It is in no mere subservience to tradition that my first words in the general debate of the twenty-ninth session should be of gratitude to the President of the twenty-eighth session, our good friend Mr. Benites of Ecuador, and of congratulations and salutations to you, Sir, on assuming the presidency of the Assembly.
42.	To Mr. Benites, of our own region of Latin America, we are twice indebted for the wisdom, the calm and the mature experience that guided us through the special session as skilfully and as safely as they had guaranteed our passage through the twenty-eighth session.
43.	And our congratulations to you, Mr. President, are enhanced by the special pride and satisfaction reserved for rejoicing in a kinsman's triumph; for have we not worked with you as comrades over many years in the councils of the non-aligned movement and in the several consultations which have brought us together in the causes of the Third World? It is reassuring that, in sealing your presidency with unanimous acclaim, the Assembly should have demonstrated the capacity and the resolve to be itself infused with that spirit of dynamism which today so pervades the environment of the international community, and of which you yourself, Sir, are so much a symbol.
44.	And as we welcome your election, so we rejoice in the admission to membership of the three new States—Bangladesh, Grenada and Guinea-Bissau— for each of which the people of Guyana reserves a special sentiment: for Bangladesh, with which we watched through the travail of birth and with which we work in the fellowship of the Commonwealth for Grenada, with which we have shared 300 years of the unique West Indian experience -an experience of European wars of possession, of slavery, of indenture and the plantation system, of a protracted colonialism and the struggle for social, economic and political justice, of the steady growth of identity and of the structures of regional unity and with which, out of that varied past, we share now the expectation of a long future of working together in the fraternity of our Caribbean community as we seek, to build just, progressive and free societies; and for Guinea-Bissau, with whose yearnings for liberation we identified, though a continent away, and in whose success in the struggle we exulted as a beginning of the crumbling of the remnant ramparts of colonialism and oppression in Africa. Each in its different way, Bangladesh, Grenada and Guinea-Bissau, represents a further victory for the hallowed crusade of self-determination, a crusade whose foremost international champion has been the Organization itself.
45.	The admission of Bangladesh draws attention in a particularly poignant way to the obligations of the world community for operations of relief and rescue in relation to natural calamities, particularly in developing States with little or no reserves for dealing with them. The disaster that struck our sister Latin American State of Honduras on the very eve of this Assembly only serves to reinforce these obligations. It is clear that there is still much more that we must do to equip the United Nations to discharge these burdens on behalf of the international community. The resources currently at the disposal of the Secretary-General are far too limited for effective immediate response?, and far too much must inevitably be left to the charity of friends and the mobilization of international anguish. This twenty-ninth session of the Assembly should take prompt action to enable the Organization better to discharge an obvious and a non-controversial responsibility and it must, meanwhile, lend its urgent voice to the appeals of the Secretary-General and of the States concerned for the provision of the immediate assistance so desperately needed.
46.	Together, the admission of the three new States brings us closer to the goal of a United Nations that is representative of all of mankind. But we must not forget in our rejoicing those impediments to universality that persist. In particular, the admissions of Grenada and of Guinea-Bissau remind us of the victories for decolonization yet to be won in the Caribbean and in Africa.
47.	In our own region, our brothers in Belize- a member State of our Caribbean community- are currently being denied independence not through the unwillingness of the colonial Power to withdraw or indeed through their own lack of enthusiasm for self-determination but, as this Assembly has already itself borne witness, because of the threat of total absorption which they face once the metropolitan Power is withdrawn the threat of a virtual smothering at birth. The time has surely come for the acceptance of those realities and rights of such settled communities and States that history itself has consecrated and for the abandonment of proprietary contentions that have their dubious origins in another age and are rooted in another colonialism. It is intolerable, and it is indeed alien to the noble traditions of Latin America, that, at this late hour, a people should find the exercise of their right to self-determination thwarted by expansionist ambition. This Organization must ensure that its mandate for decolonization is nowhere so frustrated.
48.	In Africa, it is most heartening that the Government of Portugal now takes its stand with courage and without equivocation on the side of self-determination and human dignity; and that, even as the twenty-ninth session was commencing, significant practical advances towards independence were being made in Mozambique. Among those who spoke out in condemnation of past policies, let us likewise be uninhibited in applauding present trends and assuring Portugal of our support for all constructive programs in furtherance of them. And to that assurance we must imply more than passive appreciation. The free States of Mozambique and Angola, like the State of Guinea-Bissau, whose first anniversary of independence we celebrated last week, will require massive assistance from the international community if the triumph of self-determination is not to be overcast by the calamity of economic disaster. It is not too early to commit international resources on the scale that will be essential to the inevitable task of reconstruction. This twenty-ninth session should not pass without the necessary decisions being taken to that end.
49.	The consummation of the struggle for liberation in Mozambique and Angola is, of course, both a vindication of the struggle itself and a renewal of confidence in the eventual victories that must be won by those other movements for liberation for whom victory may not be immediately at hand. But that confidence will only be justified if it does not degenerate into complacency. Self-determination in Mozambique and in Angola does not represent the end of the struggle for freedom in southern Africa. Namibia, Rhodesia, and South Africa itself will remain a charge upon the conscience and a claim upon the courage of free men everywhere.
50.	The momentum generated at the international level in recent years by the movement for freedom in southern Africa has played an important, indeed a vital, role in the present prospects for victory. A loss of that momentum might even now impair those prospects; but, no less serious, a loss of momentum at this stage of partial victory would be an indefensible squandering of the tactical and psychological advantages that have been gained for the campaigns of liberation elsewhere. Mozambique and Angola will be free. Let their places be reserved at the thirtieth session. What we need now is to redouble the effort, to re-energize the struggle, to press home the advantages mindful always that the forces of racism and oppression will grow more desperate as they retreat behind their last defenses.
51.	Let us mark the promise which this session brings of major gains for freedom in southern Africa with a renewal of commitment not merely to a continuing but indeed to an escalating struggle in which the collective will of this Organization and of all its legitimate Members are brought to bear upon the final victories. And what better way to do so than for this Organization to act decisively as the Assembly has just done on the report of the Credentials Committee [2248th meeting] and, consistent with required procedure, to formally withdraw from South Africa those rights of membership which its gross, persistent and insufferable violations of the Charter forfeited long ago.
52.	And the case of Namibia represents a special challenge; for it is an international Territory in respect of which the Organization has assumed particular responsibilities. The positive actions just taken by the United Nations Council for Namibia whose current President it is Guyana's honor to provide in exercising its legislative power to secure the resources of Namibia in trust for the people of that Territory and in establishing in Zambia the Institute for Namibia are welcome assertions of the responsibility of the international community in advancing the struggle for freedom. The time is ripe for us, through the instrumentality of the Security Council, to take the further steps that may be necessary for ensuring that the illegal occupation of Namibia by South Africa is speedily and irrevocably terminated.
53.	Nor can we forget, in passing, those divided States whose condition of division continues to contribute to their remaining outside the Organization. Let us, consistent with our commitment to universality, help to create conditions through which the peoples of all those lands may settle the internal issues of fragmentation without the interference, or even the inter-locution, of external forces in whatever garb they may be attired or from however far or near they may come.
54.	And as we try to create conditions that will assist in resolving those issues that keep the divided States outside the Organization, let us be alerted by the lessons of Cyprus to the threat to national independence and sovereignty of States already within the Organization. The people of Cyprus have suffered a tragedy of immense proportions. None of us, but particularly those of us who come from plural societies, can fail to be profoundly moved by the setback to national unity that has followed in the wake of the misguided adventurism that marked the beginning of these events.
55.	There will be time hereafter to judge those events and those who contributed to their conception and their execution. What is needed now, above all else, is to help our brothers in Cyprus to bind up the wounds of their shattered society, to help them in their efforts to preserve the integrity of the State and to place at their disposal our collective good offices and the protection, and indeed the superintendence, of the United Nations itself in guaranteeing that integrity and the capacity of Cyprus to continue to play a constructive role in the affairs of the world community. To that process of recuperation many States may be able to make a modest contribution, and the opportunity that now exists to broaden the base of the international effort particularly to broaden it beyond the confines of super and major Powers should not be lost.
56.	While that effort is being assembled, and whatever may be the eventual political and constitutional solutions, we cannot afford to ignore the humanitarian problem which cries out urgently for solution and which, if unrelieved, will make the task of finding solutions immensely more intractable. The dislocation of a large proportion of the population of Cyprus demands the immediate attention of the international community. The fact that the numbers themselves are small compared with other human calamities of this kind with which the international community has been obliged to deal in the past should serve only to quicken the pace with which programs of relief are agreed upon and put into execution.
57.	There is still a chance to save Cyprus from deteriorating into yet another embattled zone petrified in division by the patronage of major Powers. There are clearly men of good will on all sides ready to work tirelessly to avoid so dismal a prognosis. In the days and weeks ahead let the Assembly, let the Organization, let all Member States, help them to find those ways out of the present darkness.
58.	We join the Secretary-General in paying homage to the members of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force who gave their lives in Cyprus. But the lessons we must draw from that tragedy, the acknowledgment we must make for their sacrifice, is that there is need for the international community to rethink its approaches to peace-keeping, to the scale of peacekeeping operations and to the difficult questions of authorization, of control, of command and of supply that need to be settled, and settled along lines compatible with current needs of international peace and contemporary concepts of international action.
59.	The international community, like all communities at the national level, must sometimes learn hard lessons out of the experience of great tribulation. Perhaps out of the Cyprus experience the international community will learn some lessons about peace-keeping. Perhaps we shall be led at last to a perception of the Organization's true role in preventive peace-keeping -a functional role, consistent with national sovereignty, of maintaining international order and preserving the integrity of States more effectively than we ever can do through token forces assembled in the aftermath of conflict.
60.	The important developments in peace-keeping in the wake of the recent crisis in the Middle East and the present unhappy experience in Cyprus should certainly provide justification for a major effort during this session to advance the issue of international peace-keeping as one of the major mandates of the Organization under the Charter. Strengthened by contemporary insights of the global unity of mankind and the concomitant interdependence of men, we should not permit past impediments to consensus on this issue to obscure our prospects of future accord and we should not, therefore, be deterred from pursuing it anew.
61.	But while at this twenty-ninth session we deliberate the political issues of peace-keeping and disarmament, of decolonization and apartheid, of the crisis in the Middle East and the situation in IndoChina, it is the economic issues confronting the world community and impressing themselves upon the daily lives of people everywhere that will demand our most urgent attention and our most penetrating examination and debate.
62.	That we should have reached the stage where all Member States acknowledge the priority character of these issues is itself a notable advance. There was
285
a time, not so long ago, when, to the developed world of east and west, these Were the peripheral issues of the international dialog, relegated almost to the category of "any other business" on the international agenda. It can no longer be so. For these issues are now as critical to the prosperity of the developed world as they have always been to the survival of the developing.
63.	It would have been encouraging had we reached this unanimity of concern from a position of principle responsive to the mandates of the Charter, but in truth we have not. Despite the inevitable failure of a succession of international palliatives to redress the economic imbalance between the rich and the poor countries of the world; despite the mounting frustration, the cynicism and, indeed, the resentment of the world's under-privileged; despite even the gradual emergence of a global consciousness, a planetary awareness of an interdependent world community despite all these, the developed countries, for the greater part, but with some important exceptions, refused to come to terms with the need for fundamental change. It required the catalytic compulsions of the energy issue to force recognition of the need for a new international economic order. Even so, it was with a sometimes reluctant developed world that we reached a halting consensus at the sixth special session on the Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order [resolution 3201 (S'VI)] and of the Program of Action to implement it [resolution 3202 (S-VI)].
64.	With the special session on raw materials and development behind us and the special session on development and international economic co-operation in 1975 ahead of us, it is essential that these pressing economic issues occupy a major part of our time at the twenty-ninth session. This general debate can serve an important purpose if, through frank exchanges, we can advance the dialog of change and close the gap that Obviously still exists between the expectation of the poor and the intent of the rich.
65.	To close that gap we must reach agreement on the purposes of our endeavors, on, Our basic aims and objectives. In the Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order we have agreed on the rhetoric of change. In the Program of Action we have identified together some of the mechanisms by which it might be initiated. But have we agreed upon the philosophy of change? Have we reached from our different starting-points an accord on the ideology of international economic reconstruction?
66.	If the search for consensus at the sixth special session has meant no more to the developed world, or to major parts of it, than minor modifications of the international economic system to appease the claimant demand for change or, worse still, a process of minimal adjustment of positions within the existing system to meet the particular needs of what might appear to be a transient emergency and there is, let it be admitted, evidence enough that to several developed States that search for consensus meant only the one or the other if this is really so, then we are still far from that agreement on a common purpose which is the precondition of co-operative action. And for so long as that discord persists at the level of objectives neither the rhetoric of the Declaration nor the mechanisms of the Program of Action will contribute significantly to the resolution of those basic economic issues which will persist in demanding our attention. Without the energizing spark of mutual commitment, the former will be a lifeless parchment and the latter a withered blueprint, both destined for the international archive of lost causes.
67.	If, however, we are to persevere in pursuit of mutuality; if we are to proceed by consensus, as we are almost threateningly urged to do -as indeed both principle and expediency enjoin the developing States to do- then let it at least be clear to all engaged in the dialog that that mutuality, that consensus, must relate primordially to the philosophy of change, must be founded in a joint response to the seminal questions. What kind of world is it which we must strive to change? What kind of better world is it to which we seek to move? If we are not agreed upon those essentials of change, consensus on the mechanisms of change is a meaningless concept and the search for it is bound to end in futility, in frustration and, inevitably, in confrontation. But if we can reach agreement upon these essentials, real and genuine agreement supported by the conviction that it is in the ultimate interest of all States to advance that transformation, then the Declaration adopted at the sixth special session will possess the quality of an organic instrument of our new world community and the Program of Action wiK be a living charter of progressive reform.
68.	I cannot and do not purport to speak for all the Third World; but I suspect that the view from Guyana's corner of the developing world is much like the view from many another Third World window. And I suspect that our vision of the world as we seek to move from it is much like the vision of the remaining two thirds of the world's people who yearn for change. Perhaps for this reason it is easy for me to adopt the description given of our contemporary scene by one of the distinguished economists of the Third World, Mr. Mahbub al Haq of Pakistan, speaking recently in commemoration of a great internationalist of the developed world who understood our view and shared our vision:
"He would have been greatly saddened" -said Mr. Haq- "by a world which was so divided economically as to have about 20 per cent of the population enjoying about 80 per cent of the world income. We have today about two thirds of humanity living if it can be called living at all on less than 30 U.S. cents a day. We have today a situation where there are about 1,000 million illiterate people around the world, although the world has the means and the technology to spread education. We have about 60 per cent to 70 per cent of the children in the Third World suffering from malnutrition although the world has the resources to give adequate nutrition to all of its population. We have maldistribution of the world's resources on a scale where the developed countries are consuming about 25 times more of the resources per capita than the developing countries. We are in a situation where in the Third World millions of people work incredibly hard for very miserable rewards. It is easy to be sophisticated about it and to explain it all in terms of stages of development; but it is not likely to carry much conviction in our countries where people toil in a broiling sun from morning till dusk for mere subsistence and for premature death without ever discovering the reason why."
It is one of the more heartening and indeed more hopeful realities of our time that those words were spoken in the propitious environment of Sweden in a keynote address at a seminar on development and independence held in commemoration of the work of Dag Hammarskjdld.
69.	That picture of our modern world is, I believe, fairly representative of the vieW from the third world generally. It may look slightly better for a handful of developing countries; it will look slightly worse for several. But its essentials are unchallengeable and the need for its rectification must be self-evident. It is on that issue of rectification that we must seek consensus, consensus that we will employ our intellective talents and our technological skills, consensus that we will indulge our humanism no less than our instinct for survival to change the world while there is still time to do it by volition.
70.	How many of us, developed or developing Member States of this Organization, have not determined to reject a national society founded on such gross inequities? How many States have not in fact been established on the basis of rebellion against such injustices? And for how many of us are not these distortions an outrage to the tenets of our national philosophies of social and economic justice? Why, then, do we permit these feudal structures to persist in the community of States, and how long do we really believe they can survive without rendering indefensible a strategy of change through dialog?
71.	Whether we are going to end these inequalities and injustices and distortions, whether we are going to build on this planet an egalitarian world community in which the world's income is more fairly shared, in which the world's resources are more evenly consumed, in which the quality of human life derives from belonging not to the world's minority elite but to the human race itself -these are the issues on which we need to reach accord. I have no wish to oversimplify the matter. It is easy to pay lip-service to these objectives, and it is fashionable to do so. It is much more difficult to elevate them to an ethos of international life and to translate that ethos into the practical reality of living. And yet, is there an alternative, if we are indeed to proceed by consensus?
72.	If we are, therefore, so to proceed in earnest, the developed world must be ready to accept change that is truly fundamental. The world's economic system lbs at the base of the world's economic inequalities, injustices and distortions and that system itself must change in radical ways, some of which the Program of Action has already identified. I wish merely, in terms of the philosophy and the ideology of change, to allude to but one aspect of this process. Aristotle long ago perceived a fundamental truth which is as valid today in terms of relations between States as it was 2,000 years ago in terms of relations between people within States. "As between unequals", he asserted, "equity itself demands non-reciprocity". You cannot, he was showing us, change the basic condition of relative inequality except by unequal inputs. If the weak are to be made strong, if the poor are to be lifted out of their poverty, if the under-privileged are to enjoy an equal share, they must, as against the strong, and the rich, and the privileged, be specially advantaged; and the equalizing mechanisms required for redressing these imbalances must inevitably alter in radical ways the very system which produced and sustained them.
73.	What all this means is that if we are to reach consensus on the philosophy of change, the developed world has first of all to care enough about what happens in the third world and to its people; has, in the second place,, to acknowledge that its own long-term interests require profound modification of the status quo; and has to care enough and be enlightened enough to accept the sacrifices and the dislocations of change; and to accept them, not carpingly as temporary inconveniences to unbridled national prosperity, but nobly and with pride as a new way of life fashioned so that all men may share in the prosperity of our human effort.
74.	We believe, of course, that a mature self-interest ought to dictate the need for consensus on these terms; that our perceptions of an interdependent world make it inevitable that these changes must be wrought; that the demographic reality of the twenty-first century in which today's developed world may be but a mere 10 per cent of the population of our planet makes it essential that they should be wrought long before these disparities become even more absurd than they are at present.
75.	But consensus on such a philosophy of change will not emerge out of old attitudes and old approaches. It is not the consensus of the market-place or that which speaks out of the barrel of a gun. It cannot be a consensus extracted by competition or dictated by power. Our search for consensus must be guided, instead, by a new ordering of values, of values which derive from the imperatives of the human condition in this last quarter of the twentieth century.
76.	Ever since the emergence of human life on earth many years ago, there have been innumerable hazards to man's existence. They have come from time to time in varying forms, not infrequently from man himself through internecine war. Some of those hazards remain; but the crisis of our time derives from the very success of mankind, from his very success in survival and in his building of a global community that now truly possesses the earth, a community that daily grows more interdependent as our human needs press ever closer to the limits of our small planet. Over-consumption in one place today frequently means scarcity in another; and it also exacts its own deprivation in the environment of the indulgent.
77.	Our human condition has changed fundamentally; but the organization of human society has not responded to this basic change in man's relationship to his world. We still have a community of mankind in which many are weak while others are strong; in which many are poor while others grow more enriched; in which many are sick even while science 'conquers disease. The perception of the finiteness of our planet must produce an awareness that all these major problems are interrelated; Food security, problems of population, pollution of the environment, the distribution of the new wealth of the sea and of the scarce non-renewable resources of the land, the elimination of poverty, malnutrition and illiteracy, respect for the inherent dignity of man -all these must be taken together on the agenda of human survival. And in that debate, the antediluvian politics of competition and of power must yield to the politics of world order. When it does -but only when it does- consensus on that philosophy of change, which may be the precondition of man's survival on this planet, will no longer be beyond our grasp.
78.	It was precisely because we had not reached consensus on these fundamentals of change that our development decades and what has up to now been the International Development Strategy for the Second United Nations Development Decade [resolution 2626 (XXV)] have failed to produce significant change, have failed to effect even the token transfer of resources from the developed to the developing world which was their modest ambition. If we do now agree to embark upon effective international economic reconstruction, one of the primary objectives of the equalizing mechanisms we devise must be a significant transfer of resources from the rich nations to the poor; for herein lies the very heart of change, and it is in this area more than in most that we will test the strength of the commitment of the developed world to meaningful reform.
79.	In this regard, two factors need to be acknowledged. The first is that if we are to secure a significant transfer of resources from the developed to the developing countries, if we are to redistribute the world's wealth along more equitable lines, the equalizing mechanisms which we adopt may have to be highly innovative. In the area of trade, for example, mere access to markets may well not be enough. It will certainly not be enough where the assumption is that such access will materially assist the developing State through expansion of exports produced on the basis of cheap labor, for concepts of cheap labor which serve to perpetuate the inequalities of the present system can themselves provide no foundation on which to commence the process of reconstruction. In any transfer of resources designed to eliminate the most stark inequalities of the contemporary scene, therefore, the developed world may well have to face for at least some period of time not ju. an end but, indeed, a reversal of the patterns of trade on which the industrialized societies grew strong: the pattern of buying cheap and selling dear.
80.	It is a measure of the persisting absence of consensus between us on these fundamentals that much of the criticism that continues to be directed to the members of the Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries [OPEC] proceeds on the assumption that this .system of low negotiated prices for primary products and high invoiced prices for manufactured goods is somehow preordained and consecrated and that any departure from it, let alone its reversal, borders on heresy and intolerable impertinence.
81.	More particularly, however, experience has shown how easily real improvement in the export receipts of the developing countries can be frustrated by rapid inflation in the developed world. If the problem of achieving meaningful redistribution of the world's income is going to be tackled with a new resolve, then the implementation of schemes of indexation can no longer be postponed. In order to achieve concrete progress with such schemes, we may have to be content, at least initially, with something less than a perfect technical solution. If it be so although the most recent UNCTAD studies appear to confirm the technical feasibility of the system let us nevertheless proceed. We cannot continue to further postpone decision because of an infinity of unresolved subtleties. The patience, not to say the capacity for economic declension, of the developing countries must not be assumed to be endlessly extensive.
82.	The second factor is the more obvious one of the emergence of new strengths within the developing world, strengths that derive in large measure from the unity and resolve of the third world and from practical co-operation within producer associations established by developing States in defense of their right to just terms of trade. OPEC is but one of these associations. Others have already been established, not just on the basis of the experience of OPEC, but in response to the awareness that has been emerging over a number of years that developing producer States, separately weak, can multiply their negotiating strength several times over in dealings with the developed world and its multinational corporations if they act in concert and sustain their unity. The emergence of the new strength which these associations bring to the developing world ought to be a factor of the most profound significance in motivating the developed world both to reach consensus on change and to reach accord on the mechanisms for bringing it about.
83.	The choice between consensus and confrontation is not a choice which will be determined by the developing world. It is a choice that will be dictated by the developed. In any such choice the developing countries must inevitably prefer the former; but if consensus is unattainable and if confrontation is imposed, then there at least exist some levers of strength through which in the last resort a net transfer of resources might be secured.
84.	But let me make it clear that when I speak in this context of a net transfer of resources, it is of a transfer from the developed to the developing States as a whole, a shift of income towards all parts of the developing world. Transfers whose effects are so gross as to create new disparities or new areas of elitism; transfers that are so indiscriminately imposed that they fall equally upon the poor as upon the rich, but with far grayer consequences for the former; or transfers whose base of recipiency is so narrow as to encourage and facilitate a recycling of resources back to the developed countries -such transfers do not fulfill their true potential as equalizing mechanisms and they are questionable symbols of commitment to an egalitarian world community.
85.	But other equalizing mechanisms may be at hand. Certainly, in our effort to redress existing economic imbalances, the new resources of the sea and the sea-bed and the vast potential of outer space can play a unique role. Conceptualized already as a heritage of mankind, what ideal opportunities they provide for creating mechanisms for bringing about a more equitable over-all distribution of the world's
resources. If we are, indeed, to reach by consensus the goal of global justice, it should be in the interest of the developed States to maximize the returns from these new resources to the peoples of the developing world. But this, also, involves a commitment to fundamental change on the part of the developed world and a willingness to accept constraints on excessive aggregations of wealth in the interest of achieving this end.
86.	There are, of course, important contributions that the developing countries themselves must make to the fulfillment of the goal of an equitable international economic order. IHs axiomatic that just economic relations between States will not fulfill the ambition of an egalitarian world community unless they are made to serve the cause of economic justice within States. The installation and preservation of just societies within the developing world must be as much the consequence of as it clearly is the paramount reason for the securing of a regime of economic equality between all States. For this reason, if for no other, we must accept that the status of human rights everywhere in the developed and in the developing worlds, of civil and political rights, of economic, social and cultural rights, are, and must continue to be, the legitimate concern of the international community, and that their most gross and patent violation must demand the attention of the Organization. The imperatives of economic justice and of respect for the dignity of man once marshaled in the cause of human survival cannot be halted at national frontiers.
87.	And, of course, the developing countries may well be able to do much to help themselves through more effective economic co-operation in such important areas as trade, transport, industrial development, transfer of technology, and monetary and financial arrangements. The non-aligned movement, pursuing concepts of economic self-reliance, has already adopted an action program for economic co-operation between the non-aligned countries and other developing countries along these lines, and the Assembly has given its blessing to assistance for these efforts from the United Nations [resolution 3241 (XXIX)]. More direct trade between developing countries, through shipping routes that run not merely north to south between developed and developing States, but east to west in the southern zone of the world, may yet significantly enlarge the prospects for development of at least some developing countries. Certainly, such arrangements can contribute greatly to lowering the level of dependency of third world countries and effect qualitative changes in prevailing international economic relationships.
88.	Most of these developments -all, indeed, save the last -depend essentially upon the ability of the developed and the developing worlds to reach consensus through dialog. This urgent necessity makes it essential that we utilize the United Nations system to maximum advantage in pursuing that dialog and in maintaining, for so long as it is maintainable, the options for consensus.
89.	It follows that the Organization must be made the focal point for the dialog of development and for the establishment of the new international economic order, and that present efforts to transfer that dialog to and to install the machinery for decision-making in, multilateral associations controlled by the developed world must be resisted.
90.	How deeply indebted we are, all of us, to the Prime Minister of Australia for reminding us, in the eloquent and forthright language of progressive internationalism, of the primacy of this role of the United Nations in the search for solutions to our current problems.
91.	But our need for dialog does draw attention to the unique service which can be rendered, and rendered now, by other institutions, by institutions old and new, which bring together segments of the developed and developing worlds in an environment of genuinely free consultation. Mankind stands greatly in need of consensus-building mechanisms of every sort and at every level between the developed and the developing countries. Indeed, never before has there been as great a need to use these institutions and mechanisms for reaching consensus in the interest of the international community as a whole.
92.	But if we are to use them to this end, we must be mindful of their potential for contributing to that global consensus toward which we work. These consensus-building mechanisms include existing institutions, like the British Commonwealth, that bring together on a basis of ever-enlarging intimacy and understanding States old and new, industrialized and developing, States of north and south, of east and west, States pluralistic and multiracial -a microcosm, indeed, of the world community- embryonic institutions, like that emerging from the new dialog now begun in the Americas, deriving not from old traditions of hegemony but from new insights and possibilities of co-operation between all the States and I repeat, all the States of the hemisphere; incipient associations, such as that which now seems possible between the European Economic Community and a group of some 40 or more States of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific -a relationship which, eschewing a passing neocolonialism, now seeks to explore the potential for economic co-operation between the world's most powerful economic grouping and States that individually are among the weakest, but together are not without strength, and to do so on terms consistent with the wider international objectives of the new economic order.
93.	In all these groupings, and more, there must be pressed into service the search for global consensus on which rests our best hope, perhaps our only hope, not merely for establishing the new international economic order we have already proclaimed, but of evolving that consensus on an egalitarian world community without which our other expectations would be utterly illusory.
94.	If this session is to help to turn us away from the dangers of confrontation, I suggest with(all humility that it is on the intensive search for consensus of this kind and of this quality that we must all agree to embark, developed and developing States alike, both here in the United Nations and in those other organs of. international consultation that provide opportunities for the understanding and reconciliation which persistent dialog inevitably brings.


Mr. President, I would like, at the outset, to express my delegation's satisfaction and, in particular, my own, at seeing you directing the work of the twenty-ninth session of the General Assembly. I remember with special satisfaction the brotherly relationship we shared at Algiers, in 1967, when I had the pleasure of sitting beside you when you presided over the first ministerial meeting of the developing countries. On that occasion there were countless times when we found that our views converged regarding solutions for the most urgent and acute problems the developing countries were facing. No less numerous were the occasions on which I witnessed the demonstration of your exceptional qualities of leadership. For this reason, I am convinced that you will prove able to impress upon the deliberations of this General Assembly the objectivity, the firmness and the political acumen required by the complexity of the subjects under debate.
3.	I also offer Mr. Leopoldo Benites the thanks of the Brazilian delegation for the able and sound way in which he presided over the twenty-eighth session of the General Assembly. Mr. Benites is not only an asset of this Organization, which he has served for so many years with unchanging dedication, but is also an asset of Latin America and of his valiant country—Ecuador—which has in him a respected spokesman in the service of its most authentic aspirations.
4.	May I be allowed to address a very special word of greeting in our common language to the representatives of the Republic of GuineaBissau, present here today in their full right, to the great rejoicing of us all.
5.	As Minister for External Affairs of Brazil and as a Brazilian, nothing could give me greater satisfaction than to salute the admission to this Organization of a new country of Africa and of Portuguese speech, to which we feel linked therefore by bonds of blood and culture. These links constitute the strongest guarantee for the close and fertile friendship which will certainly unite our two peoples.
6.	Our greetings are also directed to the delegation of Bangladesh. We are sure that there will be many opportunities for us to extend within the scope of the United Nations the friendly relations we already entertain bilaterally.
7.	I also address an equally warm expression of brotherly feelings to the delegation of Grenada, which has added its presence to our regional group.
8.	An honored tradition, which goes back to the first session of the General Assembly, gives Brazil the privilege of opening this great dialog of sovereign nations each year. This tradition I take up today, speaking for the first time as my country's Minister for External Affairs in this forum. I do so with redoubled emotion, for I am conscious that I am addressing the community of nations at a particularly important moment in the history of the Organization and of our participation in it. It is unnecessary to make more explicit the importance of this hour in universal terms. It seems obvious to all that we are at the threshold of a new era which will be one of peace and prosperity or of insecurity and poverty, according to whether we know how to harmonize, in a constructive fashion, the most essential objectives and the most enlightened national interests of each country here represented. Brazil has the benefit of facing the challenge Of this new hour with a Government whose term has just begun and which carries, in its objectives and mode of action, the indisputable stamp of realism and diligence. This allows us to contemplate our action within the Organization against a background that is simultaneously broader in time and more encompassing in tenus of solutions to the problems under consideration.
9.	We have repeatedly and publicly enunciated the principles on which the international conduct of President Ernesto Geisel's administration is based, and we have already given sufficient demonstration that we know how to unite action with words when it comes to turning those principles into reality.
10.	During recent years Brazil has taken broad steps, first in correcting the main distortions that disrupted its economic and social development and, subsequently, in the consolidation of a model of growth that truly attempts to respond to the authentic aspirations of our national community. Thus the country has grown internally and thus also it has grown in terms of its presence, its potentialities and its responsibilities in the international field. While this is happening, we try to avoid the traps of history by not repeating the errors of nations which became great, many times at the expense of others. We want our presence in a wider ranging international scene to be accompanied by the preservation of the primordial ethical values that have been and that continue to be the bases of our foreign policy.
11.	We want our words in the international field to be direct and simple, without ambiguity or subterfuge. We want the Brazilian Government to be able to accomplish the oecumenical vocation of its people, who are open to uninhibited and frank communication. We want to explore the paths of understanding, for we believe, fundamentally, that cooperation is more effective than antagonism and that mutual respect is more creative than ambitions of preponderance.
12.	Our conduct for attaining those objectives is pragmatic and responsible: pragmatic to the extent to which we desire effectiveness and to which we are disposed to seek, wherever Brazilian national interests may move us, areas of convergence and zones of coincidence with the national interests of other peoples; and responsible because we will always act within the framework of ethics and exclusively as a function of objectives clearly identified and accepted by the Brazilian people.
13.	I do not intend to comment on the various items on the agenda of the present session. There will, I am sure, be many occasions on which the Brazilian delegation will speak on those items during the coming weeks. From this rostrum I wish only to underline which are the problems, in our understanding, to the solution of which we must jointly dedicate our most urgent attention.
14.	Immediately the problem of decolonization springs into view. We have on this question a position of absolute clarity: Brazil believes unreservedly that there is no justification for delay or subterfuge in the process of decolonization, both in the American continent itself and over the entire world. Brazil will give its support so that those peoples still subject to forms of colonial domination may achieve, within the shortest possible time, the national independence to which they aspire. We believe that to the extent that the will of the community of sovereign nations in support of acceleration of the decolonization process becomes general, so much greater will be the possibility that decolonization may be achieved peacefully and under conditions that will allow constructive cooperation between the peoples of those countries that were previously held as colonies and the peoples whose Governments had theretofore followed a colonizing policy. In this sense, support given to emancipation is as important as action directed towards the colonizing Governments so that they may detach themselves quickly and with conviction from their policies of colonial domination. In both forms of action the forum of the United Nations has demonstrated its effectiveness, and it is our intention to support it in this role.
15.	Brazil is following this; path, which is not always the easiest one or one which pleases those who cannot distinguish appearance from reality. For the Brazilian Government, the challenge faced by those who want to rid the world of the colonial stigma is the challenge of efficacy. To blame the colonizing past is not what matters; what matter? is rather to help build the future of free nations. This position corresponds to what is deepest in the Brazilian soul. We are prepared to make explicit those sentiments and the aspirations that correspond to them by offering our concrete cooperation in the building of these new nations.
16.	Amflcar Cabral, the great leader of the independence of GuineaBissau, was aware of the anti colonialist will of the Brazilian people. His words are so similar to those we have so often uttered in relation to African peoples under colonial domination that they seem almost to have come from the same mouth. I quote them:
"Our interest" in developing relations of friendship, solidarity and cooperation with Brazil is all the greater as we feel ourselves linked to the Brazilian people by bonds of blood, culture and history, and we ardently desire to establish with Brazil, after the conquest of our independence, broad fraternal relations in all fields, just as we desire them with the people of Portugal, which we never confused with Portuguese colonialism."
17.	The same feeling of brotherhood binds us to Mozambique and Angola, whose independence we want to see completed. We hail the agreement that on 7 September the Portuguese Government concluded with the Frente de Libertagao de Mozambique [FRELIMO]. Little more than a century and a half ago the same date marked the first independence of a former Portuguese colony, and it is Brazil, that former colony, which is here represented and which offers its hand to its African brothers. To Brazil this gesture signifies not just an unbending adherence to the inalienable principle of self-determination. To us, the emergence of African nations to independent life has an additional dimension which allows us to take up again, on an equal footing, the close sharing of life with peoples that have been among the most generous sources of our mode of being.
18.	To the opening up of prospects for the populations in the Territories under Portuguese administration in Africa, there has not been, unfortunately, any corresponding visible progress in respect to areas under colonial domination in other continents. In the same fashion, there still remain forms of subjugation resulting from racial or religious prejudices.
19.	In the United Nations and outside, apartheid has been universally condemned in the name of the most diverse principles. Ethically, it runs directly contrary to the universal values of the human conscience. From the viewpoint of doctrine, it incorporates the most discredited theories of alleged racial superiorities.
20.	When we repudiate apartheid we also repudiate any pretension of the international community wishing to colonize culturally the nations of Africa. Thus, when we rejoice at the emergence to independence of new Portuguese-speaking nations, we are not uttering praise for any cultural supremacy but are simply welcoming the opportunities now open for a broader brotherly understanding by the communities of the same language. For the African Portuguese-speaking nations and for other nations what we want is that they may be authentic in the expression of their own rich and varied cultures. We in Brazil, who owe so much to the different African cultures, can only hope that they may reinvigorate themselves in the climate of freedom offered to them by national independence.
21.	It has been said, and rightly so, that in the history of mankind ours is the first generation upon which has fallen the task not only of making the world but also of preventing the world from being unmade. It is an enormous responsibility for those who, like the great majority of mankind, have such minute means available to them for influencing global decisions which have such a great effect on them.
22.	We stand almost as helpless spectators of the accelerated arms race, which is incessantly pursued under the mantle of protestations of detente at promises of disarmament. The disproportion between the scope of the problem and the measures agreed on for its solution is smaller only than that which exists between the alleged defense justifications and the overwhelming destructive power that has been accumulated already.
23.	More than anything else, it is shocking to see the magnitude of financial and technological resources devoted to arms production, so many times higher than that which would be necessary to reform the present structure of economic inequities and thus to allow men to live in a world free from fear, more unfettered by shame and, above all, more favorable to the expression of its creative potentialities.
24.	There would be reasons, perhaps, to welcome the evolution during recent years from a world in a climate of "cold war" to a world in a climate of detente. We would have more reasons to rejoice if we could see confirmed in the future what seems to be the present evolution of that climate into a virtual entente. It depends in part on ourselves, the countries that seek development, whether such an entente will be made to our benefit or to our prejudice. It is to a certain extent natural that the great Powers should seek such an entente and, above all, for the preservation of the status quo -which, however, would benefit them only in the short run. However, under its shadow, and this is the only benefit which we receive, we who are less strong must seek only to realize a policy of closer and less tense cooperation in the international field. We must utilize this opening in order to obtain a better coordination of the less developed countries in the defence of their interests in economic and social progress.
25.	This evolution has saved us from the spectre of apocalyptic war, which would be the logical consequence of a boundless arms policy. This does not mean that the world has reached the certainty of being able to live in peace and security, a certainty which is the most profound aspiration of the majority of peoples. Many are those who still continue to suffer from the bitterness of armed conflict or who live under the recurrent threat of its intensification. We have to recognize that the contribution made by the countries not directly involved in those conflicts to their solution is precarious. And we have to admit that it is the very terror of total nuclear conflict which feeds or allows the growth of those localized wars.
26.	The question of the Middle East deserves constant and real attention from all of us.
27.	It is surprising—I would even say shocking - to see that the world seems to turn its preoccupations towards the Middle East only when a war crisis occurs in that disturbed region. The set of problems which for so many years have afflicted the peoples of the Middle East should require of the international community a concern to .bring about continuous and creative cooperation. Within that context, if the implementation of Security Council resolution 242 (1967) may indeed constitute one of the possibly indispensable conditions for the development of the solution to the problem, it is also true that that implementation does not exhaust the range of measures essential to the attainment of the greater objectives of peace, security, tranquility, and social and economic development of the countries of the region.
28.	Objection to wars of conquest is a constant factor in the history of Brazil and a norm inscribed in our Constitution. We hold the right to territorial integrity and the obligation of respect for sovereignty to be absolute. Consequently, we believe that withdrawal from the occupied territories is an integral part of the solution to the conflict.
29.	Only those frontiers which have been negotiated and recognized by all for the good of all will be calm. This is the solution which, by bringing them peace and security, will truly serve the countries of the region.
30.	We, the countries of the American continent, are fortunate to have an institutional solution to such problems and we are proud that the security agreement binding us together has determined, for many years now, that all regional conflicts be solved starting from the initial and indispensable assumption that occupying forces are withdrawn from areas under military invasion.
31.	The drama of the Middle East is enlarged and made universal to the extent that it involves human aspects which cannot be ignored. The community of nations must not spare an/ effort, including efforts made in conjunction with the peoples of the Middle East, to ensure that the sufferings of the Palestinian people are alleviated by appropriate measures. It is inhuman to consider that any solution that does not attend to their rights is equitable, and it is an illusion to think that such a solution would be lasting.
32.	We are sure, on the other hand, that a greater effort of international cooperation with the countries of the Middle East in the economic and social fields may provide a decisive contribution to peace. It is gratifying to note that wide prospects seem to be opening up in this direction, and there will arise if all parties, conscious of their growing responsibilities, work with creative imagination and firmness of intention unprecedented modalities for cooperation which will be of great significance to the international community, and especially to the developing countries. Such cooperation, which is in the interest of all countries and all regions, if correctly implemented, may bring about results of extreme importance in the reorientation of the flows of trade, of investments and of financing, correcting the existing distortions which contribute to insecurity and instability in the international field.
33.	Latin America, in its mutual solidarity, has a clear conception of the challenge that the present crisis represents for each one of our countries. This challenge does not frighten us; rather, it stimulates us to redouble internally, within each country, the efforts needed to accelerate national progress, and to expand, in the external field, forms of cooperation to achieve common objectives resulting from the convergence of our national interests.
34.	One of the characteristics of the time in which we are living is the growing command that developing countries are assuming over their natural resources. This evolution is allowing those countries to reduce their excessive dependence on the economies of the developed countries and better to orientate their own economic growth. It also opens up unprecedented opportunities for cooperation among developing countries.
35.	In Latin America, an awareness of the importance of this process is visibly increasing. The full use of natural resources in Latin American countries is fundamental to the acceleration of the growth of the region and may become a relevant Latin American contribution to the alleviation of the world crises of energy, raw materials and food. At the same time, the strong cultural and political solidarity that binds together the countries of Latin America, also makes joint endeavors in the economic field ever more viable. Thus we see ever-growing possibilities of cooperation in the use of natural resources common to or shared by more than one country. The. novelty of this form of cooperation, at least on the scale on which it is being developed in Latin America, has not yet permitted a general understanding of its potential or of the problems it involves. I consider it important to bring before the international community my country's point of view on these questions.
36.	Brazil considers that the free use and exploitation of the natural resources in its territory is a right inherent in the sovereignty of the State. Such a right cannot brook restrictions. In the case of resources which are, by nature, not static and which flow through the territory of more than one country, that right remains unalterable, those restrictions alone being acceptable that result from the obligation not to cause significant or permanent damage to the exploitation by other countries of the natural resources in their territories. To subordinate the sovereign utilization of our own natural resources to consultations of a.suspensive nature would be to introduce an intolerable disruption in international order, with the result of making the right that we were trying to preside a mere "dead letter". The Brazilian Government, which does not refuse to make use of or to resort to consultation between Governments in this as in any other matter, and which has resorted to this method of procedure frequently in the past, cannot 'accept the perversion of the cooperative function of consultation by questioning the sovereignty of States. For this reason we think it is our duty to awaken the consciences of Governments to the implications of principles of consultation that would injure the sovereign right of countries to use their natural resources, and that, though seemingly constructive, would be potentially disruptive to the international order, which it is our aim to preserve, and an impediment to the material progress of nations, which it is our objective to stimulate. We should all be aware that natural resources, the use of which it is intended to regulate in opposition to the sovereign decisions of territorial Governments, do not flow over ground only. There are those that flow beneath the ground, as there are those that flow in the territorial sea. The characteristics of certain resources must be the motive for responsible behavior on the part of those who use them, rather than for hindering their use and thus benefiting no party at all.
37.	We are experiencing all these problems in Latin America and we are seeking solutions to them based on the principles of harmony of interests, peaceful understanding and enlightened cooperation, principles that this Organization has established as the foundations of international life. If I bring to this rostrum the example of Latin America, it is because I sincerely believe that it constitutes a positive contribution to the realization of the ideals of the United Nations.
38.	My reflections have barely touched on some items of the agenda for the present session. The reason is that I have tried to confine myself to an enunciation of Brazil's. position on questions that belong to the agenda of mankind more than to the agenda of the Assembly, and on the set of fundamental problems, the solution of which will determine the shape of the coming decades.
39.	I have chosen to concern myself with those problems that are more closely connected with the aspirations of liberty, human dignity, justice, progress and peace. On many of these questions the international community has made considerable progress. On others, the results obtained have been imperceptible. Nevertheless, there is no reason for dismay. The severity of the problems should constitute for all of us not a reason for disenchantment, but an incentive to redoubled efforts, creative imagination and fidelity to the purposes and principles upon which this Organization of sovereign States was built.


It is fitting first of all to note that the current session of the General Assembly re-presents a turning-point in the history of the Organization. The events which coincided with the session and the conditions under which it is being held reveal a major change in the movement of world history. Concepts have changed; some of the characteristic traits of the old world have collapsed. New signs have appeared that, if taken seriously, might indicate a new course for man in international life.
101.	May I be permitted to congratulate the General Assembly on electing Mr. Bouteflika as President of the current session. The Algerian struggle represents a historic attainment for Africa and the peoples of the world in general. When Mr. Bouteflika, in the name of Algeria and Africa, assumed leadership of the General Assembly at its current session, we took it as recognition of the martyrs who sacrificed their lives for the sake of the freedom of their country and the dignity of man.
102.	Only one year after the last session, the President declared the admission of a struggling people to the United Nations, a people that, until a few months earlier, was labeled a band of terrorists. Does not the President agree with me that a new concept has arisen and that the voices that have been trying to prevent the freedom fighters from reaching this forum must inevitably be silenced for ever? The admission of Guinea-Bissau to the United Nations and the election of its representative as Rapporteur of the Fourth Committee at this very session reaffirm the facts I have mentioned. Now, let us devote this session to re-deeming those who are still under the yoke of colonialism, apartheid, racial discrimination and foreign domination.
103.	Another significant characteristic of the last session was the presidency of Mr. Leopoldo Benites. His appreciation of the heritage of man, his deep comprehension of world history and his far-sightedness inspired us to appreciate the turn of events we witness today. We recognize with appreciation, inter alia, his contribution to the adoption of the Arabic language as an official and working language of the United Nations, a language imbued with a rich cultural heritage and human values, and I should like to emphasize here that his frequent praise of this language was an important factor in introducing it. It would not have been easy for anyone else to have assumed such leadership during recent developments. We note with appreciation the positive developments in the relationships between the old world, whose civilization has paved the way for the discovery of the new world, and that part of the new world from which Mr. Benites comes, and where emigrants to Latin America, while preserving their heritage, worked out a blend of the old and the new.
104.	Those were two positive aspects. However, we cannot escape the fact that a negative aspect has ac-companied and will accompany this new course. When his country called for a special session of the General Assembly, Mr. Bouteflika noticed, as did Mr. Benites while presiding over that session, that there were those who sought to impede the reconsideration of international relations in such a manner as to assert the rights of the majority. The dominant Powers of the old system tried to put the blame on the third world by fabricating imaginary crises, by sowing the seeds of disagreement among the countries of the third world, by threatening to ban shipments of food and clothing, by promoting wars, espionage, subversion and coups d'etat, and by taking advantage of certain rights given them during the period of their might and dominance, thus obstructing the adoption of resolutions.
105.	The sixth special session provided a precious opportunity to test the extent of the dominant Powers' readiness to adjust to the new order. Members may have noticed their disregard for the demands of the third-world countries and their attempts to obstruct any understanding on a new international economic system. When they realized that they could not prevent the adoption of such a system, they all registered their reservations. Could such an attitude be a prelude towards mutual understanding and international interdependence?
106.	This Assembly, presided over by Mr. Bouteflika, and with the participation of the progressive forces of the world, cannot be used as a rostrum to invite us to dissension and threats. Discordant voices have tried to exploit this rostrum to prevent our session from considering the genuine problems facing us. There have been many arbitrary stands, but those who use threats must accept the responsibility for their attitude. It is high time that we unveiled the motives behind those voices.
107.	We are happy today at the admission of Guinea-Bissau; yet we are not going to forget that the imperialist Powers have never lent a hand in support of the struggle of its people and have attacked the liberation movements by providing assistance to the former Government of Lisbon. We cannot be expected to forgive that shameful attitude simply because they did not oppose the admission of Guinea-Bissau to the United Nations. We must not forget the shameful attitude of the imperialist Powers in ignoring the African liberation movement. Through assistance rendered to the former despotic regime in Lisbon, they stabbed it in the back. The new reality has been brought about despite their stubbornness and their opposition. We are ready to let our wounds heal, but we are not willing to weave glorious banners for them out of our blood.
108.	The African liberation movement has rendered a service to the peoples of colonialist Powers, not only by ridding them of their dishonorable wars against freedom fighters in Africa, but also by giving them the opportunity to get rid of their corrupt and tyrannical regimes. The freedom fighters in Guinea- Bissau, Mozambique and Angola have struggled for the cause of man as a whole. Their victory helped the people of Portugal to put an end to years of tyranny and suppression. If anybody deserves gratitude for this development, it is the people of Guinea-Bissau, led by the late Amilcar Cabrai, and the peoples of Angola and Mozambique with their respective revolutionary leaders.
109.	This development should have been received in the General Assembly with the admission by the imperialist Powers of the failure of their former policies and of the decline of their political and economic empires. Yet, some of them deemed it appropriate to use this forum as a vehicle to talk about tightening belts, about using food and natural resources as a political weapon, and about the rights of the minority vis-a-vis the majority. They should instead pay the price of the well-being they enjoy at the expense of those who perished of starvation, those who have no schools, those who have no medicine, and those who have nowhere to live.
110.	The extravagances of these countries were perpetrated at the expense of all those we have mentioned. Those who request co-operation could have paid the price for such opulence. They could have made unconditional sacrifices, but, on the contrary, they insisted on maintaining this high standard of extravagance and, moreover, they demanded that others make more sacrifices either voluntarily or under duress.
111.	In the chaotic conditions created by the imperialist Powers, the so-called rights of the minority must be looked on as only a continuation of the privileges of the minority enjoyed at the expense of the suppressed and deprived majority. This minority would convince us that the future of the world depends on this continued exploitation of the world's resources. This is totally unacceptable. The call for democracy within the international community is being blocked by the refusal of the minority to fit into the new reality. This can be achieved only if the minority yields to the view of the majority, and if the majority takes part in formulating the decisions which determine the future of international relations. Slandering the policies of the oil-producing countries for fixing prices should not be taken at face value. At most, it reveals the anxiety of the industrialized countries in so far as that measure might lead to other actions by the developing countries which produce raw materials, because the industrial countries have established their economies on the basis of obtaining raw materials at the cheapest prices and selling their manufactures at the highest prices. Obviously, as shown by their spokesmen, they are not willing to alter this formula, hence their campaign of slander.
112.	Can we then attach our future to the desires of countries which, although they are in a minority, are only interested in protecting their own rights without acknowledging their duties? The discussions of the Working Group drafting the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States are a striking example of the unwillingness of the imperialist Powers to give up the gains they obtained illegally when they were in control of the world's destiny. In defaming their policies, those countries only considered the future of their own economies. None of them cared to discuss the political and economic future of the world. Nor did they admit the failure of the economic and monetary policies which they had imposed upon the world. They did not deplore the looting and plunder practiced by their multinational companies which sought to obtain the lion's share of economic revenues for their share of the products of the third world. They said nothing about their intentions to lessen the gap between their advanced economies and the economies of other countries. Nor did they render any assistance in the field of technology. They did not extend a hand to the freedom fighters struggling for the realization of their right to self-determination and control over their natural resources. All they offered was lip service. They demanded that the third-world countries continue to sell their supplies at the lowest possible price lest the world economic order collapse. This is a false theory, as if scores of years of accumulated errors, plunder and looting to which the peoples of the world were subjected were not sufficient for the major developed Powers. They would have the third world remain a political colony or, at least, remain economically dominated, offering all it had at the lowest price for the sake of helping the imperialistic Powers to maintain their grip on its economy and destiny. We believe that it has become obvious that this political practice is a deceit; it is even an absurd deceit which we can no longer overlook.
113.	Those who trade in wheat and use it as a means to interfere in the internal affairs of States are the most unfair and the greatest violators of the international code of ethics, and they cannot presume to lecture other States on human conduct.
114.	The Arab countries which applied an embargo on the United States have done so as a reaction to an act of aggression initiated by this imperialistic Power and still being perpetrated against our peoples. Can any sensible individual expect us to provide energy to the hand that stabs us daily, by means of its Zionist agents, for the sake of satisfying their greed in dominating the world and its destiny? The United States has thus far offered only deceit to the peoples struggling for their freedom. On the other hand, they provide weapons and means of destruction to the racists in order to enable them to continue their domination of the peoples of the world. We are not willing to supply this war machinery with the fuel it needs to perpetuate itself. Putting these facts in their proper perspective exposes the ugly face of the elements that are trying to display their concern over the fate of the world. The worth of the military equipment supplied at one time to the Zionists would have been sufficient to feed millions of people who are dying of starvation in the Sahara, and yet the United States offered only empty promises, and conditional ones at that, to those dying of hunger.
115.	The true problem resides in the re-establishment of an economic balance of power in the world and in the restructuring of a new world economic order in accordance with the resolution of the General Assembly which was adopted at its sixth special session, to which the industrial countries, led by the United States of America, entered reservations because it did not meet their desires.
116.	May I draw your attention to a positive indicator which characterizes this session. It has become possible for us now to discuss the issues in their proper context. No longer are we afraid of talking openly. Palestine is the very issue that concerns the world as a whole, and there is no reason why we should not employ its right name. The issue is not the truce, nor is it the Middle East problem; it is not the disengagement of forces; it is not a matter for compromises. It is not any of that nonsense. The issue, in fact, is that of a sacred land which has been flagrantly usurped, the rights of whose people have been trampled upon. Those people have lived homeless for more than a quarter of a century.
117.	Thus, the imperialist and colonialist Powers and their subversive agents have sought to prevent the discussion of this issue on an international level. Yet that transformation, witnessed by the world today, has made it possible for this item to be listed on the agenda and will, in turn, make it possible for an appropriate solution to be found. The world, and especially this Assembly, has been warned against any solution based on compromises or shortcuts or bargaining. We must not ignore the facts, such as they are. We have been warned against failure to acknowledge realities and against any partition schemes contradictory to the spirit of the Charter. Today, we warn against any solutions propagated by the so- called miracle makers. Miracles can only be made by the struggling peoples, and thus no one but the Palestinian people themselves can bring about a solution. We must invite the legitimate representatives of the Palestinians to participate in the debate, as this will make the consideration of the item serious and genuine. It will further silence those who seek to smear the just struggle of the Palestinian people.
118.	Those who have tried to obstruct the inscription of the item, and those who have tried to label the Palestinians and their representatives as subversives and terrorists ignore the history of the United Nations and the history of the struggle of peoples. Most of those participating in this discussion and representing the third-world countries were once labeled as terrorists. Yet when their peoples' struggle triumphed, they became the true representatives of their people at the United Nations.
119.	The situation in Cyprus has a bearing upon the security and safety of the area. It has an effect upon our humane and emotional feelings. The imperialist Powers have tried to follow the same policy they have followed in other situations by fabricating solutions and devising compromises. We deem it the duty of the General Assembly to recall that the United Kingdom bears the greatest responsibility in creating the tragedy of Cyprus. This country has never abandoned an area that had been blighted with its colonialism without leaving behind a problem or the seeds of a problem. It is high time that the plot was exposed. The influence of the United Kingdom, its bases and its allies should be isolated rather than be allowed to poison inter-national relations. Let us leave the affairs of Cyprus to the Cypriots, whether Turk or Greek. The promotion of mutual relations between the two communities and the protection of the rights of each will pave the road to a peaceful solution which will restore independence and non-alignment to the island, making it free of bases of the imperialist Powers and of their allies.
120.	The Mediterranean is full of military fleets belonging to Powers distant from its shores, and which have no connexion with it. The continuation of the presence of the Sixth Fleet and the attempt of NATO to gain a foothold on the island of Cyprus constitute a threat to the security and safety of the population as a whole. It is our duty seriously to endeavor to make of the Mediterranean a lake of peace and civilization, free of rivalries and spheres of influence.
121.	In this statement my delegation will not dwell upon the other items on the agenda. These will be dealt with in due course in the committees. Yet we are concerned about the fate of the world because certain issues have been kept on the agenda for a quarter of a century without ever having been resolved. We realize that the decision concerning those items rests with the determination of the peoples involved, for the Charter makes special provisions for the peoples and disregards imperialistic regimes.
122.	Our numbers have risen at this session with the admission of Guinea-Bissau, Bangladesh and Grenada. We welcome them whole-heartedly. However, we are still waiting for the day to come when the representatives of the racist minorities will be replaced by the true representatives of Palestine and South Africa, and when we can welcome the true representatives of Zimbabwe. Then we shall be able to say that the provisions of the Charter and the universality of the Organization have been realized.
123.	The decision of the General Assembly [resolution 3207 (XXIX)] to refer the question of the relationship between the racist regime of South Africa and the United Nations to the Security Council is a new step that should be followed by others in order to make the representation at the General Assembly consistent with the provisions of the Charter. How could the Assembly admit into its membership those who daily violate the provisions of the Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? The argument that this matter should be looked upon in a legal or procedural context sacrifices human dignity for the sake of abiding by technicalities. The reference of this matter to the Security Council exposes the imperialistic intentions of certain Powers and unveils the organic relationship between them and the racist regime in South Africa. That, however, has not prevented the Assembly from stating its view with regard to this matter which is in itself a good start.
124.	As we await the completion of the liquidation of colonialism in the Portuguese colonies, we are concerned about a neighbor of Portugal which still occupies and dominates an African-Arab Territory. Spain's obstinate position regarding Sakiet Al-Hamra and Rio de Oro places that country on the list of the last of the old imperialistic Powers that have not yet come around to understanding the movement of history. Spain's insistence on adhering to that position is in contradiction to that movement. Any argument presented by Spain in defense of its presence in that region is nothing but a colonialist argument. The inhabitants of the region and their Arab brethren are capable of achieving their freedom and well-being; they are in no need of Spanish trusteeship or aid.
125.	A new world is emerging today. There can be no escape from the formulation of new bases comparable with this new beginning. The United Nations must become an effective instrument for the realization of its Charter. We the majority and we are proud of being a majority have the duty to lay new foundations for the course of the Organization. We shall not be intimidated by the stubborn attitude of the old Powers. Our interrelationships will not be affected by any willful mischief. In fact, we are terminating our relations with the old racist Powers in an effort to expel them from the Assembly Hall, while we welcome new delegations representing friendly countries.
126.	The new economic Powers have made continued sacrifices for the benefit of the world. They have never exploited the world. The old Powers, on the other hand, have failed to do anything to alleviate the calamities that befall the peoples of the world whom they continue to exploit. The peoples of the third world have never willfully destroyed their raw materials as did those advanced countries that burnt their grains at a time when people were perishing from starvation. The oil-producing countries have not consumed one third of the total production of the world's energy supply in extravagant and sophisticated luxuries as the privileged few have done. Rather, they produce their materials, export them and make them available for the world, and whatever revenues they get in return, they use for their own development. Whatever surplus remains, they share with fairness and dignity. It has not been couched in deceit or given as a bribe or used by their intelligence apparatus to topple legitimate Governments. The aid has been designed to give a hand to liberation movements, with an eye to ridding man of the scourge of colonialism, suppression and apartheid.
127.	The 80 per cent of the world's population that is the legitimate owner of most of the world's natural resources also has the legitimate right to discuss and administer its affairs. Now the road is clear, and we must march on despite the opposition of others.