It is my honour to
congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the post of
President of the General Assembly at its fifty-first
session. On behalf of the Ukrainian delegation, I would
also like to express my appreciation to Mr. Freitas
do Amaral, who presided so efficiently over the last
session and encouraged an intensive exchange of opinions
on the role of the United Nations in today’s world.
A year ago, at the commemorative session of the
General Assembly, our Organization received a substantial
credit of trust as a universal international institution
which, in the Declaration on the Occasion of the Fiftieth
Anniversary of the United Nations, was called upon to
“create new opportunities for peace, development,
democracy and cooperation.” (resolution 50/6, third
preambular para.)
Today, we can assert that the United Nations has
been and remains the key mechanism for maintaining and
strengthening peace and security — and there is much
proof of that. There is no doubt that the past year has
been extremely important for arms control and
disarmament. Tomorrow, 27 September, I will have the
honour to sign, on behalf of Ukraine, the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), as adopted in historic
resolution 50/245. This important instrument calls for the
de jure affirmation of the end of the nuclear-arms-race
era. In signing this Treaty, Ukraine will make yet another
contribution to disarmament, the importance of which
cannot be overstated.
In this context, I recall another historic event: the
final withdrawal of strategic nuclear warheads from the
territory of Ukraine. Having eliminated the world’s third-
largest nuclear arsenal, which we had inherited, Ukraine
became a nuclear-weapon-free State on 1 June 1996. In
doing so, we believe that Ukraine made an unprecedented
contribution, which has not yet received adequate
recognition by the international community, to
diminishing the global nuclear threat and thereby
9

demonstrated to the whole world its peaceful, consistent
and reliable policy. Accordingly, we expect the nuclear
States strictly to adhere to their commitments relating to the
security assurances given to Ukraine by the United States
of America, Russia, the United Kingdom, China and France
in December 1994.
Ukraine’s important role in the new European security
architecture has been recognized recently in several
international documents. For us, this means a special
responsibility for the maintenance of stability in the whole
of Europe. We therefore believe that the process of nuclear
disarmament should become more dynamic. In this context,
the initiative put forward by the President of Ukraine,
Leonid Kuchma, with regard to the creation of a nuclear-
weapon-free zone in Central and Eastern Europe between
the Baltic and the Black Seas is the next logical step and an
important move in the right direction. I would like to
emphasize that the possible deployment of nuclear weapons
on the territories of our neighbours in Central and Eastern
Europe is a matter of great concern to us. We believe that
support for the idea of a non-nuclear Central Europe would
promote an atmosphere of confidence between and among
the States of the region and prevent the emergence of new
dividing lines on the European continent. By adding to the
existing zones in Antarctica, the South Pacific, Latin
America and the Caribbean, as well as the nuclear-weapon-
free zones in South-East Asia and Africa, the creation of a
nuclear-weapon-free zone in Central and Eastern Europe
would create the “critical mass” that would foster the
process of global nuclear disarmament.
In our opinion, the Conference on Disarmament, which
includes Ukraine as a new, full-fledged member, should
immediately start developing a programme of complete
nuclear disarmament with a view to bringing closer the
realization of Ukraine’s appeal for a twenty-first century
without nuclear weapons.
Among other important international achievements of
the past year, I would like to refer to the beginning of the
peace settlement in the former Yugoslavia. It is important
to remember that the peace-keeping efforts of the United
Nations were not in vain. Risking their lives in difficult
conditions, the Blue Helmets have fulfilled their mission
and prevented the spillover of the conflict. In this context,
I would like to draw the attention of the Assembly to the
necessity of the speedy entry into force and implementation
of the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations
and Associated Personnel.
We hope that the peace process initiated in Dayton
has become irreversible. The proof of this will be in the
successful implementation of the military aspects of the
Peace Agreement by the Implementation Force (IFOR)
and of the recent elections held in Bosnia under the
auspices of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe (OSCE).
In general, we think that recent international efforts
in the former Yugoslavia have been a success not only for
a peace settlement. In my opinion, we have also
witnessed the appearance of a potential machinery for
effective cooperation between various international
structures in crisis management. I refer in particular to an
important experience of the Implementation Force (IFOR)
operation carried out, under the mandate of the Security
Council, by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO), its partners — including Ukraine — and other
countries. At the same time, the ultimate success of the
peace process will be impossible without the active and
action-oriented involvement of the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in the
implementation of civil aspects of the Agreement. The
concerted efforts by the United Nations, NATO and the
OSCE to settle one of the most tragic conflicts of our
time prove that political will and a clear division of
functions between the respective structures make it
possible to transform the idea of mutually reinforcing
institutions into reality. In the meantime, the international
community may have acquired a reliable mechanism for
the solution of its acute problems.
I believe that the experience of the peace settlement
in the former Yugoslavia could serve as a shining
example for the common elaboration of a future global
security architecture by all Members of this world
Organization. This architecture should also contain a
comprehensive concept of peace-keeping, the elaboration
of which, within the framework of the General Assembly,
has to be accelerated. An essential element in this work
could be the eventual reorientation of peace-keeping
towards preventive diplomacy.
However, it is obvious that we will not be able to
build up a new global security architecture without radical
reform of the United Nations itself. The need for United
Nations reform was emphasized by virtually all
participants at the last session of the General Assembly.
This issue is also a matter of discussion at the current
10

session. Yet real changes can be achieved only on the
condition of a substantial revision of the existing financial
system of the United Nations.
ln recent years the United Nations has been
experiencing an unprecedented financial crisis which poses
a real threat to its very functioning. Experience shows that
financial crises are the result either of a wrong taxation
policy or of unsound spending. We think that in the case of
the United Nations both factors are involved. The inability
of a number of Member States to meet their financial
obligations is a direct consequence of the overassessment of
their contribution rates. It will be impossible for the United
Nations to avert financial crisis unless existing irregularities
in the scale of apportionment of its expenses are eliminated.
And we expect that the current session will find a proper
solution to this problem.
Against its will, Ukraine has been made one of the
United Nations debtors. This has occurred due to the fact
that the decision on the relocation of my country to group
(c) in the scale for the financing of peace-keeping
operations has been delayed for several years. The
accumulation of a substantial debt is a direct result of the
General Assembly’s unfair decision 47/456, whose sponsors
were perfectly well aware that the decision would lead to
the current financial crisis. They refused to increase the
contribution of those nations which could afford to pay and,
contrary to the rules, placed larger assessments on the
shoulders of the countries which were unable to pay such
amounts.
Ukraine has always been aware of the need to provide
the United Nations with adequate financial resources. Upon
the instructions of my Government, I would like to inform
members that Ukraine will start paying off its debt to the
United Nations. As early as this year, the amount will be
reduced by $20 million. In coming years, its real payments
to the Organization’s budget will be increased.
The reform of the Security Council should become
another important component of transformation within the
United Nations. We support the desire of Germany and
Japan to acquire the status of permanent members of the
Security Council, but at the same time stand for increasing
the number of non-permanent members on the basis of
equitable geographical representation, which would also
take into account the interests of the Eastern European
regional group. I hope that the “two plus eight” formula
which was proposed by Ukraine and which, in principle,
coincides with the Italian approach and that of other
countries, will be conducive to the achievement of a
mutually acceptable solution to the problem within the
framework of the relevant Working Group of the General
Assembly.
One of the essential features of general peace and
security in the next millennium should be qualitatively
new international economic cooperation, the globalization
of production and trade, the development of science and
technology and the broadening of the flows of finances
and services.
We believe that the attention of the world
community should focus today on more than the political
and military aspects of security. It must also encompass
the economic, social and ecological dimensions of peace
and sustainable development. For Ukraine, this is not just
an abstract idea without a fixed deadline for its
implementation. Chernobyl turned the ecological
dimension of our national security into a priority of
Ukrainian domestic and foreign policy.
Ten years have passed since that catastrophe, but we
are still experiencing its grave consequences. Chernobyl
has not disappeared into the past. If humankind continues
to ignore common sense and to think only about today,
Chernobyl may be a reflection of our future.
We are encouraged by the Secretary-General’s report
on the work of the Organization (A/51/1) stating that the
United Nations remains deeply concerned by the
consequences of Chernobyl and is committed to pursuing
measures aimed at their alleviation. We hope that the
international community will continue to create
conditions, including material and financial ones, which
would allow Ukraine to meet its obligation and to
decommission the Chernobyl nuclear power plant by the
year 2000.
We should also remember that durable peace and
sustainable development on a global scale cannot be
achieved unless all countries secure adequate living
standards for their populations and overcome
unemployment, poverty, social disintegration and
environmental pollution.
In this context, I would like to draw attention to the
initiative concerning the creation of the Council on
Economic Security put forward by the President of
Ukraine at the Special Commemorative Meeting of the
General Assembly last year. In our view, it is high time
to concentrate the efforts of United Nations Member
States on the formation of a legal basis which would
11

allow us to implement this important initiative as one of the
steps towards increasing the level of international economic
security, securing the global coordination of the activities
of international, regional and national economic institutions
and preventing economic coercion and discrimination.
The issues of international terrorism, organized crime,
illicit trafficking of drugs and money laundering have
become matters of special concern. Ukraine has always
played an active role in international efforts, particularly
within the framework of the United Nations, aimed at
eliminating these scourges of the present, which not only
threaten the security and the health of people but have a
negative impact on the social, economic and political
situation in many countries. We believe that special
attention should be paid to the elaboration of specific
actions to be taken against transnational organized crime. In
this context, Poland’s initiative to place on the agenda of
the current session the question of the possible elaboration
of a convention on those issues is more than timely and
should be supported. Ukraine is ready to participate in the
drafting of this legal instrument.
In view of the present financial situation of the
Organization, the search for new ways to revitalize
international cooperation in the field of development has
acquired new significance. One of the promising trends,
primarily in finding additional sources of financing, is the
promotion of regular dialogue between the United Nations
and the financial institution of the Bretton Woods system.
We are convinced that larger resources allocated by
these institutions for development would speed up social
and economic transformations both in economies in
transition and in developing countries. They would also
create conditions for the successful reform of the global
system of international economic relations. It is quite
obvious that the integration of those countries into the
world economic system would benefit the entire global
community. We believe that this very philosophy should
become a foundation for a new strategy of global economic
development. The United Nations is called upon to play a
decisive role in its elaboration.
In this context, we welcome the gradual deepening of
understanding among Member States of the problems faced
by the countries with economies in transition, as is shown
by the increased resources allocated by the United Nations
Development Programme for its operational activities in the
countries of Eastern Europe, including Ukraine. For its part,
Ukraine is considering becoming a full member of the
multilateral General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World
Trade Organization system as an integral part of its own
economic reform.
The successes of the United Nations depend upon
the stable development of each Member State. Steadily
overcoming the obstacles that befell our State in the
process of radically transforming its society, Ukraine has
recently marked the fifth anniversary of its independence.
From this rostrum I would like to reaffirm that the choice
of the Ukrainian people in favour of independent
democratic development is final and irreversible.
The adoption on 28 June of this year of the
Constitution of Ukraine has become an event of historic
importance for the Ukrainian people. As President Leonid
Kuchma emphasized,
“It is an event of a great significance belonging to
those few historical dates which unite people not by
the iron fist but by the imperatives of the heart, and
which turn a population into a nation and a territory
into a State.”
In adopting its fundamental law, Ukraine has chosen
its own model of State-building and for reformatting its
public life. In drafting the law, Ukrainian legislators
benefited not only from previous historical experiences —
such as that provided by Pylyp Orlyk, a famous
seventeenth-century Ukrainian public figure who wrote
one of the first European democratic constitutions — but
also drew upon the modern experience, in particular that
of the members of the Council of Europe.
We in Ukraine are consistently building a sovereign,
independent, democratic and socially-oriented State which
promotes human rights as the highest social value. Under
extremely difficult circumstances, we have managed to
follow the European model of public life.
I would like to emphasize that integration into
European and Euro-Atlantic structures is a strategic goal
of Ukraine. At the same time my country is still
committed to non-bloc status. Having yesterday become
an observer in the Non-Aligned Movement, Ukraine once
again proved this.
No less important for us remain relations with the
newly independent States of the former Soviet Union,
notably with the Russian Federation, to which we are
linked by common historical experiences.
12

Transformations initiated by the market reform of the
economy are becoming increasingly perceptible in Ukraine.
The recent introduction of a new currency, the hryvnya,
proves conclusively that the radical economic changes in
Ukraine have become irreversible. The first results of
monetary reform show that in addition to a positive impact
on business activities, it has had a stabilizing psychological
effect on the Ukrainian people.
Our society is in the process of formation. We realize
that ours is a long and difficult path. There are a number of
important objectives we have to achieve. This will require
the gradual revival of democratic standards and their
introduction into the fabric of Ukrainian society, which has
been scarred by the totalitarian policies of the last decades.
While advancing along this road, Ukraine will
continue to count on the support of the international
community. At the same time, I would like to reaffirm that
Ukraine will continue to be committed to supporting the
United Nations which, like my own country, is experiencing
a difficult but vital time of transformation. This is the
imperative of our times, and we have to meet this
challenge.


At the outset, I wish to
express my pleasure at seeing you, Sir, assume the
presidency of the fifty-first session of the General
Assembly. Your election to this very responsible post
attests to the important role of your country, Malaysia, a
country with which the Lao People’s Democratic
Republic has excellent relations of friendship and
cooperation in many areas. Aware of your outstanding
4

competence and your qualities as an experienced diplomat,
I am convinced that this session’s proceedings will be
crowned with brilliant success.
I also wish on this occasion to express my sincere
appreciation to Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali,
for the outstanding work he has accomplished during his
five years in office in the service of the nations and peoples
of the world.
The strengthening of cooperation for development
among peoples that we have seen in recent years reflects
the general trend throughout the world. In various regions,
however, we must sadly note the persistence of complex
situations and tensions arising from bloody ethnic conflicts
and religious differences.
Even more serious, we are witnessing interference in
the internal affairs of States. Hegemonic policies are
targeted against small States through arbitrary economic
blockades, which constitute new forms of racism and
slavery. This threatens and could destroy harmonious
coexistence among States and peoples. The entire
international community must work even harder to find
ways and means to solve these problems as soon as
possible. This is no easy task. We must all be patient and
resolute. If we work together, keeping equity and justice in
our sights as we have done many times, we believe that we
can reach our ultimate goals.
In Europe, the Dayton Peace Agreement signed on 14
December 1995 to address the problems of Bosnia and
Herzegovina, and the recent ensuing elections, marked an
important stage in the search for a solution to the
distressing and destructive conflict in that country. We
appeal to all parties concerned to show maximum restraint
and objectivity in their sincere and rigorous implementation
of the commitments made, in order to restore peace,
stability and cooperation in that region.
In South Africa, under the resolute guidance of
President Mandela, the South African people are trying to
overcome the aftermath of apartheid and rebuild the
beloved country. We pay tribute to the new South African
authorities for their determination and courage, and hope
that South Africa and its courageous people will enjoy
every success in these difficult undertakings.
In the countries of the Caribbean, economic
cooperation and cultural and other relations have continued
to develop in accordance with the current international
climate, thereby enhancing peace and security in that part
of the world. Given this logical course of events, we hope
that the United States of America will adopt a more
reasonable position in its efforts to solve the ongoing
problem with the Republic of Cuba through sincere
dialogue in order to respond to the legitimate interests of
the two peoples and help promote understanding between
the two countries.
In the Middle East, following the establishment of
the Palestinian Authority in accordance with the
Washington peace accord signed in 1993, the peace
process was a source of great hope. But recently it has
run into difficulties. Events last week in Jerusalem further
compound the situation. We are deeply concerned at the
situation and the Government of Laos hopes that the
coming meeting between leaders of the parties to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict will help normalize the
situation so that the commitments they made can be
respected in the interest of peace and cooperation in the
region and throughout the world.
On the Korean peninsula, the Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea and the United States are rightly
continuing to implement agreements reached, thereby
helping consolidate peace in the region. We welcome this
situation, and the Government and the people of Laos
express their full support for the deep-seated aspirations
of the Korean people for a situation in which a new war
becomes impossible and the peaceful reunification of
Korea can take place on the basis of dialogue and new,
suitable mechanisms that can turn aims into reality.
In South-East Asia, a movement towards peace and
cooperation has gathered strength. Recently, in Malaysia,
representatives of the countries of the region discussed a
planned railroad from Asia to Europe, from Singapore
towards China via Laos. This project would enhance
cooperation in the region. With this in mind, the countries
of the region are trying to work together to solve their
problems by peaceful means in accordance with regional
realities. By remaining true to their policies of peaceful
coexistence and security in the interests of development,
these countries, including the Lao People’s Democratic
Republic, have signed a treaty on the establishment of a
nuclear-weapon-free-zone in South-East Asia. This
historic event is their major contribution. The Government
of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic believes that the
adoption of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty
by the fiftieth session of the General Assembly is a sign
of the immeasurable success of efforts made by the
international community to bring about the gradual
elimination of nuclear weapons throughout the world.
5

In the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, the
economic reform that began in 1986 has borne its first
fruits for our people. Average annual economic growth over
the past five years, from 1991 to 1995, stands at
approximately 6.4 per cent. The inflation rate is generally
stable, thereby helping gradually to raise the living
standards of the multi-ethnic Lao populations. What we
have accomplished has helped maintain political stability
and social harmony. This was why, during its congress last
March, the Lao People’s Revolutionary Party gave an
exhaustive account of socio-economic development and
decided to continue reform unremittingly on the basis of a
market economy. It also decided to aim for average annual
national economic growth of 8 to 8.5 per cent and a per
capita income of $500 per year by the year 2000. Currently,
our Government is encouraging the various economic
sectors to develop and is helping foreigners invest in the
potential of the country with a view to laying down
material and technical foundations that can help the country
say goodbye to underdevelopment by the year 2020. This
is a major and arduous task which the Government will
work hard to fulfil.
In its foreign relations, the Government of the Lao
People’s Democratic Republic intends to continue its policy
of peace, independence, friendship and cooperation with all
countries and international and non-governmental
organizations. For now, it will focus its efforts on preparing
the conditions necessary for us to be able to join the
Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 1997.
This will enable the country to develop along the general
lines of other countries in the region and throughout the
world. We are pleased that Cambodia and Myanmar have
indicated that they too wish to join ASEAN.
Positive developments are taking place in the
international economic situation. Some countries are
showing signs of progress. However, there have been no
indications that the world economy will make a speedy and
lasting recovery. Increased interdependence and
globalization in the international economy have both
provided new opportunities and caused new tensions and
imbalances, and have, in particular, increased the
marginalization of developing countries. The entire
international community must act together to ensure that
there will be a more favourable and more equitable
international economic environment in which developing
countries can effectively wage their struggle against poverty
in order to achieve progress throughout their societies.
The right to decent housing for all is essential in
guaranteeing stability and sound development in the socio-
economic sphere. We are therefore pleased to note the
accomplishments of the United Nations Conference on
Human Settlements, held in June at Istanbul. The Lao
People’s Democratic Republic is also pleased to note the
positive results achieved at the ninth United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development, which took place
last May in Midrand, South Africa.
Recently, the World Congress against Commercial
Sexual Exploitation of Children, held in Stockholm,
Sweden, seriously considered the troubling situation in
which every year, more than a million children throughout
the world are victims of abusers of all sorts, and
presented various measures to the international
community to combat this new danger which threatens the
future of the new generation. The Lao Government
supports these efforts and is determined to implement
them in every manner possible.
The problem of drug abuse continues to weigh
heavily on the international community. Because of its
globalization, this problem can be solved only through
effective international cooperation founded on the
principle of shared responsibility. In recent years, the
Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic has
formulated a comprehensive programme for drug control
through the year 2000, which consists in a gradual
reduction in poppy cultivation through the implementation
of integrated rural development projects. Given the
seriousness of drugs in our society, we have recently
amended our penal code and laid down more severe
sentences for such offenses. We have achieved a certain
number of satisfying results in implementing this
programme, although a great deal remains to be done.
With the cooperation and assistance of friendly countries
and international and non-governmental organizations, we
hope to be able to make even greater progress in the
future, which will contribute to the international
community’s effort to eradicate this scourge from the face
of the Earth.
The environment is one of the issues to which the
international community attaches great importance.
Developed and developing countries alike have a
sovereign, sacred right to exploit their natural resources.
In exercising this fundamental right, sustained, economic
growth must go hand in hand with environment
protection, and vice versa. Environmental protection
should in no way imply a rejection of economic
development out of fear of damaging the environment. As
the two pillars of lasting development in all countries,
these concepts must be mutually reinforcing. It would be
6

unwise, in our view, to emphasize one at the expense of the
other. Only equal regard for these two aspects will
guarantee the success of any development effort.
We live in a complex and still uncertain world. In this
context, nations and peoples throughout the world accord
great importance to the United Nations, the only universal
multilateral forum for the consideration of world problems.
In order to ensure that it can discharge its great duties, the
institution needs to adapt itself to new world realities. In
this vein, it is essential to affirm the role of the General
Assembly, where all States are represented, as the United
Nations system’s principal organ for deliberation and
decision-making. As for the Security Council, the Lao
delegation believes that it should be restructured and made
more democratic, and that there should be a limited
expansion in the number of its permanent and non-
permanent members according to equitable geographic
distribution and taking into account the relative importance
of the various countries. In an effort to achieve this goal,
certain countries, such as Japan, Germany and India in
particular, should become permanent members of the
Security Council. The Security Council would thus be in a
position to meet the legitimate aspirations of Member
States, and particularly of the developing countries, which
constitute the vast majority of nations on our planet. In this
vein, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, in cooperation
with other delegations, will spare no effort to positively
contribute to the current efforts to strengthen our universal
Organization.


I should first like to greet you,
Sir, and to wish you a successful term as President of the
General Assembly. I am also happy to inform the Assembly
that I come here today from Bosnia, where there is no
killing any more. I make both of these statements with
great satisfaction.
Allow me now to deliver a less optimistic page of my
address. While flying to New York the day before
yesterday I read an article published in a prominent
American newspaper that dealt with the provision of the
Bosnian army with arms during the war. The author of the
article does not say so explicitly, but he implies that
everything that is Muslim smells of terrorism. For him, it
seems it is enough to have a Muslim name and to wear
a beard to be suspicious. The writer also mentions a
number of people. Their only fault is that they helped the
Bosnian army to obtain some arms during the war. Today,
there are more than a billion Muslims world wide. I do
not know in whose interest it is, in this or similar articles,
to push them into the embrace of the extremists.
Our country and people went through hell. The
world deemed that it had the right to impose an arms
embargo; we believed that we had the right to self-
defence. In a competition between those two rights, we
believed, and we still believe, that our right was greater.
Therefore, I am not going to apologize to anyone for our
having done everything possible to secure arms in order
to survive. On the contrary, I pay tribute to all brave
people, and express my gratitude to all of the friendly
countries that assisted us during the war. That page of our
history is over, and we are turning to a new one: Peace.
I thank the United States of America for starting the
initiative for peace and for making efforts, together with
other countries, to strengthen this fragile and complex
peace.
We are a small country, and we must pursue an
open and honest policy. Secret diplomacy and double
games are privileges of the mighty. For this and many
other reasons, among which is also the aforementioned
article, I should like to reiterate some facts and our
objectives.

Bosnia and Herzegovina is possible only as a
democratic State of three equal nations and of free citizens.
We accept this fundamental provision of the Dayton Peace
Agreement, with all of its consequences. That is, the well-
known formula: one State, two entities, three nations.
It is often considered that the Dayton Agreement is not
good enough. It is good because it has stopped the killing
in Bosnia and Herzegovina and because a better plan does
not exist. Its main deficiency is not in it, but in its
implementation. All of the bad aspects of the Agreement
could be improved if it were completely and consistently
implemented. Unfortunately, this is not the case. According
to the provisions of the Agreement, “Herceg-Bosna”,
established as a parallel State during the war, should cease
to exist. But it still exists and impedes the building up of
the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Dayton peace accord provides that the second
entity, the Republika Srpska, should facilitate the return to
their homes of more than half a million Bosniaks and
Croats who have been expelled. This is not happening;
rather, expulsions are continuing.
Generally speaking, the problem of the Dayton Peace
Agreement lies in its selective, that is, partial
implementation. The Serbs, for instance, like paragraph 2
of Annex 4, which mentions the Republika Srpska, yet they
do not like Annex 7, which demands the return of people
who have been expelled. They accept the first provision and
reject the second one. The world, and above all, the Contact
Group members, should tell them explicitly that the Dayton
accord is a whole. If there is no return of the expelled
people, there is no Republika Srpska. Otherwise, the
Dayton Agreement will grow from a small and bearable
injustice into a huge and intolerable injustice — and an
intolerable injustice leads to new conflict.
The provisions of the Dayton Agreement stipulate that
there should be respect for human rights but, nevertheless,
human rights are being violated more or less throughout the
entire territory.
The September elections and the pre-election campaign
offered an opportunity to test this in a very effective
manner. Conditions are particularly bad in this regard in the
territory of Republika Srpska. For the people from the
Federation, neither before nor during the elections was there
freedom of movement, or it was very limited; and only
Serbian political parties could act. Moreover, the electoral
boards that registered the voters and counted the ballots
consisted in all cases of only one nation and, very often,
one party.
With regard to free media, significant progress has
been achieved only in the territory of the legal Bosnian
Government, where a large number of independent
newspapers and magazines, 40 radio stations, and 12
television stations operate. During the last 50 days of the
pre-election period, the ruling party had only one-tenth of
the allotted time available at prime time on the State
television station, Television of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
from 8 p.m. to 12 p.m., while opposition parties had nine-
tenths of the allotted time at their disposal. The
Government also granted preliminary approval to the
Open Broadcasting Network and stands ready to extend
this approval on the condition that the Open Broadcasting
Network covers the entire territory of Bosnia and
Herzegovina and is open to all the political tendencies,
left and right.
The issue of Brcko will be solved by the main
Arbitrator, Mr. Roberts Owen, an American, since the
Serbian side does not attend the meetings of the
Arbitration Commission. Both parties have presented their
arguments. I wish to emphasize that, in making his
decision, the Arbitrator will not be totally free. He is
bound by respect for the principles of legality and equity,
as explicitly stated in Annex 2, Article V of the Dayton
Agreement.
I will complete this brief analysis of the
implementation of the Dayton Agreement by stating that
the main war criminals, Karadzic´ and Mladic´, are still
free, in spite of Dayton, in spite of the orders of the
Hague Tribunal and in spite of the elementary demands
of justice.
We would like to proclaim the principle of
reconciliation of peoples and nations. Bosnia needs this.
Here, no one advocates the idea of the collective guilt of
a nation. Guilt is always individual, regardless of the
number of perpetrators. But for the people to be absolved
and for the road towards reconciliation to be open, the
criminals must be punished. That is why the international
tribunal in the Hague was established, but, as is well
known, neither the chief Prosecutor nor the President of
the Tribunal are satisfied with what the international
community is doing. In vain, they repeatedly indict the
perpetrators and forward the warrants. Even on the issue
of war crimes, the world is seeking some painless middle-
ground solution. When the issue of war crimes like those
committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina comes into
2

question, every compromise is a shameful betrayal of
justice. Unpunished war criminals will continue to poison
the world and ruin its institutions.
Some people in Europe, and in the United States also,
ask whether, after everything that has happened, Bosnia and
Herzegovina is possible. These people either do not know
the facts or are morally corrupt. They do not know that on
the territory of the Serb entity, over half a million people,
40 per cent of the indigenous pre-war population of Bosnia
and Herzegovina, were either killed or expelled, and they
are totally indifferent to this fact. My answer is that if
genocide without punishment is possible, then Bosnia and
Herzegovina is not possible.
So the real question is not whether the people can live
together, it is more concrete and more straightforward: does
a larger nation have the right to expel a smaller nation and
then, under the slogan “we cannot live together”, usurp its
property and demand that these violations be forgotten and
legalized? This is how the question “is Bosnia and
Herzegovina possible?” should be formulated. And for
people of principle and morality, the answer is clear.
Finally, what should the future Government of Bosnia
and Herzegovina do at this crucial and historic moment for
Bosnia and Herzegovina? In my opinion, it should be
constituted as a maximally representative Government
composed of all the relevant political actors in conformity
with the results of the elections, including an opposition
from both entities. It should thereafter proclaim that its
programme consists of at least three points. First, it should
request from all the signatories of the Dayton Peace
Agreement that the Agreement be fully and consistently
implemented. At this moment, all the domestic as well as
international actors, at least verbally, express their support
for this Agreement. The Government should hold them to
their words. International pressure in this regard will be
necessary for a long time.
Secondly, the Government should proclaim the
reconciliation of the peoples and nations on the condition
that war criminals are prosecuted vigorously. And thirdly,
the Government should ensure freedom of the media as a
way to heal the country. The media started the war several
years ago with the unprecedented spread of hatred. The
media can have the same influence in strengthening peace
through spreading tolerance and understanding among the
people. State radio and television were an appropriate
example during the election campaign. The Open
Broadcasting Network could also contribute to this if it is
open to all ideas and all political directions and if it is
regulated by Parliament.
This programme cannot be carried out by the
Government alone. Bosnia and Herzegovina is still a
recovering patient and it needs the world’s support. The
presence of international military forces will be
indispensable for a certain limited period of time, and
economic assistance will be necessary for longer.
Before I conclude, I would like to say a few words
about the United Nations. We support reform of the
United Nations system. The changes are necessary not
only in the Organization but in its psychology as well, if
I may say so. Reform of the Security Council is also
necessary, in conformity with the changes in the world,
and also to ensure a new attitude towards obligations. The
United Nations must not undertake obligations it cannot
carry out. This is impermissible. My people have paid an
infinitely high price for this irresponsibility.
The “safe area” of Srebrenica and its more than
8,000 innocent victims are not the only, but are the
gravest, example of this incomprehensible attitude. We do
not know who is responsible, but we seek reforms which
will ensure that this will never happen again.
Yesterday, in this very building, I signed the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. We are a small
country, and my signature on that Treaty is not of great
significance. Nevertheless, we want to participate, even if
only symbolically, in everything that is constructive. One
day Bosnia and Herzegovina, through its representative,
will sign a treaty on the suppression of terrorism, and
some other day a treaty on the struggle against drugs and
organized crime. I hope that in future Bosnia and
Herzegovina will join in any activity whose aim is to
confront evil, and that it will continually push the limits
in the direction of good and towards a better and safer
world.


On behalf of the State of Kuwait, it gives me
great pleasure to extend to Mr. Razali our sincere
congratulations on his election as President of the General
Assembly at its fifty-first session.
Given his personal experience and wisdom, we
believe that he will be able to guide our discussions
efficiently towards a successful conclusion. Since he
represents a sister Muslim country, I am particularly
pleased to take this opportunity to underscore the firm
bonds of brotherhood in Islam between Malaysia and
Kuwait.
I am pleased to use this occasion also, to pay tribute
to the President of the previous session of the Assembly
for his outstanding efforts and contributions during that
historic session.
Kuwait views with pride and acknowledgement the
impressive performance of the Secretary-General, His
Excellency Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, especially his
leading role in and commitment to the enhancement of
the functioning of the world Organization in the areas of
global peace, security and development. Mr. Boutros-
Ghali has consistently worked to restructure the United
Nations to bring it more into line with the aspirations and
expectations attached to it. I want to make special
mention of the concrete steps the Secretary-General has
taken to curb and rationalize expenditures, to streamline
the administrative structure, and to reorganize the
Secretariat in order to reflect current realities in the global
arena. Hence, Kuwait subscribes to the position adopted
by the League of Arab States and the Organization of
African Unity (OAU) in supporting the Secretary-
General’s bid to remain on board in order to pursue his
reform programme for the revitalization of the United
Nations.
19

Last year, the family of nations observed the fiftieth
anniversary of the establishment of the United Nations
against a backdrop of universal recognition of the
wonderful achievements of the United Nations system. The
record includes, to cite only a few areas: assistance in the
attainment of national independence by many States; the
establishment of the principles contained in the Charter,
including the right to self-determination; the consolidation
of codes of civilized conduct among States; the upholding
of justice and equality; and the promotion of economic and
social development. Perhaps the most shining success of the
United Nations is the peacekeeping operations it carries out
in many volatile regions of the world. Such operations have
recently assumed a new humanitarian dimension in the
form of relief efforts in cases of natural disasters and civil
war, and election monitoring.
We view the United Nations as a forum for debating
the future of humankind among nations, with a view to
promoting the well-being, dignity and basic freedoms of the
human person. The ever-increasing complexity of
contemporary life in this global village and the ever-
changing set of common and pressing issues which continue
to emerge require a concerted international effort through
the United Nations. By the same token, we must admit that
there are gargantuan challenges that continue to face the
United Nations, most poignantly the ethnic and regional
conflicts that endanger regional stability and the
international security system. Other pressing issues include
the population explosion, environmental degradation, the
water shortage, desertification, the food deficit, the growing
gap between the North and the South, the regional arms
race, the threat posed by nuclear weapons, the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction, development concerns,
barriers to economic and trade cooperation, the removal of
restrictions on free trade and, last but not least, human
rights.
To rally all States members of the world community
round ways to deal with the fundamental transformations
that face the world, we must: believe in the energy,
potential and mechanisms of the United nations system to
be able to address global concerns in a multilateral fashion;
provide enthusiastic financial, political and moral support
for the United Nations and identify with its principles and
purposes; fully pay assessed contributions to the United
Nations budget; and actively pursue a genuinely peaceful
policy that recognizes and respects the rights and legitimate
concerns of other Member States, with a view to building
up a regional order in line with the norms of international
behaviour. Accordingly, regional arrangements should be
anchored in the established codes of justice and rules of
international law and treaties. Here we must ensure
respect for human rights, and protect human dignity and
the freedom of choice. In this context, human
development without discrimination is essential for the
overall economic and social development of society. Top
priority should be given to this goal rather than to
squandering national resources on weaponry. We must
face up to terrorism and muster the national will to work
collectively on a global level to stamp out the root causes
of this plague which afflicts both the weak and the strong,
the poor and the rich, for, in the final analysis, terrorism
is not susceptible to reason; it stems from bigotry,
traumatizes the innocent, resorts to violence and seeks no
dialogue.
Against this backdrop, the indisputable fact remains
that today’s world is interdependent in its security as well
as in its general concerns. The affluent few may not be
able to live in exclusive comfort while a majority of
humankind is marginalized in deprivation and poverty.
Here emerges the stark need for a collective conceptual
and material effort to develop a common agenda for the
benefit of all human beings.
It is from this perspective that we view the
significance of the revitalization and refashioning of
United Nations organs to keep abreast of the rapid
development of international relations. In this context,
Kuwait is following closely the ongoing discussions in the
Open-Ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable
Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the
Security Council. We had hoped that consensus would
have been reached on the restructuring and reform of the
Security Council to coincide with the celebration of the
fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations last year.
Failure to attain that goal so far should not dampen our
hopes. Rather, we should redouble our efforts towards
that end. Our aim should be a Security Council whose
work and procedures are more transparent. Its resolutions
should reflect more faithfully the will of the universal
membership of the United Nations. Its composition should
be expanded to reflect the recent increase in membership,
sovereign equality among States and the equitable
geographical distribution of seats among the various
regional groups.
Any reform of the Security Council must in the end
ensure collective efforts by both members of the Council
and other members of the international community to
respect and implement its resolutions. The Council should
be able to demonstrate its firm resolve against any regime
that does not comply with Council resolutions.
20

A textbook case in point is the just position towards
the Iraqi regime adopted by the Council and supported by
the international community as a whole. As recently as
23 June 1996, leaders of Arab States, in the final statement
issued at the end of the extraordinary Arab Summit in
Cairo, urged the Iraqi Government:
“not to embark on any aggressive policies aimed at
provoking its Arab neighbours and to implement in
full all the relevant Security Council resolutions and
especially those requiring it to take the necessary
measures to release all Kuwaiti and third-country
prisoners and detainees, to return the property seized
and to comply with the compensation mechanism.
They regard this as the right way to ensure that the
sanctions imposed on Iraq are lifted and the
appropriate conditions created for Iraq to resume its
role in the inter-Arab regional order.” (A/50/986,
appendix, p. 7)
This statement shows a recognition by the Arab
leaders of the nature of the Iraqi regime and their
appreciation for the importance of the full implementation
of all relevant Security Council resolutions. Hence, Iraq
must cooperate sincerely with the International Committee
of the Red Cross in order to account for all Kuwaiti and
third-country prisoners and detainees, so that the chapter on
this human tragedy can be closed. We must note with regret
here that the Tripartite Commission, which meets every
three months in Geneva, and its Technical Subcommittee,
which meets monthly on issues relating to the border
between Iraq and Kuwait, have so far gotten nowhere. In
point of fact, the Iraqi regime exploits such meetings for
propaganda purposes.
I must reiterate here that this question of prisoners and
hostages remains a human tragedy precipitated by the Iraqi
regime. And it remains a top-priority humanitarian issue for
the people and Government of Kuwait.
The Iraqi regime is legally bound to cooperate with
the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) in
eliminating its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.
UNSCOM's bitter experience shows that the Iraqi regime
will not pass up any opportunity to use it for deception,
misinformation and the concealment of required data. It
even went so far as to block repeatedly the work of
UNSCOM inspectors as recently as March, June and
August of this year, thus prompting the Security Council to
adopt resolution 1060 (1996) in addition to presidential
statements issued by way of warning to the Iraqi regime.
Kuwait, keen as it is on ensuring the safety and
stability of the region, supports UNSCOM efforts. Indeed,
we commend UNSCOM for its resolve and its insistence
on the absolute necessity of implementing all provisions
relating to the liquidation of Iraq’s weapons of mass
destruction.
Given the human suffering of the brotherly people of
Iraq emanating from the policies of the ruling regime,
Kuwait continues to provide humanitarian relief assistance
in kind to the Iraqi refugees. We also welcomed the
accord reached between Iraq and the United Nations on
the implementation of Security Council resolution 986
(1995) as a step forward towards alleviating the suffering
of the Iraqi people.
Let me take this occasion to reiterate Kuwait’s
position that Iraq’s unity and territorial integrity must be
preserved. In the meantime, we understand — indeed
appreciate — all measures taken by the Coalition States
in order to ensure the full implementation by Iraq of all
relevant Security Council resolutions. The essence and
thrust of these resolutions is the evolution of a regional
order anchored in the established principles of justice and
stability, the rule of law, observance of the norms of
international behaviour, and respect for international
treaties, at the core of which is the Charter of the United
Nations.
In view of Kuwait’s concern for peace and security
in the Arabian Gulf region, and by virtue of our close
relations with our sister State, the United Arab Emirates,
and with our friendly neighbour, the Islamic Republic of
Iran, Kuwait associates itself with the position of the Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC) regarding the issue of the
islands. Kuwait calls upon the two parties to continue
their negotiations in a bid to reach a just and peaceful
settlement through dialogue.
On another regional matter, Kuwait fully supports
the sister State of Bahrain in the recent measures it took
to combat terrorism with a view to consolidating its
security and stability. Our position is in harmony with the
principle that the GCC member States have a common
destiny, and their security and stability are therefore
indivisible.
Kuwait has been following with grave concern the
stalling of the Middle East peace process following the
election of a new Government in Israel, which adopted a
series of positions that contradict the arrangements
worked out in Madrid, primarily the land-for-peace
21

formula and the implementation of Security Council
resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) towards a
comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
The recent Cairo summit document underscored the
adherence by the Arab States to the peace process, in order
to achieve the ultimate goal of a just and comprehensive
peace, as a strategic option under the umbrella of
international law. The Arab position requires a matching
commitment by Israel to work in a sincere and forthright
fashion all the way through until the overall peace process
is completed. This must include the restoration of rights and
the return of occupied territories, as well as ensuring
security and a strategic balance of all States of the region,
in accordance with the principles laid down in Madrid.
For the record, let me recall in this context that
Kuwait put the question of Palestine among its top
concerns. In point of fact, that issue has been central to our
relations with other members of the international
community. We have channelled enormous effort and
resources into this cause, since Kuwait has always believed
that Israel has not recognized the legitimate rights of the
Palestinian people to self-determination and statehood — let
alone the fact that it has seized Palestinian territory in total
disregard of United Nations resolutions and by using force
as a means of imposing faits accomplis. We demand that
the Israeli Government stop its settlement activities in the
Palestinian territories, especially in the Holy City of
Jerusalem, and that it cease forthwith all changes to its
Arab character and legal status. The refugee problem must
also be resolved according to United Nations resolutions.
Finally, a Palestinian state must be established with
Jerusalem as its capital, in accordance with the will of the
Palestinian people.
In this context, we condemn the steps taken by Israel
in commissioning and excavating a tunnel under the
western wall of the Al-Aqsa Mosque. This constitutes a
desecration of that holy site and is a provocation to the
people of Palestine — indeed to all Arabs and Muslims
throughout the world. The use of great force and violence
by Israel has left many people dead or wounded. We
demand that Israel put an immediate end to these practices
and that it fulfil its obligations to preserve the Arabic and
Islamic character of these holy places.
Lasting and comprehensive peace requires mutual
accommodation of the parties’ rights, compliance with
accords concluded, action in good faith, avoidance of
provocative acts, and long-term vision — all with a view
not to inflict injury on any major party to the peace
equation.
Withdrawal by Israel from the Golan is a litmus test
of its good intentions to achieve a just and balanced
peace. Therefore, Kuwait supports Syria’s position that
negotiations should resume from the point at which they
ceased, in view of the fact that the peace process is a
continuum that should not stop before reaching its
ultimate destination.
Kuwait also supports Lebanon in its legitimate
insistence that Israel must fulfil all provisions of Security
Council resolution 425 (1978), under which Israel must
withdraw fully and unconditionally from all Lebanese
territory under occupation.
We believe that, in the final analysis, world peace is
indivisible and that consequently, the question of global
security has worldwide ramifications. Hence we think that
the issues of ethnic strife and civil war should remain on
the international agenda. Thus, we welcome the peaceful
measures taken thus far in the Republic of Bosnia and
Herzegovina with a view to bringing that tragedy to an
end while ensuring that the people of that Republic are
accorded their legitimate rights. We also welcome the
outcome of the recently held elections there and
congratulate President Alija Izetbegovic´ on the well-
deserved confidence placed in him.
We also call upon the international community to
pursue its efforts towards ending the current tragedies that
afflict Somalia, Afghanistan and Burundi. In the same
vein, we hope that the peoples of those countries will be
responsive to the efforts of the international community.
Kuwait notes with satisfaction the success of the
United Nations earlier this month in the adoption of the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT), which
is the culmination of a long-standing universal effort and
of hopes for a safer world. Indeed, the CTBT represents
an essential step forward on the path towards the
elimination of nuclear weapons.
Cooperation among member States of the
international community in the economic and trade
spheres has engendered a welcome openness following
the conclusion of the world free trade agreement. We
hope that this accord will expand the volume of the
developing countries’ exports to the world markets.
Kuwait was in the vanguard of advocating the removal of
trade barriers simply because we believe that, in the
22

context of an interdependent globe, collective political
security cannot be isolated from the economic concerns of
nations. Against this background, we welcome the steps
already taken by some developing countries to readjust their
economic approaches towards genuine openness and the
adoption of free-market policies. In our view, this type of
restructuring will help attract foreign investments and
accelerate the transfer of technology, which, in the end, will
foster international economic relations in terms of
generating a freer cash flow, a better investment
environment and an increase in joint ventures.
Kuwait believes in the need to harness human energies
to narrow the gaps that exist among nations, based on a
common understanding of the tenets that underpin world
security and economic well-being. We also believe that
dialogue and the tolerant exchange of views, coupled with
sincere and determined joint action, will lay a solid
foundation for improved international relations. Under this
scenario, the good forces will combine to neutralize the evil
ones; the “haves” and the “have-nots” might stand a better
chance of interacting beneficially; reason and prudence will
reign supreme, while the outlaws, saboteurs and vicious
tyrants will continue to lose ground. In the end, living
conditions will improve under a new world order based on
the principles of justice, which promote peace and security
for all.


It is a
source of profound satisfaction to see a diplomat of the
experience of Mr. Razali Ismail, representing Asia and the
friendly and brotherly country of Malaysia, presiding over
the fifty-first session of the General Assembly. I wish to
congratulate him on his well deserved election. I am
confident that, with his abilities, he will be able to steer
the work of this important session in an exemplary
manner. I assure him of the full cooperation of the
delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran in discharging
his important mandate.
The developments during the last decade on the
global scene, particularly the demise of the bipolar
international system and the need to replace it with a new
24

world order, have created many hopes and expectations.
Nations around the globe, irrespective of their diverse
cultures, customs and religions, expected that on the
threshold of the twenty-first century the process for the
creation of a new world order characterized by collective
participation and human development would emerge in a
climate governed by realism and a sober grasp of the
essence of the ongoing changes in international relations.
The essence of these international developments was
indeed the overwhelming rejection at the national level of
totalitarianism and dictatorship, with a profound message
for humanity at large: if we desire to construct a world of
collective participation and human development we must
build international relations on the foundations of justice,
tolerance, the rule of law, cooperation and transparency.
Human society hoped and expected that justice would
guarantee the inalienable rights of all individuals, nations
and States through a rejection of hegemony and special
privileges for a dominant few; they hoped that, through
recognition of diversity of cultures and beliefs, as well as
respect for the rights of all States, tolerance would facilitate
intercultural communication and mutual understanding,
thereby enriching common human civilization and
empowering all members of the international community to
participate fully and effectively in determining the shape
and setting the norms and standards of behaviour in a
future world. They hoped that the rule of law would ensure
the security and legitimate interests of individuals, groups
and States.
Cooperation would replace confrontation, bringing
about joint human efforts to resolve common problems and
to further common objectives. Transparency, by providing
objective and clear explanations and solutions to global
issues, would consolidate mutual confidence at the
international level.
In such a world, the United Nations occupies a
paramount position. It embodies the hopes and aspirations
of the entire membership of the international community,
and as such, provides a suitable framework for collective,
transparent and rule-based international decision-making
and implementation geared towards the promotion of the
common good and the resolution of common ills. The
convening of many international conferences in the past
decade to articulate and codify further norms of behaviour
for an orderly new system, the relative success of the
United Nations machinery in preventing and de-escalating
many international and regional conflicts, and the
constructive debate on reinvigorating the General Assembly
and reforming the Security Council are positive examples
providing hopeful signals in that direction.
On the other hand, amid competition and rivalries
for the shaping of the emerging world order, a new
phenomenon has surfaced. This phenomenon is so distant
and alien from the universally envisaged world of
collective participation and human development that its
consolidation and persistence would send any hope for a
global human society to the oblivion of more rivalries and
insecurity. Indeed, concurrent with the expansion of
participatory democracy in many countries, a complex
movement has emerged towards autocracy or even
totalitarianism at the international level, a trend which is
founded on hegemony and flouts justice, freedom,
participation, the rule of law, tolerance, human rights,
pluralism and democracy in a dangerous and
unprecedented manner.
The evident behavioural characteristics of this
menace, disguised behind appealing facades, can be
summarized in the following manner: first, there is
unilateralism, which means a total lack of commitment to
mutual cooperation and common solutions, and complete
reliance on unilateral measures in various fields. Second
comes opportunism, in which international forums are
resorted to only as mechanisms for the promotion of
national self-interest and often in pursuit of a domestic
agenda. Third, there is secrecy, which takes the form of
an insistence on dogmatic, non-transparent and closed
methods and a rejection of transparency, which impedes
the abuse of multilateral arrangements. Fourth comes
lawlessness, which is the evasion of the rule of law
coupled with audacity in breaking the law and universal
norms, even in a public and official manner. Fifth we
have imposition, which means the promotion of domestic
agendas and national priorities through the imposition of
policies on others, including through the extra-territorial
application of domestic legislation. And sixth there is
coercion, the unbridled recourse to the threat and use of
force in international political, economic and commercial
relations.
The most notable manifestation of the new
international totalitarianism surfaces in the cultural sphere.
Our world is characterized by a diversity of religions,
civilizations, cultures and customs. This diversity has
naturally resulted in the emergence of many systems of
law and values, with similarities as well as differences.
Regrettably, the claimants of world leadership have either
failed to grasp this self-evident reality due to their own
lack of historical and cultural depth or have found it
25

incompatible with their interests and therefore attempt to
neglect it. More regrettable is the fact that the collaboration
of certain other States in this field has exacerbated such
opportunistic intolerance.
In this context, the misguided propaganda waged to
distort the image of Islam, and the unprecedented
intolerance exhibited against the tide of Islamic resurgence
among Islamic nations and States indicate a futile campaign
to suppress this great divine religion of justice and
tolerance, and of defiance against oppression, tyranny and
domination. The claimants of world leadership have yet to
realize that a people’s religious devotion is intertwined with
its very existence, and will only draw more strength and
resilience in the face of campaigns of external pressure and
negative propaganda. The progressive march of the Islamic
world, which benefits from the rich heritage of Islamic
culture, history and civilization, cannot be halted. Thus this
significant and important segment of humanity will
certainly occupy an increasingly prominent role in the
shaping of the future world order.
The irreconcilability of totalitarianism with the rule of
law has had dangerous manifestations on the international
scene. The passing and signing of legislation to allocate
money for subversive and terrorist activities against the
Islamic Republic of Iran is the most dangerous
manifestation of this lawlessness, which is no longer
confined to the secrecy of intelligence services but has been
recklessly made into law by the United States Congress.
This law and similar unlawful behaviour, including the
infamous decision of the United States Supreme Court
approving kidnapping by the United States Government,
represent a very dangerous trend. They illustrate a growing
tendency to institutionalize and even legalize illegality and
disregard for international obligations.
A similar pattern of behaviour that has been
manifested in the past several years by the United States
Government is the self-arrogation of the right to legislate
for the international community by attempting to apply its
domestic legislation beyond its borders. Recent unilateral
sanctions enacted by the United States against the trading
partners of a number of countries not only constitute a
grave breach of various norms and principles of
international law and many resolutions of this Assembly
and other international forums as well as blatant
interference in the internal and external affairs of other
States, but, indeed, point to a very dangerous trend, which
undermines the very foundations of contemporary inter-
State relations.
The rejection of such legislation by various
Governments and international forums along with
universal resistance against their application illustrate the
fact that unilateral interference, the imposition of policies
and the self-arrogated leadership of one State over the
national priorities and external relations of others cannot
and will not be tolerated by the international community.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has referred these two
pieces of legislation to the pertinent international tribunal.
We strongly believe that unless this dangerous trend is
arrested at the earlier stages of inception, it will have
irreversible implications, including the undermining of the
credibility and reliability of international undertakings. If
outlaws are left to trample upon the rule of law, peace
and security around the globe will be in peril.
The same general tendency of domination has
debilitated the Security Council, which has repeatedly
fallen prey to the interests of a permanent member. The
Council, for example, not only failed to prevent the Israeli
attacks against defenceless Lebanese women and children
in a United Nations compound, but also turned a blind
eye to reports substantiating the deliberate nature of the
atrocity, thus putting aside its humanitarian and Charter
responsibilities in the interests of the political
considerations of supporters of Israel.
Relying on such unconditional support, the Zionist
regime pursues with impunity its expansionist policies of
occupation in Palestine, southern Lebanon and the Syrian
Golan Heights, as well as its routine practice of State
terrorism and blatant violation of the most fundamental
rights of the Muslim people of Palestine. Israel has
neither regard for international law nor any commitment
to peace, its only objective being the consolidation and
expansion of its occupation of the territories of others.
Considering these realities, the only logical conclusion is
that peace in the Middle East requires a just and
comprehensive resolution of the question of Palestine
through the return of all Palestinian refugees to their
homeland, the exercise of their inalienable right to self-
determination and the liberation of all occupied territories.
It is noteworthy that the mere expression of such
realistic analyses by a sovereign State is misportrayed as
opposition to peace and provides the pretext for concern,
anger and even illegal political pressure. In other words,
the new international autocracy, contrary to its
proclamations of support for freedom of expression,
cannot tolerate the least dissenting view regarding its
destructive policies.
26

The prevalence of such attitudes in the Security
Council has clearly shown that the Council needs
fundamental and substantive reform and modification,
particularly in its rules and decision-making procedures.
The realities of today’s international scene are so different
from those prevailing in the aftermath of the Second World
War that the Security Council is weakened by its present
structure and prevented from meeting the new challenges.
On the other hand, the General Assembly enjoys
greater credibility in view of its relatively universal,
democratic and transparent character. This supreme body of
the Organization should not become the forum for general
and inconclusive discussions. The Assembly, in accordance
with the Charter, must assume its rightful place as the
primary decision-making body on important international
political and economic issues.
In today’s world, the imperative of global participation
and collective effort in the advancement of common
objectives and the resolution of international problems is
self-evident because of the mutual interdependence of the
members of the international community. One of the most
notable areas for serious cooperation involves the challenge
of combating all forms of terrorism. Regrettably, the same
Government that has engaged in sponsoring and aiding
various forms of terrorism — through, inter alia,
appropriating a budget for subversive operations against
Iran, harbouring and assisting acknowledged terrorists, and
supporting Israeli state terrorism, mass murders and
abductions — has also prevented serious international
action in this regard by irresponsibly levelling
unsubstantiated accusations against others.
I reiterate in this Assembly that levelling politically
motivated accusations against one or a few States, groups
or regions cannot and will not help in the resolution of this
major international problem. The eradication of this
international menace requires serious global cooperation
based on the following criteria: condemnation and rejection
of all forms of terrorism, regardless of the identity of the
victims or perpetrators and irrespective of their political
tendencies and objectives; refusal to provide sanctuary to
terrorists or terrorist groups and prevention of operations by
or on behalf of terrorists; and cessation of all baseless and
unsubstantiated propaganda and allegations. We once again
reiterate our commitment to participating in any serious,
comprehensive and rule-based universal cooperation to
combat and eradicate this inhuman phenomenon.
In the field of disarmament and in its efforts to end
the nightmare of nuclear holocaust, the international
community has been plagued by unilateralism, secrecy
and evasion of the rule of law. Ironically, in recent years,
the major arms producers and suppliers have exhibited
more concern over their proliferation than have those
States that do not possess such sophisticated weaponry. At
the same time, the former have been reluctant to accept
any scheme of general and comprehensive disarmament
under credible international monitoring.
Some nuclear Powers and their allies continue to
include the doctrine of nuclear response against non-
nuclear threats in their defence alliances. In the
International Court of Justice, these very Powers made
every effort to prevent the Court from rendering a
decision outlawing the use or threat of use of nuclear
weapons.
During the negotiations in the Conference on
Disarmament on the finalization of the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, in contravention of the
Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on
the legal requirement of good-faith negotiations for
nuclear disarmament, any reference to nuclear
disarmament within a time-bound framework faced strong
opposition by a small number of nuclear Powers. In the
same negotiations, insistence on unilateral, non-
transparent national technical means — as opposed to a
multilateral and transparent international monitoring
system — created a major obstacle for consensus. Even
the commonly accepted principle of negotiations to
resolve these and other problems and to attain consensus
on this vital international instrument was vetoed. This
undemocratic and dogmatic procedure resulted in the
Assembly’s approval and opening for signature of a
defective Treaty that does not reflect an international
consensus. We, along with many other non-aligned States,
will join the signatories of this Treaty solely because of
our commitment to be an active participant in any effort
to combat the inhumane weapons of mass destruction,
while at the same time redoubling our efforts to achieve
a nuclear-weapon free world.
Non-proliferation policies have also been marred by
discrimination, shortsightedness and ambiguity. On the
one hand, Israel’s nuclear-weapons programme has
continuously received the direct and indirect political and
technical support of one State; on the other, the
interventionist policy of coercive deprivation of other
countries in the same region of their inalienable right to
acquire nuclear technology for peaceful purposes has
become a cornerstone of the foreign policy of the very
same State.
27

The dissemination of false allegations to instil fear and
anxiety, the depiction of an imaginary enemy and the
fanning of division and tension have often been employed
as pretexts to justify an external military presence and
intervention as well as mind-boggling sales of excessive
and unnecessary weapons systems. This behaviour
characterizes the United States policy in the Persian Gulf,
which has only resulted in the exacerbation of insecurity
and instability within and between States of the region.
In spite of obstructions and misinformation campaigns,
the Islamic Republic of Iran has continued to articulate and
pursue initiatives and measures aimed at fostering greater
regional confidence; enhancing respect for principles of
international law; bringing about transparency in armaments
and reduction of military spending; creating zones free from
weapons of mass destruction; strengthening peace and
security through persistent endeavours to encourage and
facilitate understanding and conciliation; and consolidating
economic cooperation.
In Central Asia and the Caucasus, cognizant of the
religious, cultural, historical and commercial bonds that
exist among member States of the Economic Cooperation
Organization, the Islamic Republic of Iran has tried in
earnest to expand areas of cooperation among member
States of that important regional organization. The
expansion of transportation networks, including the revival
of the Silk Road, provides the possibility for a dramatic
increase in the volume of trade not only among member
States but also between them and other countries of Europe,
East Asia and the Persian Gulf.
Regarding Afghanistan, in pursuance of our mediation
and in view of the fact that the return to peace and stability
there requires all States, particularly those in the region, to
use their influence in order to convince the warring factions
to stop the vicious cycle of fratricide, we plan to convene
a regional conference next month in Tehran, with the
participation of regional foreign ministers and
representatives of the United Nations and the Organization
of the Islamic Conference.
As regards the crisis in Tajikistan, we have used every
means available to us to bring the positions of the parties
to the conflict closer to each other, in the strong belief that
these differences cannot be settled through force or by
military means. Considering the consequences of the
expansion of the conflict, more coordination and
cooperation among regional States and between them and
the United Nations are imperative.
In Karabakh, we welcome the establishment and
continuation of the ceasefire and believe that this conflict
can only be resolved through negotiations, withdrawal
from occupied territories and the return of refugees to
their homelands. The Islamic Republic of Iran, enjoying
friendly relations with both Armenia and Azerbaijan, is
prepared to continue its efforts towards the resolution of
this conflict in cooperation with other States in the region.
In northern Iraq, the policy of the Islamic Republic
of Iran has always been founded on maintaining the
security of our border areas and the prevention of terrorist
infiltration, coupled with consistent emphasis on and
respect for Iraq’s sovereignty and territorial integrity as
well as on the prevention of tension and conflict between
various Iraqi Kurdish factions. Regrettably, obstructionist
and monopolistic tendencies, as well as self-serving
interventions and indifference, have resulted in a grave
humanitarian nightmare and the influx of hundreds of
thousands of innocent refugees across Iran’s borders.
As a cornerstone of its foreign policy, Iran has
always pursued the promotion and strengthening of peace
and understanding not only in the region but also in the
world at large. During the recent visit of the President of
the Islamic Republic of Iran to Africa, our efforts to bring
about reconciliation between Sudan and Uganda led to the
signature of a memorandum of peace between the two
neighbouring States and we hope that, with everyone’s
cooperation and understanding, a more lasting peace can
be attained.
Our world today, more than at any other time, needs
and deserves morality, security, mutual respect and
confidence, the rule of law, the participation of all and
collective cooperation for human development. The new
international totalitarianism, notwithstanding its deceptive
facade, is inherently antithetical to these values and
constitutes the very negation of the recent achievements
of human society. The progressive evolution of the
international community can be achieved not by replacing
domestic dictators with international tyranny, but only
through a collective endeavour to achieve common human
ideals and aspirations, including, inter alia, understanding
28

through respect for holy values and mutual tolerance for the
cultures and beliefs of others; collective participation and
cooperation in the resolution of international issues within
a free, democratic and transparent decision-making process;
security through the rule of law and practical commitment
to international norms and obligations; and the re-direction
of energies and resources from coercion and the arms race
to universal respect for human rights and human
development in all of its cultural, moral, social, political
and economic dimensions.