session of the new
millennium. I would like to begin by conveying my
sincere congratulations to you, Sir, on your election to
the presidency of this historic session, the success of
which is ensured, I believe, by the experience and
wisdom you bring to this noble work. I would also like
to pay tribute to your predecessor, His Excellency
Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, whose dedication and
leadership enabled the fifty-fourth session to lay the
groundwork for the Millennium Assembly.
I also take this opportunity to warmly welcome
the admission of Tuvalu to the United Nations.
Two weeks ago world leaders, including my
President, gathered in this very place to rally the
political will of the international community to meet
the challenges of the new millennium. Their meeting of
minds here in this Hall of peace, as summed up in the
Millennium Declaration, reaffirmed the role of the
United Nations as the embodiment of humankind's
aspiration to greater peace and prosperity, to be
strengthened and fulfilled through the efforts of all
Member States.
It is only right that the new millennium should
start with the beginning of the end of the confrontation
and conflicts handed down from the past era. Such a
start has been made on the Korean peninsula with the
first South-North Korean summit meeting in June. As a
result, inter-Korean relations have taken a definite turn
for the better. The whole world stands to benefit from
the liquidation of the final legacy of the cold war that
the summit appears to have set in motion on the Korean
peninsula.
During the June summit the two leaders engaged
in an extensive discussion on peace on the Korean
peninsula, South-North economic cooperation and the
future of the Korean people. At the end, they
announced a five-point joint declaration committing
the top leaders of the two sides to steering inter-Korean
relations away from tension and enmity towards
reconciliation, peaceful coexistence and co-prosperity
and eventual unification.
The summit is being followed up with inter-
Korean ministerial meetings to work out concrete steps
to implement the summit agreements. Some steps have
already been taken, such as the reopening of the liaison
offices at the truce village of Panmunjom and several
sociocultural exchange programmes. Some are in the
making — the work to reconnect the railroad between
the two sides and the negotiation of the necessary legal
instruments for full-scale economic exchanges, such as
agreements on investment guarantees, avoidance of
double taxation, settlement procedures and dispute
arbitration. The third ministerial round is to be held
later this month on Cheju island of South Korea.
In the latest development the two sides have
agreed on a return visit to the South by Chairman Kim
Jong Il at an early date. Furthermore, in a key move for
tension reduction, a South-North defence ministers'
meeting is to be held on 25 and 26 September, also on
Cheju island.
Each of these developments stirs the hearts and
minds of the Korean people. But none would match the
profound emotions that were aroused in mid-August by
the exchange of visits in Seoul and Pyongyang by
families that have suffered the unprecedented
humanitarian plight of remaining separated for half a
century. It was a limited exchange involving only 100
individuals from each side, out of an estimated 10
5

million members of families torn apart by the national
division. But further exchanges are in the planning, as
are more lasting solutions to their plight.
As dramatic and hopeful as the June summit and
the inter-Korean developments since then have been,
only the first steps have been taken in the long process
of ending the cold war and establishing a lasting peace
on the Korean peninsula. We sincerely seek the abiding
interest and support of the international community to
see us through. In this regard, I should like to express
my Government's wholehearted appreciation of the
statement by the Co-Chairpersons of the Millennium
Summit welcoming the inter-Korean summit and the
follow-up measures.
At the dawn of a new millennium the United
Nations has yet to resolve the old problems of violent
conflicts that are worsening in both scope and nature.
In many parts of the world, countless lives continue to
be lost in armed conflicts, insurgencies and ethnic
violence at regional, subregional, and intra-national
levels. We, as Member States, have to rally a stronger
political will to prevent a repetition of these tragedies
that have happened or are happening in Rwanda,
Kosovo, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of
the Congo.
It is particularly deplorable that United Nations
personnel in the field are under growing, violent attack.
We urge all parties concerned to guarantee the safety
and security of the peacekeeping, humanitarian and
other United Nations personnel. In this regard we
welcome the Brahimi report as providing a useful basis
for improving the effectiveness of the peacekeeping
operations activities with an adequate mandate and
resources.
My Government remains fully committed to
United Nations peacekeeping missions. Last year, in
support of the democratic aspiration of a people, the
Republic of Korea sent an infantry battalion to East
Timor. Furthermore, with the economy regaining a
growth momentum, we are taking steps to fulfil our
pledge of an increase in our contribution to the
peacekeeping operations budget. This is an expression
of our firm belief that in the twenty-first century the
United Nations should be better prepared and more
willing to fulfil its responsibility for international
peace and security.
Many leaders at the Millennium Summit spoke of
the double-edged nature of the globalizing world,
which brings unprecedented opportunities for
economic growth on the one hand, while it further
widens the disparities between the developed and
developing countries, on the other. Aggravated by the
digital divide of the information age, the wealth gap
can become a source of unrest and instability in the
world.
The Republic of Korea has actively taken on the
challenges of globalization. At home we have turned
the recent economic crisis into an opportunity to gear
up for the knowledge-based economy of the global
information age. We knew that we must emerge from
the crisis not simply as we were before the crisis but in
a new form fit to thrive in the age of information
industries and borderless competition. Thus, bold
reforms have been under way to rid the economy of
past inefficiencies and to accelerate liberalization and
market opening. Active Government assistance has
been rendered to small and medium-venture businesses
in the information sector, as well as to educating the
people in computer literacy.
Government policies have combined with the
intellectual vigour and adventurous spirit of the Korean
people to produce the world's fastest growing Internet
population   an estimated 20 million users by the end
of the year out of a population of 43 million, almost 50
per cent of our entire population. While actively
promoting the information age, we have also given
special attention and care to those pockets of society
that would fall further behind without help. Our efforts
in this area have been built around the concept of
“productive welfare”, which aims at enabling the
socially weak and enhancing the living standards of all.
A key operative term is human resources development,
which offers training and education to all who are
willing to work.
We believe that the same concept of enabling the
weak to develop their capacities should be applied in
international development assistance. Thus, on the
occasion of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation
(APEC) Forum on Shared Prosperity and Harmony in
Seoul in March this year, our President, Kim Dae-jung,
urged donors to support the developing countries in
their efforts to set up information centres which would
provide communities with access to the Internet and
other conveniences of the information age. I am very
happy that the proposal is entirely consistent with the
Secretary-General's initiative on the United Nations
Information Technology Service (UNITeS). In addition,
6

my Government is increasing its assistance for human
resources development in the developing economies
through the dispatch of experts and invitations to
trainees in the information and telecommunication
fields. In particular, in collaboration with the United
Nations, we have offered training opportunities to
experts from African countries in export promotion.
We will continue to strengthen cooperation with the
United Nations to address the mounting challenges that
Africa faces.
Shared values and ideals make for the strongest
of the bonds that enable nations to work together
beyond differences in history, ethnicity and socio-
economic development. In this regard, the spread of
democracy and its values in the post-cold-war era has
greatly enriched the grounds for the global community
to build a world of durable peace and prosperity and of
dignity for all human beings. While upholding human
rights and democratic values at home, democracies
should cooperate to promote their universality in the
global community. Thus, the Republic of Korea was
happy to serve as a co-convenor for the first
international conference of the Community of
Democracies in Warsaw last June, and we are honoured
that Korea will host the second international
conference of the Community of Democracies in
October 2002.
Meanwhile, to strengthen democracy at home, my
Government has continued the endeavour to improve
human rights laws and practices. At present we are in
the process of enacting a comprehensive human rights
law, which will give birth to a national human rights
commission. The commission will work to improve
institutional arrangements for the promotion of human
rights and to raise public awareness. We are also
making significant progress in enhancing the rights of
women and children as well as workers. Particularly
noteworthy is the creation of the Ministry of Women,
due within this year, to advance gender equality.
As the new millennium opens, the challenges
facing the United Nations are multifaceted and ever-
diversifying. I have mentioned a few. There are many
more issues, such as disarmament and sustainable
development, that are equally important. However, the
resources of the global body remain limited. Ongoing
reform is required to enable the United Nations to meet
the challenges with greater efficiency and
effectiveness. Thanks to the Secretary-General's
initiative, considerable achievements have been made
to streamline the Organization, but there are still areas
where creative input is called for. Security Council
reform is one of those areas. We believe that
representativeness, transparency and effectiveness must
be the guiding terms in the debate for a comprehensive
reform of the Council.
We do not need new concepts to describe the
challenges of the new millennium. They are still the
problems of peace and prosperity and the right of
human beings to live with dignity. However,
globalization has increased the intensity of the
problems as well as the chances for their resolution.
Therefore, the role of the United Nations must also be
consolidated. The Government of the Republic of
Korea is prepared to play an active role commensurate
with its abilities to accomplish the common goals of
the global community. I sincerely hope that this body
will lead the way in putting the lofty spirit of the
Millennium Declaration into action. In the process, my
country, the Republic of Korea, heartened by the
enhanced hope for its peaceful and prosperous future,
will play an active part.


I stand here today as
Israel's messenger of peace. The establishment of the
State of Israel was the fulfilment of the dream of a
people forced into exile 2,000 years ago. The
destruction of the Second Temple and the dissolution
of Jewish statehood were the result of our failure as a
nation to assume the proper political course, to opt for
accommodation with reality instead of engaging in
messianic hallucinations. Our punishment was very
severe indeed, but maybe it can serve as a lesson to
those nations and leaders who today may be tragically
led to believe that the dangerous inertia of romantic
mythology and unrealistic dreams is preferable to the
banality of a wise and prudent political course.
Most revolts are uprisings against a system.
Zionism was a revolt against destiny. It is this
expression of our re-encounter with the world of
political realities that eventually led us to the
restoration of Jewish statehood in 1948. Tragically,
however, historical and geopolitical circumstances
have put us in a prolonged, bitter conflict with the
Palestinian people.
It was thanks to the leadership of Prime Minister
Rabin and Chairman Arafat that, seven years ago,
Palestinians and Israelis were put on a track leading to
peace and reconciliation. We have been engaged in the
past seven years, but more intensely in the last year, in
a major effort, unprecedented in both scope and depth,
to resolve this 100-year-old conflict. This negotiating
process, and it alone, should be the foundation of a
peace agreement.
At this point, I would like to address my
colleagues from the Arab and Muslim world. I hope
that my words will convince them of the Israeli
Government's sincere intentions to achieve a
comprehensive peace based on respect, dignity and
fairness, which will end the Middle East conflict and
best serve the vital interests of the entire region.
The Jewish people have no quarrel with Islam.
On the contrary, we have the deepest respect for that
great Islamic civilization under whose wings Jewish
history — from Al-Andalus to Turkey, from Egypt to
Iraq, from the Jewish quarters of Tangier to Aleppo in
Syria — has known some of its finest hours and most
glorious cultural achievements. But even at the height
of the “Golden Age”, in the midst of the delights and
wonders of Muslim Spain, our people never abandoned
their dream of and yearning for Jerusalem, as expressed
in the words of the poet Yehuda Halevi more than 800
years ago:
“My heart is in the East, and I am in the furthest
reaches of the West. To thee my soul yearns from
the depth of the West.”
We are a small nation decimated by holocaust and
dispersion, but our heritage is rich. It was from our
eternal capital, Jerusalem — which, according to a
Muslim source,
“in the days of the people of Israel, was an area
larger than Cairo and Baghdad” —
that the message of monotheism was projected to
humanity. The Jewish holy sites and shrines in
Jerusalem are the very heart of the Jewish faith,
identity and history. For the past 2,000 years, Jews
have turned towards Temple Mount in prayer three
times a day.
“If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand
forget its cunning. Let my tongue cleave to the
roof of my mouth if I do not recall thee”,
they pledged in joy and in sorrow.
For the past 30 years, Israel has consistently
demonstrated its commitment to freedom of religion
10

and worship in Jerusalem. Heads of the various
religious denominations in Jerusalem will attest to the
fact that the city has never been so open to all
believers. During the last month of Ramadan, a record
number, unheard of in the annals of Islam in Jerusalem,
of more than 400,000 Muslim worshippers attended
Friday prayers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
I note this as an example of the deep respect
which Israel has for Islam and its followers. Just as we
do not question the sincerity of the sentiments of others
towards their holy sites in Jerusalem, we expect that
others will not question the Jewish people's deep, awe-
inspired attachment to Jerusalem and its holy sites,
from which we will never again be parted.
Politicians need not distort God's intentions for
the sake of negotiations. How refreshing it is that a
great number of Muslim scholars should attest to the
fact that, as the Supreme Court Judge Mujir el-din al-
Hanbali wrote in his History of Jerusalem and Hebron,
“David reigned for 40 years and before he died he
passed the monarchy on to his son Solomon and
told him to build the beit al-miqdas —  the
Temple”.
The expression beit al-miqdas —  that is, the House of
the Temple — became in many Muslim sources a
synonym of the word “Jerusalem”.
It is a travesty of historical truth to present the
Palestinian refugee problem as the result of mass
expulsion. There is no denying, however, that once the
Jews — who for thousands of years waited with
humility for their redemption — made their re-
encounter with history as a sovereign nation, they had
to assume the inherent immorality of war. The
suffering of the civilian population will always be a
burden on the conscience of any nation at war. The
Arab-Israeli conflict has no monopoly on this maxim.
Clearly, the Palestinian refugees were victims of the
Arab-Israeli conflict. Israel, however, can assume
neither political nor moral responsibility for this
tragedy that was the direct result of the all-out
onslaught against reborn Israel — an onslaught
launched by the Arab armies in 1948. The Palestinian
refugee problem was born as the land was bisected by
the sword — not by design, Jewish or Arab. The
problem was largely the inevitable by-product of Arab
and Jewish fears and the protracted bitter fighting.
We believe that, once established, it is the
Palestinian State that should provide for the vindication
of the Palestinian claim for the right of return. The
notion is preposterous that a nation should create a
State only in order to gather its exiles in a
neighbouring State. Israel, however, has expressed its
willingness to actively participate in any international
effort and fund aimed at providing the financial
foundations for the resolution of the refugee problem.
Out of humanitarian considerations, Israel may also
accept a small and limited number of refugees within a
scheme of family reunification.
Let there be no doubt. The peace process is not
the objective, we need not sanctify the process. Peace,
not the process, is the objective. Peace is not about
more conventions, summits and resolutions; it is about
the future of our children, and about the seemingly
unattractive banalities of building the mechanisms of
cohabitation.
To the Palestinians we say: we need to
disentangle ourselves from this seemingly insoluble
conundrum. We know that unless your and our wounds
are healed, peace — not only the political peace but
also that of the mind and the conscience — will not be
complete. Yet, at the same time we realize that the total
satisfaction of our respective dreams or presumed
rights will lead us to perdition. Hence it is incumbent
on us to devise realistic ways to heal without opening
new wounds, to dignify our existence as free peoples
without putting into jeopardy the collective existence
of each other. Peace is not about twisting each other's
arms; it is about defining a common interest. I believe
that such an ideal compromise is not impossible to
achieve, while banishing the sword from this land of
God.
Peace has not materialized in full yet, but I
believe that we are moving in the right direction. In the
past year the Government of Prime Minister Ehud
Barak has made bold, courageous and unprecedented
moves towards peace. At Camp David we have
contemplated ideas and explored concepts relating to
the most sensitive and supposedly intractable issues.
Our sense is that breakthrough is possible, just as
failure may lead to breakdown. We have turned the sea
that separated us into a river. But, do we have the
courage and the determination to cross it?
I know I may not sound too objective by
vouching for Prime Minister Barak. But, I have come

here with the power of conviction that no Prime
Minister before him — and let no illusions be
harboured, no Prime Minister after him — will touch as
he has the outer limits of his options as an Israeli and a
Jew.
I do not underestimate the dilemmas facing
Chairman Arafat. He is the great leader of the
Palestinian people, and I know that the decision is not
easy for him either. But this is the destiny of leaders: to
always be prophets without honour. They should not
expect the applause of their constituencies, what really
matters is the judgement of future generations. I call
upon our Palestinian partners to realize that history has
brought us to a moment of truth and decision from
which we are not allowed to escape empty-handed
without inflicting severe punishments on our own
peoples.
Israel aspires to achieve a comprehensive peace
in the region and help move it into the future. Twenty
one years ago we signed a cornerstone peace treaty
with Egypt, followed by a peace treaty with Jordan and
an incipient but promising process of normalization
with the Maghreb and Gulf States. Eighteen years of
Israeli military presence in Lebanon have been
terminated by the Barak Government, in close
cooperation with the United Nations, and thanks
especially to the efforts and dedication of Secretary-
General Kofi Annan. We have also delved into the
possibilities of reaching peace with Syria. We hope that
talks with Syria will resume as soon as possible and
that a fair and equitable agreement can be achieved.
Israel is determined to pursue peace and take the
calculated risks attached to it. But Israel will not
compromise — not now and not ever — on those
security and national interests that we deem vital.
While building our peace with the Palestinians we
cannot ignore security concerns inherent in the fact that
peace with the Palestinians is not our last peace. We
still have a dispute pending with Syria, and we are still
exposed to the most serious regional threats emanating
from revolutionary powers in the area.
Peace requires the active involvement of the
international community. The critical role played by
the United States, and especially the relentless
dedication and unequivocal commitment of President
Bill Clinton, has been massive and constructive. Once
again the United States has proven to be the
indispensable nation. We have also seen the European
Union rising to the task, and we commend the role of
the French Presidency and that of other key European
Governments. Peace needs the advice of the
international community and it will need that support
to cement peace once it is achieved.
We expect also to work closely with the Egyptian
Government for the cause of regional peace. I believe
that it is also important that Russia and the Arab world
express their opinions that now is the time to make
historical decisions. Time is an elusive and perishable
commodity. We are all running out of it.
We are open to developing wide spaces of
cooperation with our Palestinian neighbours and indeed
with all the countries of the Middle East, with dignity
and mutuality. But, we do not intend to impose our
experience on anybody, nor is it our intention to assert
our economic or technological presence amidst those of
our neighbours who do not want it. The leaders and the
elites throughout the Middle East do not need our
advice to know what are the real challenges ahead of us
all: modernizing the economy and combating disease,
hunger, poverty and illiteracy. Indeed, small islands of
excellence notwithstanding, the Middle East is in grave
danger of being on the wrong side of the digital divide.
In his inaugural speech in 1961, the late President
Kennedy invited his generation to join him in a
struggle:
“Now the trumpet summons us again — not as a
call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a
call to battle, though embattled we are — but a
call to bear the burden of a long twilight
struggle, ... a struggle against the common
enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease and
war itself.”
Nothing will make us happier than joining hands
with our Arab neighbours with dignity and mutuality in
this most noble of struggles.
The Middle East is not tranquil yet. It is still
replete with armed conflicts, political hostilities and
animosities. Israel believes that regional arrangements
are crucial for arms control. A step-by-step approach,
commensurate with progress towards comprehensive
peace, is the right approach.
We are concerned by the expanding stockpiles of
conventional weapons in the region, as well as by
attempts made by Iran and Iraq to acquire and develop
12

non-conventional weapons, and by an increasing
missile threat.
Israel attaches great importance to the eventual
establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass
destruction in the region. In order to reach that goal,
direct negotiations between all States of the region
must be held.
Last year saw a turnaround in Israel's relations
with the United Nations. After years of anomaly, Israel
was temporarily admitted to the Western European and
Other Group (WEOG) in New York. We hope that
Israel's admission to the Western Group in
international organizations based outside New York
will soon be secured.
The United Nations, and indeed most of its
Member States, played a major role in demanding that
Iran treat fairly the 13 Jews falsely accused, convicted
and sentenced for ludicrous charges of espionage. It is
in such instances that the international community has
the opportunity to express its discontent and exert
pressure on countries that break the norms of
behaviour.
On the issue of the reform of the Security
Council, is our opinion that the Security Council
should faithfully reflect the present geopolitical
picture, a picture that has changed beyond recognition
since the last enlargement of the Council in 1965. We
subscribe to the view that the right of veto — a safety
net against the possible arbitrariness of the General
Assembly — should remain in the hands of a limited
number of States.
Allow me a final reflection on the Israeli-
Palestinian dilemma.
The tragedy of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
stemmed from discrepant historical rhythms. The
history of our modern national movement has been
characterized by realistic responses to objective
historical conditions. The Palestinians have
consistently fought for the solutions of yesterday —
those they had rejected a generation or two earlier. This
persistent attempt to turn back the clock of history lies
at the root of many of the misfortunes that have
befallen the peoples of the region. Now it is time for all
of us to overcome dire memories and look forward.
Neither the physical nor the rhetorical war of images
will bring us any closer to peace and reconciliation. No
one has a monopoly on the mythology of suffering and
atrocities. In this tragic dispute we have all committed
acts of violence that we ought not to be proud of. To
the Palestinians we say, we are excited by the prospects
to overcome the troubled history of our relations in
order to shape our dreams of peace. Let us then join
hands in asking the world, which has been watching,
perplexed at, and sometimes even fuelling our wars, to
mobilize its resources for the benefit of our peoples.
And, let us be full partners in this international effort to
lay down the foundations of the Middle East of the
future. The creative energies of our peoples should at
long last be put to work in the service of peace, for as
the wisest of kings, King Solomon, the builder of the
Temple in Jerusalem, wrote thousands of years ago,
there is:
“A time for slaying and a time for healing ... a
time for war and a time for peace”. (The Holy
Bible, Ecclesiastes 3:3-8)


Allow me first of all to
convey the apologies of the Minister of Foreign Affairs
of Vanuatu, The Honourable Serge Vohor, who is
unable to be here on this historic occasion due to most
pressing commitments at home. I am therefore very
deeply honoured to address the Assembly on behalf of
the delegation of the Republic of Vanuatu.
At the outset I wish to congratulate Mr. Harri
Holkeri on his election to this historic session of the
General Assembly. My delegation is confident that
with his vast experience and diplomatic skills, he will
guide this Assembly to a successful conclusion. I
would also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute
to his predecessor, who so ably guided the fifty-fourth
session of the General Assembly.
Allow me also to congratulate Tuvalu as the
newest Member of our family of nations. As a small
island State, and, more significantly, a member of the
South Pacific region, Vanuatu is very pleased to
welcome Tuvalu. Vanuatu certainly hopes a further
increase in the Pacific island membership would be a
positive step in the region's economic and political
development as we embark on the twenty-first century.
Small island States, including Vanuatu, are
continuously confronted by difficult and challenging
issues, which must be addressed at this summit. For the
Pacific region, its key features are its immense
geographic spread, its small land and population base
and limited natural resources, and its vulnerability to
economic and natural shocks, which inevitably have an
impact on its physical infrastructure and economic
development. Dependence has been on a few fragile
commodity markets and fickle tourist income.
One of our greatest challenges is education for
all. The Human Poverty Index of the Pacific Island
26

Countries shows Vanuatu as the third last of the least
developed countries. Vanuatu shares the view that the
key to development and success is education. As a
signatory to the Convention on the Rights of the Child
and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women, Vanuatu is committed
to this cause. However, limited financial and human
resources continue to hinder development in this area.
Vanuatu welcomes the initiative taken by the
Secretary-General, in his address to the Dakar World
Education Forum, held in April 2000, to build a global
partnership for girls' education. Vanuatu will be
pleased to be part of this global initiative. At the same
time, Vanuatu fully supports the view that involving
women as central players in development provides
benefits in the areas of nutrition, health, and savings
and reinvestment at the family, community, and,
ultimately, national level. Nevertheless, the challenge
of ensuring education for all at all levels is an
ambitious objective that will require external
assistance. The education and training of the
population, including women, must therefore be an
important goal of the Assembly.
One of the great obstacles to our economic
development, including our foreign investment
portfolio, has always been the relatively high cost of
public utilities, in particular the energy sector, which is
largely dependent on traditional oil-based systems. The
cost of importing oil products and petroleum-derived
gas is currently about 90 per cent of our combined
domestic exports. Our economy cannot afford this
trend in the long run.
We believe that with access to the new and
relevant technology available in the developed
countries today, the Republic of Vanuatu and other
small island nations can develop integrated renewable
energy systems and hydrogen fuels if our potential
wind- and sun-related and geothermal and
hydroelectricity resources can be fully utilized.
Access to financial and technical resources from
the developed countries can assist countries like the
Republic of Vanuatu in moving in the right direction
and thereby positively contribute to our common
objective of creating a healthier and more environment-
friendly economic development.
The emergence of new information technology
today underlines the strong linkage between the
concepts of knowledge and power. While
communications and business transactions through the
Internet and other modern electronic means have now
become routine within the circles of the rich and the
powerful, the large majority of the world's population,
which lives in the poor developing countries, has very
little or no knowledge about — let alone any access
to — this new and revolutionary way of doing day-to-
day business.
In this new millennium, the new information
technology must be made accessible and affordable to
the people living in the most remote areas of the
developing nations in order to facilitate their access to
better education, better health services and give them
greater access to world markets and business
opportunities. This is a great challenge, but one that we
must face together, and proudly. That is why we have
the United Nations.
Last month the national Parliament of Vanuatu
passed two laws in this area — the Electronic
Transactions Act and the E-Business Act. We hope
that, through the support of relevant United Nations
agencies and bilateral development partners, we will be
able to fully implement these new laws for the benefit
of our small island nation and its people, in particular
in the rural and remote areas.
In his statement to the Millennium Summit, my
Prime Minister highlighted the need for the
industrialized countries immediately to ratify
international treaties on the protection and sustainable
management of our natural environment and resources,
which are vital to the very survival of millions of
citizens of small island States. Environmental
degradation poses a serious threat to the small island
States, which are threatened by the rising sea level. We
continue to urge countries to adopt and ratify the Kyoto
Protocol as soon as possible. As a signatory to the
Framework Convention on Climate Change, Vanuatu is
in the process of adding its signature to the Protocol.
We cannot let this opportunity pass without
expressing our serious concern about the great
difficulties a least developed country such as the
Republic of Vanuatu is facing with regard to its
application to join the World Trade Organization
(WTO), because some powerful countries, in particular
the United States of America, refuse to recognize our
constant call for special consideration. Vanuatu has
been in the complex process of accession for five and a
half years. The negotiations we were engaged in until
27

last October with a number of major bilateral and
multilateral players, such as the European Union,
Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and
Switzerland, have been completed in a spirit of
understanding and appreciation of Vanuatu's
circumstances.
The United States continues to place heavy and
unreasonable demands on us, which we cannot accept.
We consider those demands absurd, because the United
States is among our least significant trading partners.
We believe that Vanuatu has become the innocent
victim of global trade disputes between the big players.
While we have always supported the principle of
free international trade, we expect the new regime to be
more realistic and more flexible, to allow ample time
for the small and least developed countries to adjust to
the new rules. After all, the WTO cannot be considered
as a truly global trade regime without the adhesion of
all independent countries, including small island
States.
It is no secret, as the Vanuatu Prime Minister
clearly stated at the recent G-77 Summit in Havana,
that the conditions being imposed on us for joining the
WTO are simply beyond our capacity to consider in the
short to medium term. Unless the powerful countries
review their positions and conditions with regard to our
application, then the Republic of Vanuatu will have no
other choice but to reconsider its original application to
join the WTO.
On a related issue, we would also like to take this
opportunity to register our most sincere recognition to
all the Governments in the Pacific and other regions for
their consistent support for Vanuatu's status as a least
developed country. We continue to maintain our strong
belief that the United Nations criteria for assessing
least developed country status must be fully reviewed
and must take into account new indices, such as the
Environmental Vulnerability Index, and the long-term
impacts of such natural disasters as cyclones, tsunamis
and others on countries' social and economic
advancement.
Enhancing the role of the peacekeeping forces of
the United Nations must also be a priority for this
Assembly. It is in this spirit that Vanuatu commends
the Brahimi report on peacekeeping, believing that,
once implemented, it will allow the United Nations to
carry out its peacekeeping operations effectively. At
this juncture, I am proud to say that, in spite of our
meagre resources, Vanuatu is participating, for the first
time in its 20-year history as an independent nation, in
United Nations peacekeeping missions in East Timor
and Bosnia. Prior to this attainment, Vanuatu also
served in some regional peace-monitoring missions.
In his statement to the Millennium Summit, the
Prime Minister of Vanuatu touched on an important
issue: the principle of self-determination and the
related question of West Papua. The case of West
Papua has always been high on Vanuatu's agenda. In
1984, the late Prime Minister and father of our
independence, Walter Hadye Lini, said:
“We may not have the resources to support
their struggle, but we can remember them in our
everyday prayers. For when we talk about their
struggle, we must always use the name that was
very dear to them: West Papua.”
The United Nations must be consistent in its
decisions concerning the recognition and respect of the
fundamental right to self-determination of the people
of West Papua. The truth surrounding the so-called act
of free choice must be exposed to the Melanesian
sisters and brothers of West Papua and to the rest of the
international community. Saddest of all was General
Assembly resolution 2504 (XXIV) of 1969 on West
Papua. How can the United Nations continue to ignore
the cries of over 3 million people demanding justice?
This year marks the end of the International
Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. It is only
appropriate that the United Nations should reconsider
and revisit the decisions taken at that time. Following
the tragedy in East Timor, Vanuatu believes that it is
not too late for the international community to act to
halt a similar tragedy in West Papua. In this context,
Vanuatu would like to strongly request that the issue of
West Papua be placed for discussion on the agenda of
the Committee of 24. Any move to oppose this will
most certainly undermine the credibility of the United
Nations and its decisions on this special case. Over the
past few decades, the United Nations has positively
contributed to the process of decolonization. We must
not allow this opportunity to pass.
On the question of reform, we agree that any
reforms should include the Security Council in order to
make it more democratic and transparent. The
membership of the Security Council should be enlarged
not only to enhance geographic representation, but also
in response to the aspirations felt at all levels of the
28

world community and to the voice of the least
developed countries and small island States.
Vanuatu would like to congratulate all those
countries that recognize the need for a proper
evaluation and assessment of the crisis situations in Fiji
and the Solomon Islands prior to taking punitive
measures, if any. We in the Republic of Vanuatu
believe that traditional economic and other forms of
sanctions against individual countries in times of crisis
should be fully reviewed in this new millennium. In
this respect, the delegation of Vanuatu would like to
express its sincere appreciation to Sir John Kaputin,
Minister for Foreign Affairs of Papua New Guinea,
who so ably led the Pacific ministerial mission of the
African-Caribbean-Pacific Group of States to Fiji and
the Solomon Islands in order to carefully assess the
situation in the two countries. The mission was also
comprised of the Foreign Minister of the Cook Islands,
Mr. Robert Woonton; the Minister for Foreign Affairs
of Vanuatu; and the Minister of Education of Samoa,
Ms. Fiame Naomi Mata'afa.
I would also like to take this opportunity to
commend Mr. Laisenia Qarase, Prime Minister and
Minister for National Reconciliation and Unity in the
Interim Administration of the Republic of the Fiji
Islands, for his eloquent statement on the situation in
Fiji. We would also like to extend our appreciation to
Mr. Danny Philip, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the
Solomon Islands, for his comprehensive statement.
We have made visionary statements. Now is the
time for us to translate these into action. We have
called for a more efficient, responsive and effective
United Nations. We must muster the good will to
resolutely implement the Millennium Declaration and
to rededicate ourselves to upholding the fundamental
principles of the United Nations. Let us not lose sight
of these goals.