Mr. President, I should first of all like to congratulate
you on your election to the Presidency of the fifty-fifth
session of the General Assembly. I wish you every
success in this task which is both difficult and
inspiring.
Allow me to include in this tribute the Secretary-
General who has a crucial role in promoting
international cooperation for peace, security, justice
and development in the world.
I fully associate myself with the speech made by
my French colleague, Mr. Hubert Vedrine, on behalf of
the European Union. His declaration covered quite
broadly European concerns regarding different regions
of the world and the crises they continue to experience.
Like my European colleagues, I will confine myself to
repeating the encouragements of the European Union
for the Israelis and Palestinians to seize this historic
opportunity now within their reach to conclude a
framework agreement in the coming weeks.
The new century is a blank page. It depends on us
and on our Organization to provide the appropriate
answers to the challenges inherited from the past
century. The Heads of State and Government who
gathered here for the Millennium Summit set forth the
objectives that will mobilize our energy for the coming
years. I will only mention three of our highest
priorities.
First, world peace. This is the primary
responsibility of the Security Council. It is therefore
essential to bring the ongoing reforms to a successful
conclusion and to improve the Council's legitimacy as
well as its representative character. To adapt the
Security Council to the evolution of the world is the
primary condition for its ability to respond to our
expectations. Belgium coordinates a group of ten small
and medium-sized countries in the quest for
constructive compromise formulas. Regarding the
enlargement of the Security Council, the creation of ten
new seats, five permanent and five non-permanent,
with an equitable geographical distribution, seems to us
to be a path worth exploring. As for the right of veto,
we have put forward a number of concrete and
moderate proposals seeking a voluntary and partial
limitation to the right of veto. Such a reform, a
balanced one along these lines and responding to the
wishes of most Member States can, and should make
significant progress in the months to come.
Secondly, the elimination of poverty and
attainment of sustainable development. The
globalization of the economy must proceed hand in
hand with job creation and economic take-off in the
poorest regions as well as with universally recognized
social and environmental norms. There is no more
denying that great inequalities, differences in
development, the lack of good governance and
disregard for human rights are factors which create
instability, both within States and among States in their
international relations.
Thirdly, the defence and promotion of democracy
and human rights. For us this requires equal
participation of men and women in public life and
decision-making, as well as the fight against all forms
of racism, intolerance, discrimination and xenophobia.
8

Serious violations of human rights and universal values
must therefore never be allowed to go unpunished.
This also implies a permanent quest for the
conditions, modalities and terms that underlie common
human values. Democracy  and on this at least we
should all agree  is much more than a statement of
fact regarding an established balance of power or an
arithmetic majority. It is a political morality that
includes loyal electoral behaviour. It is respect for, and
encouragement of the open expression of differing
points of view. It is a frame of mind based on a lofty
and optimistic conception of the human being.
I say this because, even at home in our old
European democracies which one would consider safe
and sheltered, we see reappearing the vile spectre of
rejection of differences, exclusion and xenophobic or
slanderous prejudice.
European parties are again raising and exalting
what is most sordid and most barbarous in human
nature. Saying nothing or resigning oneself to this fact
is tantamount to trivializing the phenomenon and
trivialization means corruption of the spirit.
I say this also because we must recognize that our
political systems, in theory well equipped to withstand
such assaults, unfortunately tend all too often to give in
to the temptation to minimalize them under the
specious invocation of so-called higher demands of
realpolitik.
It is not my purpose here to allege some moral
superiority but simply to remind ourselves that history
always exacts a price when one refuses to learn from
its lessons.
Belgium has participated over the past decade in
numerous peacekeeping operations under the auspices
of the United Nations, among others in Somalia,
Rwanda and in the Balkans.
Reviewing these experiences, the Belgian Senate
issued a detailed report in December 1997 containing
recommendations that prefigure, to some extent, the
recommendations contained in the Brahimi report. I
will point out a few aspects on which there is complete
convergence between the two reports.
First, United Nations forces must be prepared to
confront the worst case scenario. The Blue Helmets
must be trained, equipped and commanded for such an
eventuality.
Secondly, these forces must have at their disposal
all relevant information, as well as the capacity to
analyse such information in terms of strategy and
tactics, so they must be able to rely on an effective
intelligence capability.
Thirdly, troop-contributing countries must be
closely involved in the preparation of the mandates and
in the management of operations. The Assembly will
not be surprised to hear me plead for the
recommendations formulated in the Brahimi report to
receive wide support of all Member States. I hope that
all actors concerned  the Member States, the Security
Council and the Secretariat  prove their
determination and their will to extend reforms to all
levels and bodies of the Organization. I pledge the full
support of the Belgian Government to Deputy
Secretary-General Louise FrÈchette, who is responsible
for their implementation.
I would also like to point out that, in our opinion,
the conclusions of the Brahimi report cannot be
dissociated from other discussions to be held during the
fifty-fifth session, specifically those on the revision of
the scale of assessments for peacekeeping budgets. In
this regard as well, Member States will have to keep an
open mind in order to set up an equitable system of
financial burden sharing that is adapted to the current
shape of the world.
Another sensitive question manifests itself clearly
in the light of recent experiences, namely the proper
role of the United Nations in relation to regional
organizations, and indeed even in relation to the
initiatives of neighbouring States in a conflict zone.
Lessons to be learned from the Yugoslav crisis are not
the same as those that can be drawn from recent crises,
particularly those in Africa. The goal in this regard is
not to deny the merits of the regional approach. On the
contrary, Belgium supports the creation of regional
rapid reaction forces in the service of peacekeeping, as
was underlined one week ago by our Prime Minister,
Guy Verhofstadt, before this very body.
It has to do more with highlighting the fact that
the merits of the regional approach clearly can never
justify inaction on behalf of the international
community or some sort of oratory diplomacy that
passes off solving problems to regional bodies and
organizations or to temporary coalitions. The Security
Council, as the supreme authority in matters of peace
and security, must be able to play its role, although it
9

should certainly be possible to refer some tasks to
regional institutions most able to take action.
I would like to make one last observation
regarding preventive diplomacy and peacekeeping. The
arsenal at the disposal of the United Nations is not
limited to sending troops. Other means are available
and, moreover, have been used repeatedly during recent
years. I am referring to sanctions, and in particular to
economic sanctions. This type of coercive measure, if
applied by the Security Council in accordance to the
Charter, can indeed produce the results envisaged when
their use is well targeted and limited in time or when
they are inscribed in a realistic timeframe. But
experience also shows that when they are applied
indiscriminately or when they serve overtly ambitious
political objectives, their effectiveness tends to
decrease after a certain amount of time, and they may
even produce results wholly opposite to the ones
initially envisaged. It is increasingly rare for sanctions
to be an useful instrument. Too often, they only
penalize populations without reaching the targeted
rulers, who often understand how to exploit the
boomerang effect of such sanctions.
I would like to move now to a subject dear to my
heart, Central Africa. During the past year, my country
has expressed strongly its desire to be involved in, and
to contribute to, the mobilization of the international
community in support of the Lusaka peace process. It
is essential that all Congolese parties engage resolutely
and without preconditions in a dialogue, as they agreed
to do in Lusaka. It is equally essential that our
Organization and its Members who have the means to
do so support the rapid deployment of the United
Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic
Republic of the Congo (MONUC), even though some
of the conditions and modalities of that operation may
have to be reviewed in the light of the Brahimi report.
One thing is certain: without the presence of a
peacekeeping force there will be no peace. Nor will
there be peace, or even a permanent cessation of
hostilities, without a dialogue between the Congolese
parties. Both these questions are obviously linked. In
order to overcome the current impasse it is essential to
make progress where possible. It therefore seems to us
that the problem should not be stated in terms of
preconditions, order of events or priorities. In any
event, the responsibility of the Security Council and
the international community remain in place. Without a
political leap by the parties to the conflict, and without
the necessary material support of the international
community, the peace process is doomed to fail.
In Burundi, where action by the countries of the
region and the remarkable facilitation undertaken by
former Presidents Nyerere and Mandela have started to
yield promising yet still incomplete results, it is also
time for our Organization and the principal donor
countries to act to consolidate the gains achieved and
to set the country once and for all on the path to peace
and development. It is in this spirit that Belgium will
participate actively in the meeting organized by the
European Commission that is to be held in Brussels on
15 September to prepare for the donors' conference
soon to be convened by France on the request of
Nelson Mandela.
Regardless of how well-intentioned they may be,
efforts in the cause of peace can sometimes be to little
avail, given the greed and rivalries fuelled by the
illegal exploitation of local resources. Resources
attained in that way are financing wars, which
themselves become a source of profit. The problem of
the diamond trade in conflict areas is at the centre of
this question. We know that war diamonds represent
only a fraction of international trade, but these illegal
revenues nevertheless contribute to destabilizing the
situation, encourage the logic of war and spread
corruption and anarchy. Belgium is active in the efforts
to create a global system of verification. It is high time
indeed to put in place a realistic and effective legal
framework binding on everyone in order to regulate the
trade in diamonds.
I would now like to speak about non-proliferation
and disarmament. Last April, during the Review
Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Belgium intervened
vigorously to express its concerns regarding a certain
number of elements that could lead to the weakening or
putting into question the very foundation of the non-
proliferation regime negotiated in recent decades. We
certainly welcome the conclusions of the Conference
and the reflection that it triggered. That has led to a
favourable climate for the implementation of the plan
of action. That being said, numerous States still refuse
to adhere to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, while others
have not yet ratified the Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
We have followed closely, and with some
concern, the debate in the United States on anti-
ballistic defence. Belgium is not opposed in principle
10

to the idea of anti-missile defence. We are only stating
that the political perception, the analysis of the threat
and the means to counter it vary greatly from region to
region. There is no unique or universal response, but
what is essential is to make sure that an anti-missile
system, whatever it may be, should contribute to
general stability and to the consolidation of mutual
confidence. In other words, the decisions will have to
be taken not only on the basis of a strategic and
technical analysis, but also on a consensual basis that
builds upon the overall political and strategic balance.
We welcome the decision by the American
Administration to postpone its decision on the
launching of a programme. Besides the question of the
feasibility of such a programme, its unilateral nature
would have a negative impact on our common
disarmament objectives. We now hope that this
decision will encourage negotiations for a START III
agreement between the United States and Russia. Rapid
progress on a new, substantial reduction of strategic
nuclear arms could in turn lead to breaking the impasse
in negotiations for a fissile materials cut-off treaty at
the Disarmament Commission in Geneva.
Belgium also welcomes heartily the adherence to
date by 138 States to the Convention on the prohibition
of anti-personnel mines. Further efforts have to be
made in order to implement it and mobilize the
necessary funding to eliminate these especially
inhumane weapons forever.
I have dwelled mainly on peace and international
security. I would like to turn to the two other subjects
that Belgium considers a priority in the programme of
action of the Millennium Summit. Without these
priorities, our efforts in the field of security would be
fruitless. I am referring to universal respect for human
rights and worldwide development.
The protection of human rights is a leading
feature of my country's foreign policy. Our
participation in the Commission on Human Rights will
enable us to further enlarge our initiatives and our
political action. We will be able to act more directly in
the fields where we have a particular interest, such as
the fight against racism and xenophobia, and the rights
of the child. Belgium was actively involved in the
negotiation of the Optional Protocol to the Convention
on the Rights of the Child aimed at sparing children as
much as possible from the suffering and consequences
of armed conflict. The signing of that Protocol on the
occasion of the Millennium Summit, as well as our
country's signature of the second Protocol, on sexual
exploitation of children, are specific signs of our
common will to reinforce the protection of the rights of
the child.
I would like to reiterate my country's wish to see
the death penalty permanently abolished all over the
world. I also appeal to countries that are not in a
position to do so at this time to adopt a moratorium as
a transitional measure. We certainly cannot accept the
death penalty still being implemented in cases of those
who were minors at the time of the offence, pregnant
women or the mentally ill.
We are following very closely the evolution of
international law and jurisprudence aimed at
condemning persons convicted of crimes against
humanity. My country has been at the forefront of
national legislation in this context and hopes that these
measures can serve as a deterrent and an example for
other States. We have just ratified the Statute of the
International Criminal Court, and we are encouraging
other States to do the same in support of this important
commitment.
Let me say a few words on globalization and its
problems. Globalization is the expression of an
inevitable technological evolution. It makes little sense
to condemn this evolution as a whole, for it is natural
and has many positive effects, but we need to channel
its dynamics towards real economic and social progress
for the well-being of a larger number of people. But the
globalization of the economy and trade cannot simply
mean the renunciation of our political and institutional
responsibilities. The risk is very real. We are already
witnessing a form of abandonment of responsibilities in
the case of Governments and Parliaments confronted
by the gigantic challenges of globalization and the
almost impossible task of dealing with them at the
national level. In the absence of a really effective and
recognized global authority, the dynamics of
globalization could lead us into a political vacuum.
There will be no new economic world order without a
new political world order in which national democratic
institutions, politically representative and accountable,
can play a role. This is another challenge facing our
Organization and its Member States. We will have to
provide an answer in the new millennium.
The United Nations system is at the heart of the
issue of globalization, whose effects are becoming

more and more evident. Questions have been raised;
now it is time to find the answers. We are convinced
that only the United Nations system, with all its
spheres of activity, is in a position to harmonize global
economic development with human development.
Here, more than anywhere else, we realize that human
beings, wherever they come from, share a high degree
of common aspirations, as well as the same fears, the
same needs and the same dreams. This belief has to
guide us in all our actions, both here and at home.


Let me first welcome
Tuvalu as a new Member of the United Nations.
The current session of the General Assembly is
an important landmark for the international community.
We are still feeling the beat of the Millennium Summit.
Our crucial task now is to seek specific ways to
implement the provisions of its final Declaration.
In his address to the Summit, President
Alyaksandr Lukashenka of Belarus clearly defined an
ultimate objective, as we see it, for shaping the image
of the United Nations in the twenty-first century, which
is to meet the needs and aspirations of our respective
nations and seek practical opportunities for real
improvement of the quality of life of every single
individual. This is the imperative that reality has been
dictating to us. It is also the main thrust of the
Secretary-General's report (A/54/2000) “We, the
peoples: the role of the United Nations in the twenty-
first century”.
Belarus holds in high respect the unique historic
role played by the United Nations in international
developments of the second half of the twentieth
century. As can be seen from all the Organization's
previous experience, a stable, just and prosperous
world can only be attained on the basis of the sovereign
equality of States, their territorial integrity and political
independence, non-interference in their internal affairs
20

and respect for national traditions. Humanity has had to
confront conflict and humanitarian stress every time
those principles were disregarded. We believe that they
will continue to be of similar importance in the next
century.
Just as was the case 55 years ago, there is hardly
a more pressing task for the United Nations than the
maintenance of international peace. All Member States
have equal rights to peaceful and sustainable
development. Thus the security of no State, whether
small island country or super-Power, can be achieved
through disrespect for the interests of others.
The Republic of Belarus is committed to its
choice of a nuclear-weapon-free world. We believe in
the generosity and great meaning of the initiative by
the head of our State to establish a nuclear-weapon-free
space in Central and Eastern Europe. We are confident
that in due time this idea will receive a sufficient
number of proponents.
During this session Belarus has deposited its
instruments for ratification of the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and the additional Protocol to
the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, the
Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons. At the same time,
a continuing absence of visible consensus within the
United Nations on the key issues of the international
disarmament process is becoming a dismaying reality.
To exit this dead end would essentially require setting
priorities and embarking upon an active dialogue aimed
at achieving progress in both nuclear and conventional
disarmament. Five million victims over the past
decade — is this not serious enough to make real
action imperative?
It is crucial to maintain and consolidate the
strategic global parity built under the complex
conditions of the twentieth century. In this regard,
preservation of and respect for the Anti-Ballistic
Missile (ABM) Treaty is a logical basis for the
maintenance of international stability. Its violation
could result in an extremely dangerous disruption of
the established set of interdependent agreements in this
area. The Republic of Belarus will again sponsor the
resolution on the ABM Treaty during this session.
The time-span between the two most recent
sessions of the General Assembly has been marked by
the United Nations active involvement in the peaceful
settlement of disputes, post-conflict peace-building and
rehabilitation. We observe with satisfaction the actions
taken by the Security Council, more resolutely and
consistently than in the past, with respect to such
complex situations as conflicts in Sierra Leone, the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia and
Eritrea, Angola and East Timor. My country has been
following with hope the developments in the Middle
East. We believe that the withdrawal of Israeli troops
from Southern Lebanon and the Palestinian-Israeli
peace talks will favour the resolution of the crisis in the
region.
For over a quarter of a century attempts have
been made to break a stalemate in the settlement of the
Cyprus problem. It is crucial that the United Nations
continue its work to resolve this crisis on the basis of
the appropriate resolutions of the Security Council and
the General Assembly.
The development of specific preventive measures
for the elimination of root causes of potential conflicts
should be the focus of United Nations attention in the
near future. It is important to make irreversible the
growing trend in international efforts to define
universal mechanisms and specify practical measures
of conflict prevention and crisis management. The
activities of the Panel of experts headed by
Ambassador Brahimi, in addition to the upcoming
Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and
Light Weapons in All Its Aspects, are an important
contribution thereto.
As the Secretary-General has rightly observed,
the very credibility of the Organization as regards
playing a decisive role in the war and peace process is
at stake. In this respect, the Republic of Belarus has
been and remains firmly committed to the preservation
of the primary role played by the Security Council in
decision-making on actions to avert threats to peace
and security. Viewed from that perspective, further
improvement in the working methods of the Council
and reform of its membership on the basis of equitable
geographic representation are not merely an important
task, but a pressing imperative.
Belarus reconfirms its determination to
constructively contribute to the activities of the
Council should my country be elected as a non-
permanent member for the period 2002-2003.
The tremendous benefits of globalization will be
reduced to nothing unless there is a clear understanding
of the dire need for the international community to
learn a common language — that is, the language of
21

law. In recent years we have witnessed practical
demonstrations of situations in which even the slightest
deviation from internationally accepted norms would
inevitably present an extreme danger not only for the
violators themselves, but also for the entire
international community. It is an encouraging fact that
since its outset the United Nations has gained
significant potential by accumulating all the far-
reaching ideas, hopes and aspirations of humankind for
building a better world.
Implementing the norms of international law at
the national level should become a priority for the
United Nations and its partners. Today my country is a
party to the United Nations most important conventions
and treaties. The establishment of a legislative model
based on the United Nations Charter and international
treaties and conventions, complemented by national
legislation, is the objective we must all strive for.
The stability of the interdependent world is
hardly attainable when the system of international
politics is perceived solely as the domination of one
State or interaction among separate groups of States.
Differences in social and economic advancement will
persist for a long time. Therefore, in a globalizing
world the United Nations should play a more active
role in promoting the economic development and social
progress of all countries.
Belarus supports a sharper focus in international
efforts on the problems of the developing countries,
particularly in Africa. We also deem it expedient to
take into account the needs of countries with
economies in transition, which would by no means
soften the focus on the problems of the developing
world. We see no contradiction in such an interlinkage,
as appropriate goals and objectives to this end could
only be formulated jointly with the United Nations.
The Republic of Belarus shares the apprehensions
expressed by many States over the environmental
future of our planet. In this regard, we perceive as
highly indicative the debates at the Millennium Summit
and at the Summit meeting of the Security Council.
Belarus has signed and ratified a number of important
international agreements in the area of environmental
protection, including the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on
Biological Diversity.
Against this background, we continue to be
acutely sensitive to the ever-diminishing interest by the
international community in the Chernobyl disaster, the
world's largest technological catastrophe of the past
century, to which Belarus fell a major victim. In this
regard, I should like to quote once more from the
address by the President of our country at the
Millennium Summit:
“Without awareness of our joint responsibility for
preserving the common human environment, all
discussions of a fair distribution of the benefits
and disadvantages of globalization will remain
just shallow talk.” (A/55/PV.4)
We are confident that the United Nations, which has so
far contributed significantly to assisting our people in
the relevant area, will be in a position to find new
sources and mechanisms to help Belarus overcome the
Chernobyl tragedy.
The ideas of democracy and respect for human
rights can certainly play a key role in continuous
human development in the twenty-first century. Yet to
make this goal attainable, it is essential to relinquish
attempts to use those principles to discriminate among
peoples and “punish” unwelcome States and
Governments. Regrettably, we must note a certain
involvement by the United Nations in efforts to
establish a “club of countries of advanced democracy”
on the basis of some random criteria. It is inadmissible
that the idea of the forum of new and restored
democracies approved within our Organization should
lead to the separation of peoples into teachers and
pupils.
The principle standpoint of Belarus on this issue
is the following: a truly democratic world can only be
based on an equal dialogue among different
civilizations.
This year is of special significance to the
development of democracy in my country.
Parliamentary elections due in October will be held in
full conformity with democratic standards. We have
invited international observers to monitor the elections
and look forward to seeing them carried out and
contributing in real terms to democratic development in
Belarus.
Each session of the United Nations General
Assembly is a milestone in the evolution of the United
Nations itself and the development of the system of
international politics as a whole. In that sense, the
current session has been endowed with very special
22

powers. It is up to us all to determine how much the
United Nations will be able to show that the hopes and
aspirations of our nations at the dawn of the new
century were justified. In the discharge of these noble
duties, the international community can invariably
count on a due contribution by the Republic of Belarus.


Still fresh in our minds is
the strong plea made by the leaders of the world at
their historic meeting on the eve of this fifty-fifth
Assembly for a universal recommitment to
multilateralism and to the purposes and principles of
the United Nations. Their Declaration at the Summit's
end was unanimous and unambiguous. Humanity's
future lies in the hands of this Organization and its
ability to create a new global order for the promotion
of peace and development. It is a conclusion which the
Assembly must take to heart if it is to fulfil this urgent
mandate.
I am confident that our task will be facilitated by
our President's skilful direction. Coming from Finland,
a country that has been forged by history on the anvil
of political, economic and social endurance, he will
undoubtedly bring to bear on our deliberations a sense
of purpose and urgency. In congratulating him on his
election, Guyana pledges a readiness to cooperate to
make this Assembly abundantly successful.
My delegation also offers its appreciation and
thanks to His Excellency Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab for the
able leadership he provided the fifty-fourth General
Assembly.
Our gratitude is also due to Secretary-General
Kofi Annan, who continues to manage the Organization
with a sure and steady hand. The report that he
submitted to the Assembly, “We the peoples — the role
of the United Nations in the twenty-first century”,
amply addresses the many important challenges that lie
ahead of us. It is well worth our study to see what
measures the Assembly can take to promote global
peace and development through strengthening of the
Organization.
As the report demonstrates, a high level of
tension now exists in the governance of the global
economy. While it has been generally acknowledged
that markets offer opportunities for growth and
development, there is still the caveat against excessive
reliance on them. As many developing countries have
discovered, the market is often blind to their particular
circumstances and needs. Their concerns have raised
serious questions about the fairness of the trading
system, leading to much public protest, as was
dramatically expressed in Seattle and almost every city
where the Bretton Woods institutions and the World
Trade Organization (WTO) have tried to hold meetings.
The message is clear: the international
community must find a consensus on ways and means
to ensure more democratic governance in international
affairs so that the developing countries can have a
greater say in shaping their own future.
The gap between the richest and poorest countries
has widened so dramatically during recent years that
strong and urgent action must be taken to avoid a major
human disaster. For most developing countries such as
my own, a scarcity of financial and human resources
places serious constraints on the policy options they
are able to exercise. Despite the fact that many have
embraced market-based reforms and democratic
governance, they have had limited success in
improving the socio-economic conditions of their
people.
Their efforts to undertake important reforms and
to lift themselves up by their boot-straps have been
rewarded by a denial of much-needed assistance to
sustain the progress achieved. The hostile international
environment in which they find themselves not only
21

frustrates their economic and social development but
also renders the strengthening of the democratic
process extremely difficult.
Thus, while globalization has benefited strong
economies, it has weakened many developing countries
and forced them into the backwaters of development.
Severe economic and social dislocation has followed in
many cases, accentuating the particular vulnerabilities
of small economies, many of which are often
dependent on a single agriculture crop for the
livelihood of their peoples. While the proponents of
economic liberalization contend that the market offers
“a level playing field”, they conveniently forget and
fail to realize that the players are not equally matched
and that the rules of the game are stacked in favour of
the strong. The weak can hardly compete and are
eventually marginalized. Indeed, it is a zero-sum game,
where both winners and losers are known in advance.
The majority of developing countries continue to
be crippled by weak infrastructure such as roads,
communications and other physical requirements and
the inadequacy of skilled labour to take advantage of
opportunities in the market. Moreover, they must face
not only high production costs but also low prices and
inadequate access to markets. Trade liberalization has
also led to a rapid growth in imports by developing
countries, while their own exports remain sluggish and
their trade deficit widens. In the process, Governments
lose much-needed revenues from duties and taxes,
which hitherto made an appreciable contribution to the
national budget.
Meanwhile, official development assistance has
fallen to its lowest since the target of 0.7 per cent of
Gross National Product (GNP) was established by the
United Nations in 1970. Only four countries —
Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden —
have reached the mark. On average, developed
countries contribute less than a third of this target
figure, with the richest countries contributing even less.
Assistance is now apparently seen by some as both
wasteful and wasted, a perception which may serve to
explain this rapid decline. Yet for many of the poor
developing countries, such assistance is indispensable
if they are to improve their economic performance. To
make matters worse, they find it difficult without the
requisite technology and human resource base to attract
foreign direct investment, which is increasingly
concentrated in a small number of emerging
economies.
The challenge facing the international community
and policy-makers in the new millennium, therefore, is
to redress these inequities in the global economy in a
comprehensive and sustainable manner so as to ensure
the smooth integration of developing countries, in
particular the smaller economies, into the globalizing
world economy. Developing countries are not asking
for charity — merely the opportunity to develop their
potential and to take their rightful place in the
international community. As they have said, they
recognize their primary responsibility for their own
development. They ask only for assistance in creating a
domestic environment that will enable them to
participate fairly in the global economy.
A helpful measure would be to integrate
transition periods into current economic models and
make provisions for targeted assistance to small
economies. Another would be to provide significant
debt relief and debt cancellation as necessary, together
with development assistance to boost the overall
productive capability of developing countries.
Developed countries could also assist in
promoting regional integration, as well as South-South
cooperation, to allow developing countries to benefit
from the many complementarities that they possess.
Equally indispensable is the provision of new and
additional resources through the establishment of a
global development fund that would help to bridge the
gap between the developed and developing worlds. An
action-oriented programme, somewhat along the lines
of the post-Second World War Marshall Plan, is
necessary to achieve meaningful progress.
Policies aimed merely at creating unsustainable
social safety nets are hardly lasting solutions. The root
causes of the social and endemic problems of the
developing countries, which ultimately lead to global
instability, must be addressed. To this end, we must
find a way to direct aid and investment into building
capital, both human and physical. We cannot speak
seriously of closing the digital divide in an
environment in which many Governments are
struggling to meet even the most basic needs of their
populations and where degraded infrastructure does not
support a “communications revolution”.
In this context, we have noted the Secretary-
General's initiative to forge a global compact between
the United Nations, the private sector and non-
governmental organizations in an effort to maximize
22

the development effort. Such a strategic alliance can
indeed enhance cooperation on a wide array of global
issues, including aid, trade and investment, and
protection of the environment as well as satisfy urgent
education, health and housing needs. To succeed,
however, such a compact must be based on mutual
understanding and respect through a clear definition of
the respective roles of the partners. There must be
common objectives and agendas, as well as a clear
definition of the roles of each partner.
Finally, the international community, and more
particularly the developed North, must recognize the
close link between freedom from want and freedom
from fear — between development, peace and stability.
At the national level, we know that good governance
must be practised to ensure that the population are
protected from all forms of oppression and allowed to
enjoy their inalienable human rights. Correspondingly,
at the international level, the principles of the Charter,
as well as the laws which we, as civilized nations, have
come to accept, must be respected to provide an
environment conducive to development.
In chapter IV of his report the Secretary-General
remarks:
“Economic globalization has largely eliminated
the benefits of territorial acquisition, while the
destructiveness of modern warfare has increased
its costs.” (A/54/2000, para. 192)
This lesson must be learned by States which, despite
their professed commitment to the Charter, often resort
to various forms of coercion in international relations.
The United Nations, and more particularly the Security
Council, should not — and, indeed, must not —
tolerate such actions. All disputes must be resolved
through peaceful means.
While many of the proposals made by the
Secretary-General in his report will undoubtedly help
to contain the threats to peace and development in the
twenty-first century, we rather fear that they will be
insufficient to meet our requirements if they are
pursued in a piecemeal fashion without a more
comprehensive and holistic framework. It is for this
reason that Guyana sought the inclusion on this year's
agenda of an item on promoting a new global human
order. Time does not allow me to provide the details of
this initiative. However, so that the concept may be
more fully understood and widely supported, I have
asked that, along with copies of my statement, an
explanatory memorandum outlining the aim of our
proposal be circulated. Very shortly we will also make
available a more extensive document that could serve
as the basis for discussion in plenary session. It is our
hope that out of this consideration will emerge a
resolution that expresses the determination of the
international community to find a consensus on the
way forward to securing global peace and
development.
The time is now opportune, I believe, for us to
summon up our collective political will to devise a
common and cogent strategy for managing the global
agenda in the twenty-first century. Should we fail to
heed this imperative, we will continue to plough the
sea and reap only disillusionment and despair. This
Millennium Assembly affords us a singular opportunity
to define the terms and conditions of a new global
partnership. Let us not waste it in futile debate, but,
rather, use it to give new hope to our peoples for a
better future.


May
I first, on behalf of our Minister for Foreign Affairs,
who could not be here, on behalf of my delegation and
on my own behalf, join previous speakers in extending
to the President our heartfelt congratulations on his
election to preside over the fifty-fifth session.
In addition, I congratulate his eminent
predecessor, Mr. Theo-Ben Gurirab, and the Secretary-
General, Mr. Kofi Annan, on the quality and great
quantity of activities carried out during the recent
Summit.
I also take this opportunity to congratulate and
welcome Tuvalu, the 189th Member of our
Organization. We hope that other potential Members,
such as Western Sahara in Africa, will soon be able to
join us.
The Millennium Summit — in which the Head of
State of Rwanda, Mr. Paul Kagame participated —
evaluated the twentieth century and formulated
recommendations for enhancing the work of the
Organization in the twenty-first century, now
beginning. As a number of speakers emphasized, the
twentieth century was the era both of great and
unprecedented technological triumphs and of crises as
great as the new means of destruction.
The distressing feature of the First and Second
World Wars was that they made use of the advanced
technologies of the late nineteenth century and the first
half of the twentieth century to cause enormous human
and material devastation. In 1918 and again in 1945 all
humanity was overwhelmed by the terrifying
consequences of a world war. “No more wars leading
to the loss of millions of human lives”; “No more
genocide”: these were the calls of the founding
countries of the United Nations when they met in San
Francisco in October 1945.
Today, as in the past, the international community
finds itself reliving horrors that it thought it had
banished for ever, horrors that include the genocide in
Rwanda in 1994. It certainly was not a lack of
theoretical principles of public morality or
international law that contributed to preventing or
stopping this genocide. These principles had even been
greatly strengthened in 1948 by the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, and had been widely
diffused throughout the world by many organizations
that took up the banner of human rights.
2

The Brahimi report (A/55/305) was needed. We
welcome its conclusions and recommendations, and
take this occasion to warmly congratulate our
Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, on having
commissioned it and the two others that preceded it:
the Srebrenica report and the courageous Carlsson
report. Our Organization had its failures, but the
Brahimi report tells us that we can do better in the
future. To miss this unique opportunity to reflect on
what must be done, and how, would be to renounce our
responsibilities and the principles and values expressed
in the Charter of our Organization. Another Rwanda or
Srebrenica would disgrace us all.
Undoubtedly, we must look elsewhere for the true
source of the problem. It is surprising that even today
countries that claim to embrace human rights are
delaying and using pretexts to block prosecution of the
authors of the genocide. There are even some who —
afraid to accept or think about what happened — refer
to this genocide as what happened in Rwanda in 1994,
being afraid even to think about it. To take just one
example, I refer to the observations of Minister Yerodia
Ndombasi on 16 September.
In sum, my delegation calls on the international
community to draw every possible lesson from the
genocide committed in our country, so that “Never
again such a human tragedy” ceases to be an empty
phrase. Much more urgent is the question of assistance
to Rwanda for rebuilding and making good the huge
material and moral damage caused by the 1994
genocide. Such assistance was recommended in the
reports of the Independent Inquiry set up by the United
Nations and of the Organization of African Unity's
international panel of eminent persons. All the
members of the international community represented
here can help Rwanda rebuild and develop. And each
time we wish to do more for the Organization and
humanity let the Brahimi report serve as a source of
inspiration.
I take this opportunity to salute the Security
Council discussions of 15 April, when the
recommendations of the Carlsson report were
considered and the Council was urged to use its
influence to ensure that they were effectively followed
up by other United Nations institutions and agencies,
including the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), from which we are awaiting special
assistance as part of the development assistance
programme for Rwanda. We venture to hope that the
reforms under way at UNDP will lead to the provision
of assistance based on a sincere and enthusiastic
partnership according to the British model eloquently
outlined by Prime Minister Tony Blair during the
Millennium Summit. It is a partnership steeped in
equality, justice and fraternal solidarity for all. We
invite all our partners to embrace this initiative, in their
relations not only with Rwanda, but with all the other
developing countries — especially the former colonies.
The reports that I have mentioned also justly call
on the international community — beyond contributing
to the task of overcoming the devastating effects of
genocide — to contribute vigorously to preventing this
crime against humanity, in particular by suppressing it.
Those who hide, protect and advocate for the criminals
responsible for the 1994 genocide should think twice
before persisting in this evil behaviour.
I now come to the Congolese crisis, certain
aspects of which can be seen as an extension of the
genocide committed in Rwanda in 1994. It is worth
recalling that after their defeat and withdrawal many
militia members and former Rwandan soldiers who
were authors of the genocide took refuge in what is
now the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Not only
were these former soldiers and militia members not
disarmed at the time, but they have benefited from new
military equipment and training, allowing them to
commit acts of genocide along the borders and prepare
for a repetition of the previous widespread genocide
campaign. Is this not sufficient reason to ask a
responsible Government to act to preserve the
sovereignty of its country and the security of its
people? The Assembly can well understand that this is
hardly a case of a security pretext, but, rather, of a
current reality.
The plan for a massive invasion by the genocidal
forces was thwarted in November 1996 — thank
God — by the forces of the Rwandan Patriotic Army.
But from May 1997 to August 1998 it was necessary to
once again repel infiltrations from the Congo and to
resist other acts of genocide committed in the north-
western part of our country. The horrors of this
rebellion have been the source of a number of
resolutions, but the world seems to have rapidly
forgotten them.
It is in this context that our country now has a
military presence in the Congo — a presence whose
only purpose is to prevent a recurrence of genocide in
3

Rwanda by the same Interahamwe militia and soldiers
of the previous regime. We have more or less
succeeded in achieving our objectives. Since 1998 we
have captured many soldiers of the previous regime
and Interahamwe militia, contrary to what Minister
Yerodia Ndombasi told the Assembly on 16 September.
Most of these soldiers — there are many of them —
have rejoined the army. We are continuing to hold 135
of them while they await a decision.
We have also succeeded in saving some of the
Interahamwe and the soldiers of the former regimes, as
well as innocent civilians who had been held hostage
during all this time for purely military and political
purposes. In the category of liberated hostages, 12,000
were repatriated since August 1998, and the process
continues. We have established centres to receive them
on our borders with the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, and several humanitarian organizations,
including the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), have also been
involved. This is a secret to no one, and it has been
documented by the UNHCR at Goma and Gisenyi.
Those who are against our successes say that these
people are Congolese citizens that we have forced into
exile in Rwanda, because their departure has created a
vacuum in the operations of the allies of these forces of
genocide. They are our citizens, and no one can claim
to love them as much as we do. They are at home,
awaiting the others with open arms.
My Government welcomed the signing of the
Lusaka agreements in July 1999 and still upholds them.
Their main principles are, first, that the inter-
Congolese political negotiations should lead to a new
political order in the Democratic Republic of the
Congo; and, secondly, that the armed groups should be
pursued and disarmed, including former Rwanda
military and the Interahamwe authors of the 1994
genocide, who are still attempting to continue their
misdeeds, encouraged by certain of our Congolese
brothers who go so far as to deny their presence on
Congolese territory with the sole purpose of vilifying
us, to judge by the statement by Minister Yerodia
Ndombasi last Saturday.
The Rwanda delegation deplores the Kinshasa
Government's recently calling into question these same
agreements, despite the fact that they are upheld by all
the countries concerned of the subregion, the
Organization of African Unity and the Security
Council. Just before that, the Congolese Government
had created controversy by refusing to authorize the
free movement of United Nations military observers;
and that free movement would not be possible outside
those agreements, to which that country is a party.
As far as Rwanda is concerned, we believe that,
at this time, the Lusaka agreements constitute the only
framework that will guarantee a lasting peace in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo and in the
subregion. Any other approach in this matter would run
the risk of dangerously jeopardizing the peace process
now under way.
Furthermore, the slowness and hesitations
observed in our Organization regarding the deployment
of the forces of the United Nations Mission in the
Congo must be reviewed, and advantage must be taken
of the current offers to strengthen the presence of the
United Nations in the zones evacuated by the signatory
parties of the Lusaka agreements. Any attempt to
reduce the force would only lead to the kind of
catastrophe from which the Brahimi report tries to
spare us.
I should like to take this opportunity to commend
the growing role of regional and subregional
organizations in resolving conflicts. As is well known,
such a positive involvement has already led to
considerable results in various parts of the world,
including in South-East Asia and Western Africa. It is
our hope that the United Nations will adopt a similar
approach to regional contributions to its machinery for
conflict resolution.
If the question of conflicts in the world continues
to be one of the major preoccupations of our
Organization, it would no doubt be a good idea to pay
special attention to their prevention. This requires
being attentive to the efforts made to eradicate, or at
least attenuate, the root causes of conflicts, both
domestic and external.
With respect to Rwanda, the halting of the 1994
genocide was followed by courageous policies inspired
by the tragic lessons of our recent history. These
policies were translated into the following actions for
and factors of national reconciliation, as follows:
In July 1994, a Government of National Unity
and a Parliament were established including all the
components of the Rwanda population and all the
political circles of the country. This was an integrative
approach such as had never before been known in
4

independent Rwanda, despite the linguistic, socio-
cultural and historical advantages that militate in its
favour.
The policy of exclusion, which lasted more than
30 years in all sectors of national life, from education
to employment, was eliminated. We are pleased to have
abolished, 60 years after its introduction, the
identification card, which categorized people according
to their ethnic origin and their place of origin and on
the basis of which decisions were taken to kill people
or to spare their lives.
A skilled, professional national army was
established, including the forces of the Rwandan
Patriotic Army, which liberated the country, as well as
a portion of the forces of the former regime that had
separated themselves from the perpetrators of
genocide. We welcome their bravery and their
discipline. The United Nations needs troops of this
type for difficult operations in Sierra Leone and
elsewhere.
In March 1999 the National Commission on
Human Rights and the Commission for Unity and
National Reconciliation were established.
The judicial system was rehabilitated, which
guarantees the independence of the magistrature. This
judicial system has been strengthened by a form of
justice called gachacha, which, while keeping to
international judicial norms, will benefit from major
inputs of the population at the early stages of a trial.
This will have the advantage of accelerating the
prosecution of those accused of genocide.
In two and a half years more than 3 million
refugees have been repatriated. This is all the more
striking since Rwanda's refugee problem, having lasted
for more than 30 years, is the most numerous and
longest-standing in Africa. At present the only ones
remaining outside the country are families of criminals
responsible for genocide and some refugees whom
Rwanda wants to repatriate, but who are still being
manipulated by those criminals. Our head of State
asked them to return in his inaugural statement at the
Supreme Court, and some of them have begun to come
back voluntarily to the country.
Democratic elections were held last year.
Following the upcoming local elections, they will be
completed in October. These are orientations that today
guide the policy of unity and national reconciliation,
the need for which became clear after the genocide of
1994.
Beyond the eradication of genocide, there are
many challenges that deserve the attention of the
international community at the beginning of the new
millennium. These relate to the gaps between
developing countries and prosperous countries in the
context of globalization, the reform of the United
Nations system and many other current problems, such
as the spread of AIDS.
With respect to the gap between developing
countries and prosperous countries, the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries saw gaps between industrialized
countries and poor countries grow even wider. This
resulted from technology as well as from political and
commercial inequalities left over from the colonial era.
After independence many development proposals were
made, such as the provision of 0.7 per cent of gross
national product for development assistance,
technology transfers, a new international economic
order favouring fair remuneration for commodities, and
so on.
All these strategies have been the subject of a
number of international conferences. None of them has
been implemented sustainably or consistently. Some of
them have remained theoretical and have not even
begun to be implemented as programmes. But it is
never too late.
For some time now, we have been in an age of
globalization of economies in the context of structural
gaps that have not changed much since the sixties. My
delegation would like to emphasize the urgent need for
the preliminary adoption of certain measures to
facilitate the establishment of machinery for efficient
globalization. Is there any need to recall that the
external debt of developing countries constitutes, in
and of itself, a real handicap to their economic
recovery? How can one talk about growth in a context
where external debt absorbs 60 per cent or more of the
export income of these same developing countries?
What will be the result of globalization in an
environment where the competition of market
economies reduces in advance the role of certain parts
of the world to that of eternal consumers, with the
monopoly on production elsewhere? These are all
questions that deserve urgent answers and solidarity on
the part of the international community.
5

My delegation believes more particularly that the
success of globalization requires courageous
accompanying measures, such as eliminating the debt
for poor countries and providing support for economic
integration policies, in particular in Africa. This
requires our world Organization to endow itself with
machinery that can help to guide globalization.
For some time now, the United Nations has
rightly been concerning itself, at the highest level, with
the reform of the functioning of its structures. This is
an urgent matter, as it affects what is at stake for the
future and even the survival of all of humankind, which
can no longer be managed in the same spirit and with
the same structures as 55 years ago. We should
remember that the number of Member States has
increased from 51 in 1954 to 189 today; that is an
irrefutable argument for democratization. In this same
context, Africa, which has 10 times as many Member
States in the United Nations as it did when the
Organization was founded, must occupy the place it
deserves in the major decision-making bodies of the
United Nations, such as the Security Council and
others. The Bretton Woods institutions must also
change their character and behaviour if globalization
and equity are to be real and consistent.
In conclusion, I would like to speak about that
other challenge for our times: the AIDS pandemic. This
disease is currently responsible for the loss of more
human lives that the most deadly wars. The people of
the poorest countries are the most vulnerable in the
face of this disease of the century. The delegation of
Rwanda would like, from this rostrum, to make an
urgent appeal to the international community to show
solidarity in the face of the threat of extinction of the
human race that AIDS represents. Put simply, taking
AIDS lightly trivializes the crime of genocide. Both are
exterminating people and should be combated with
vigour and determination.
More specifically, aid should be provided for
humanitarian — if for no other — reasons, so that the
least developed countries can benefit from the most up-
to-date medicines, at affordable prices, that can provide
relief from people suffering from AIDS and do all that
they can to contain this scourge.
Furthermore, my delegation is convinced that an
effort to mobilize the greatest possible financial
resources would enable scientific research to take place
to bring this disease, and others, such as malaria, which
are devastating a large part of the population, under
control.
We hope that the twenty-first century, which is
just beginning, will usher in a world of peace and
solidarity that will meet the greatest aspirations of
humanity.


I congratulate the
President on behalf of the Botswana delegation on his
election to lead the fifty-fifth session of the General
Assembly. He can count on our support as he
discharges his onerous responsibilities during this
historic session and in the year that lies ahead.
I also take great pleasure in saluting my brother
and colleague, the outgoing President, Mr. Theo-Ben
Gurirab, for his outstanding leadership of the fifty-
fourth session of the General Assembly — the last
session of the twentieth century — and for steering it
to a successful conclusion.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan has continued to
give a good accounting of himself as the chief
executive of this, our United Nations. We owe him a
debt of gratitude for the manner in which he has,
without fear or favour, led the United Nations during
the past four years.
Five years ago, in this very Hall, we celebrated
the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the United
Nations. On that historic occasion, the former President
12

of the Republic of Botswana, Sir Ketumile Masire, had
this to say about the United Nations:
“The United Nations has served us well.
Small States such as my own have found in the
United Nations a vital forum for collective
bargaining. It has contributed to the advancement
of international cooperation in solving economic,
social, cultural and humanitarian problems. It is a
centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in
the attainment of these common ends.”
(A/50/PV.37, p. 3)
Botswana's faith in and commitment to the
United Nations remains undiminished, and we are here
on the eve of the new millennium to renew that faith
and to reaffirm that commitment.
The United Nations begins the new millennium
heavily laden with the residual problems of the
outgoing century. Even as we meet here, bloody
conflicts of varying degrees of intensity and savagery
are ravaging societies in many places around the globe.
Endemic poverty holds sway in the developing world,
in contrast with the lavish opulence of the West.
Diseases, the most virulent of which is the devastating
HIV/AIDS pandemic, have continued to cause untold
misery all over the world, particularly in sub-Saharan
Africa. All these problems pose a serious challenge to
the United Nations and to the international community
as a whole. The character of the twenty-first century
will no doubt be determined by our ability and
commitment to face this challenge.
On the African continent, the struggle for peace
and against war remains an all-consuming
preoccupation. The agendas of the United Nations
Security Council and the Organization of African Unity
(OAU) attest to this vexing state of affairs. All the
efforts of the leaders of Central and southern Africa,
which a little more than a year ago produced the
Lusaka Agreement aimed at bringing peace to the war-
torn region of Central Africa, have thus far come to
naught. There is no peace in the region because the
Agreement remains unimplemented even as the parties
have continued to profess their fidelity to it.
The United Nations now has the authorization of
the Security Council to deploy more than 5,000
observers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to
monitor the ceasefire and pave the way for the
deployment of a full-fledged peacekeeping force in the
near future.
A crucial element of the Lusaka Agreement,
among others, is that there must be dialogue in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, among the people
of that country, if the international efforts spearheaded
by the United Nations and the OAU aimed at creating
conditions for national reconciliation in that country
are to bear fruit. Regrettably, there is no dialogue in
process in that country, although a facilitator has been
in place for nine months.
We hope the Congolese leaders will soon realize
that without the implementation in full of the Lusaka
Agreement, their country will be bereft of any hope for
peace. There may be no second chance. The Lusaka
Agreement is their only salvation.
The leaders of Burundi, next door to the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, recently gathered
in Arusha, United Republic of Tanzania, to make peace
under the facilitation of the former President of the
Republic of South Africa, Mr. Nelson Mandela. Their
gathering in Arusha attracted the presence of leaders
from near and far, including the President of the United
States of America, Mr. Bill Clinton.
Regrettably, the peace agreement reached was
embraced by some and denigrated by others, which
does not augur well for peace in Burundi. It is our
fervent hope that those who have not embraced the
Arusha peace agreement will do so. In having President
Mandela as Facilitator, the people of Burundi could not
have been more fortunate — and for the second time.
Before President Mandela, it was the late
President Mwalimu Nyerere, may his soul rest in
peace, who gave so much of himself for peace in
Burundi. Burundi may not be so fortunate a third time.
On that occasion, President Clinton had this to say: “So
I plead with you: you have to help your children
remember their history, but you must not force them to
relive their history.” Burundi would do well to heed
these words and save its children from the scourge of
endemic conflict.
The Great Lakes region of Central Africa needs
peace. The neighbours of the Democratic Republic of
the Congo and Burundi, all of them, will not have
peace so long as carnage continues in their backyard.
Angola will not have peace so long as its neighbours to
the north are strife-torn.
The United Nations is making steady progress in
Sierra Leone, following initial mishaps which
13

threatened to reduce this Organization to an object of
ridicule. The size of the United Nations force in that
small country should be enough to frustrate the
murderous activities of the bandits of the
Revolutionary United Front (RUF). In the final
analysis, however, the future stability of Sierra Leone
cannot be imposed by the United Nations or even,
indeed, by the Economic Community of West African
States. It is the people of Sierra Leone themselves who
must embrace the logic of peace through national
dialogue and reconciliation.
The silence of the guns in the Horn of Africa in
the tragic war between Eritrea and Ethiopia could not
have been more welcome. The region has more than
enough problems without endless war. Famine is
stalking the area, evoking earlier episodes of human
devastation, particularly in Ethiopia and Somalia. In
peace, it is hoped the international community will be
able to assist the affected areas without hindrance. Our
hearts and best wishes go out to the people of Somalia
in their difficult endeavour to restore normalcy to their
fractured country. We hope the new central authority
they have established will be respected by all the
parties in the country.
The struggle for peace in Africa, if it is to be
successful, must be prosecuted on two fronts —
political and economic. On both fronts, I can assure
this Assembly that Africa is not a hopeless continent,
as some of our detractors would have the world
believe.
The Secretary-General's seminal report on the
causes of conflict in Africa has not fallen on deaf ears.
Our continent has been changing for the better for
some time now. Changing democratically elected
governments by unconstitutional means, whatever the
reason, is no longer tolerated. Coup makers are no
longer welcome in the councils of the OAU. We have
come to accept that good governance and the rule of
law, far from being regarded as sinister neo-colonialist
concepts as some may wish to stigmatize them, simply
mean accountability and transparency on the part of
those who are entrusted with the responsibility of
running the affairs of their nations. They mean
cultivating a culture of incorruptibility, openness and
tolerance.
On the economic front, I cannot gainsay the
obvious fact that people cannot eat democracy or good
governance. Democracy in an environment
characterized by abject poverty and ignorance is an
endangered species. Africa needs investment and aid to
buttress its democratization process. The challenge
facing the United Nations in the new century is
therefore to strive to ensure that Africa's difficult
renaissance is not simply encouraged but also
supported in material ways.
The western world would do well not simply to
shout at Africans, to pontificate about human rights
and good governance and deprecate the continent's
civil wars and endemic instability, from the privileged
comfort of Western Europe and North America.
Africans need and deserve hands-on solidarity and
constructive engagement with the developed world if
they are to succeed in their struggle for peace and
development.
Let me state the obvious. Small States like my
own derive a sense of security from our membership in
the United Nations. The United Nations is our shield
against the vagaries and predatory nature of world
politics. That is why we have been unstinting in the
fulfilment of our obligations to the Organization. We
pay our dues to the Organization without fail. We have
participated in its peacekeeping activities. And we have
defended it against its many detractors.
It is no secret, however, that this United Nations
to which we all habitually profess our unflinching
commitment and devotion is perpetually tottering on
the brink of insolvency. This is unfortunately so, even
as we equally habitually burden the Organization with
escalating tasks for it to perform on a shoestring
budget. The Secretary-General is right in challenging
us, the Member States, to hold one another responsible
for the financial difficulties faced by the United
Nations. We alone can resolve these difficulties. We
must honour our Charter obligations and do so without
conditions.
We must strengthen the United Nations in order
to secure our future, the future of mankind. We must
continually reform the Organization to adapt it to the
realities of the post-cold-war world and the new
millennium. A crucial part of this reform and
adaptation is the reconfiguration of the Security
Council, on which there is sufficient consensus in our
United Nations family. The Council needs a heavy dose
of democratization and accountability; about this, there
is no dissension.
14

We must strengthen the peacekeeping arm of the
United Nations to make good or deliver on our
Charter's pledge “to save succeeding generations from
the scourge of war ...”. Peacekeeping has always been a
crucial function of the United Nations. And so the need
to enhance the rapid reaction of the United Nations to
conflict situations around the world has long been
recognized and is deeply felt. The lessons in Kosovo,
East Timor and, more recently, Sierra Leone have
taught us that the United Nations needs better trained
and well-equipped troops, as well as innovative,
imaginative and realistic mandates from the Security
Council.
Let there be no repetition of the kind of
humiliation the United Nations recently suffered in
Sierra Leone at the hands of a ragtag army of bandits.
The conflicts that are wreaking havoc on societies
today are radically different from those that
preoccupied the United Nations during the cold war
era. We must therefore devise new and creative
mechanisms and strategies for responding to them.
Let me conclude my statement by reiterating
Botswana's commitment to the United Nations and its
Charter. This Organization is irreplaceable, and I am
sure the presence here two weeks ago of so many world
leaders to mark the turn of a new millennium is more
than enough testimony to this obvious fact.


I wish to
congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the
presidency of the General Assembly at its fifty-fifth
session. At the same time, I record my thanks and
appreciation to your predecessor, the Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Namibia.
We are meeting just after the historic Millennium
Summit, which brought together more than 150 leaders
of the world. Clearly, there is not much left to say. On
the other hand, there is much to be done. Urgent action
is needed; the time for implementation is now.
National action is needed more than ever in all
countries. The fact is that each nation has the primary
responsibility for dealing with its own problems. It is
not sufficient to make visionary statements and well-
intentioned commitments. The will to bring about
change in our societies must be demonstrated in all
nations. We should remember that we are the solution
to our problems, and that if we are to be effective the
partners of others, we must demonstrate a willingness
to help ourselves.
We must eliminate poverty. It is an indictment
against humanity that in the twenty-first century more
than a billion of the world's people are mired in the
dehumanizing conditions of extreme poverty. Each
country must adopt those policies necessary to
engender growth in their economies and to ensure that
all their citizens have access to the opportunities that
are being created. It now behooves the international
community to take concrete and positive action to
bring to fruition the commitment made by heads of
State or Government in the Millennium Declaration: to
reduce poverty levels by the year 2015.
Trinidad and Tobago has already taken action
through an appropriate policy framework and other
measures of reform. As a result, our economy
continues to grow, and we are generating employment
while keeping inflation low. We are making efforts to
ensure that all our citizens benefit from the country's
successes, and we are making strides towards the
elimination of poverty and are today ranked very
favourably in the United Nations Human Development
Index.
Education is the key. It is a powerful force for
social change. It is a human right. It goes far beyond
schooling. It assists in combating poverty, empowering
women, promoting human rights and democracy and
promoting international peace and security. According
to the United Nations Children's Fund report, “The
State of the World's Children 1999”, 130 million
children in the developing world are denied the right to
basic education. Regrettably, almost two thirds of them
are girls. This cannot continue. All children must have
access to all levels of education. This must be a
national objective in every country. United Nations
declarations by themselves will not help.
Since independence, Trinidad and Tobago has
placed considerable emphasis on education, which
continues to rank among the largest items of
Government expenditure. The laws of Trinidad and
Tobago provide that education is mandatory for all
children between the ages of five to 12 years. Tuition is
free at public and Government-assisted schools. We
continue to improve our system. Pre-school education
has developed rapidly in Trinidad and Tobago, and
17

special education is also being given greater attention.
In further recognition of the importance of education,
the Government of Trinidad and Tobago recently
embarked on a programme which will ensure free
secondary education for every child of secondary
school age, and this took effect with the opening of the
new academic year 2000-2001.
If people are not healthy, they can neither find
fulfilment nor contribute to their country's
development. The poor of the world need easier access
to essential drugs and vaccines to reduce mortality and
disability. It has to be a travesty that only one per cent
of the budget of global health research is directed to
diseases like pneumonia, diarrhoea, tuberculosis and
malaria, all of which are concerns of developing
countries. In Trinidad and Tobago, health care is given
high priority. The health budget continues to be one of
the major areas of Government expenditure and,
through a decentralized system of regional health
authorities, health care is made accessible and
affordable to all. The Government is constantly
investing in human resources and physical
infrastructure to meet the demands of the population.
The Government of Trinidad and Tobago has reduced
the cost of medication for some chronic diseases, such
as glaucoma, diabetes, asthma and arthritis. We are also
ensuring that equipment for our physically challenged
citizens is affordable. Every effort is being made to
reduce the backlog of certain common surgical
procedures. Next year, a National Health Insurance
Pilot Project is expected to be instituted to cover every
citizen. Under the proposed system, the Government
will pay the contribution on behalf of those persons
who cannot afford to do so.
The ravages of the HIV/AIDS pandemic and its
devastating socio-economic consequences constitute
another of the major health-related challenges for the
international community in the twenty-first century.
The spread of the HIV/AIDS virus is of particular
concern to the Caribbean, the second most seriously
affected region. The Government of Trinidad and
Tobago views this matter very seriously, and we have
long embarked on a programme of action designed to
combat this scourge. It is based on research and
education and building partnerships with the public and
private sectors, as well as actors in civil society. We are
also convinced of the need for greater global
partnership to develop an effective and more affordable
vaccine against HIV/AIDS. The present HIV-related
drugs should be made less expensive. We support the
convening as well of a special session of the General
Assembly to consider all aspects of this problem.
Our planet continues to experience environmental
degradation. The problem will never be solved unless
there is international cooperation, especially on the part
of industrialized countries, which are mainly
responsible for the emission of greenhouse gases. We
in the smaller countries, especially small island
nations, are the most severely threatened. But even in a
situation where we are victims, we do not absolve
ourselves from responsibility. Trinidad and Tobago is
already doing its part. We have established a Ministry
of the Environment and an Environmental Management
Authority. We have recently enacted legislation to
empower this Authority. We have operationalized an
environmental policing system, and we are now in the
process of establishing a Green Fund, through which
the industrialists in our country will contribute to
financing programmes for protecting the environment.
The Government is working in close collaboration with
the international community on environmental issues
and, in this regard, we are a State Party to all of the
major Conventions concerning the environment.
Trinidad and Tobago is actively involved in the
development of national legislation to give effect to
these international treaties.
I must join my Caribbean Community
(CARICOM) colleagues in lamenting the blatant and
persistent misuse of the Caribbean Sea as a trans-
shipment route for hazardous wastes. This continues to
be a cause for major concern to the Governments of the
region. We are not comforted by the assurances of
compliance by those who use this route for economic
gain. A single accident can threaten the very viability
of our societies. Can the commercial benefit from using
this route override its potentially horrendous
consequences? Accidents can occur, and we again call
for a halt to these shipments.
No country can progress without democracy and
good governance, which create the environment for
progress and development, peace and security. All
citizens must be included in the mainstream of national
activity. All must be allowed to contribute. Every voice
must be heard; every view considered; and every
citizen must have access to the opportunities that their
societies create. This should be the primary
responsibility of every Government in every country.
Government must also be based on the rule of law.
18

Each nation, therefore, has the responsibility to
develop effective judicial and legal systems to both
protect the rights of the individual and guard the nation
against any usurpation of its democratic systems. We in
Trinidad and Tobago are proud of our strong
democratic traditions. Free and fair elections are held
peacefully, regularly and on time. There is freedom of
speech and of political association and freedom of the
press. Our democratic tradition is buttressed by a very
active civil society, involving strong trade unions,
dynamic social and cultural groups and other non-
governmental actors. We have an independent
judiciary, and we have recently embarked on the
modernization of our laws and legal system to keep our
country in step with modern trends.
Each Government has the duty to ensure the
security of both its State and citizens. One of the
serious threats to security is the escalation of the worst
kinds of crimes within national borders in many
countries. This battle against the criminal element is
faced by all societies, on differing levels, but it is a
battle to which Governments must, of necessity,
allocate adequate resources if they are to maintain
peace and foster development. In many developing
countries, the rise in the level of violent crime is
directly related to poverty and the deprivation suffered
by individuals. This link between poverty and
development on the one hand, and peace and security
on the other, should not be minimized. Like most
countries, Trinidad and Tobago is battling the
phenomenon of crime. In addition to allocating
increased resources to our protective services, to
provide them with manpower, infrastructure and
equipment to deal with crime, we are implementing
social programmes to combat deviant behaviour,
through the Ministries of Education, Culture, Social
Development, Youth and Sport.
Trinidad and Tobago continues to face the
challenges of the illicit traffic in drugs. Due to our
geographic location, we are used as a convenient
transhipment point in the drug trade. We have taken all
measures available to us on the national, regional and
international fronts to combat this menace to our
society. The Government has, in this regard,
established an agency to coordinate the overall efforts
against drug trafficking and has entered into regional
and bilateral arrangements for cooperation in
combating this serious crime. Our strengthened legal
framework has led to successes in the investigation and
prosecution of crimes associated with drug trafficking.
Legislative measures include the Dangerous Drugs Act,
the Drug Court Bill, the Drug Abuse Rehabilitation
Tribunal Bill and the Proceeds of Crime Bill.
At the international and regional levels,
cooperative efforts include a number of bilateral
extradition and mutual legal assistance agreements. In
July, 2000, Trinidad and Tobago, along with six other
Governments, signed an agreement establishing a
regional justice protection programme, which provides
a framework for regional cooperation in the protection
of witnesses, jurors and legal and law enforcement
personnel. While we will continue to strengthen
existing measures and to expand the spheres of
cooperation, we wish to reiterate that this is a problem
which the international community cannot successfully
tackle without the necessary commitment of all States
concerned.
Another growing threat, which is closely related
to the menace of the drug trade, is the illicit trade in
small arms. We therefore attach great significance to
the convening of the 2001 United Nations Conference
on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons
in All Its Aspects, and we fully support the very
important preparatory work which will precede the
Conference.
The disease of racism, racial discrimination and
religious intolerance continues to plague the world as
we enter twenty-first century. This is an intractable
cultural problem that can be ameliorated only through
education and enlightenment. It is the expectation of
my delegation that the World Conference against
Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and
Related Intolerance, to be held in South Africa at the
end of August 2001, will produce action-oriented
recommendations to eliminate this scourge. No effort
should be spared to rid human civilization of this ugly
affliction.
As a pluralistic society, Trinidad and Tobago is
proud of its record of harmony. In our country, as
immortalized in our national anthem, every creed and
race find an equal place. We have become well known
as a rainbow society and at present we are seeking to
create the institutions and the legal framework to even
further deepen our world-renowned harmony.
Whilst I have thus far emphasized the need for
national action, we are fully aware that cooperation at
an international level is absolutely necessary if we are
19

to deal effectively with the problems of our planet. In
this global village, no country can survive on its own.
Today's reality is globalization, borderlessness and
integration at the international, regional and
subregional levels. The United Nations, therefore, like
all other international actors, has a pivotal role to play.
For example, the international financial institutions
must become more sensitive to the development needs
of countries and the world trading system must take
into account the special concerns of the disadvantaged
and the vulnerable.
As we have already demonstrated, Trinidad and
Tobago is willing to be an active participant in the
concerted effort of the international community to
achieve the goals we have set for ourselves. We have
always proven this since becoming a member of this
body. We have participated, we have cooperated and
sometimes, as with the International Criminal Court,
we have led the way.
We wish to achieve a humane global civilization.
We wish to bequeath to the future a planet of prosperity
and peace for all