Let me impart at the
outset the sad news I received early today of the aerial
bombardment by the Taliban of the city of Mazar-i-
Sharif, the sixteenth consecutive bombardment in just two
days. These bombardments have taken as many as 150
lives among the civilian population of the city, mostly
women and children. I express outrage and condemnation
at this cowardly act of terror, which typifies the Taliban’s
gross violation of international humanitarian law and their
relentless belligerence against every norm recognized by
the world today.
I stand before the Assembly and the world
community in the tradition of past Afghan
representatives — with the exception of those during the
years of occupation — representing an independent,
sovereign and non-aligned Afghanistan.
One year ago, our Foreign Minister, the late Abdul
Rahim Ghafoorzai, stood on this podium to explain the
dark and ominous movement known as the Taliban,
which — backed by foreign forces — had invaded
Afghanistan. Tragically, Mr. Ghafoorzai died in the
19

service of his nation. So today it is my duty to stand before
the Assembly to explain the struggle the Afghan people
have waged against these mercenaries.
When the Taliban entered Kabul on 27 September
1996 their first act was to storm the United Nations
complex. The past 12 months have seen a seemingly
endless series of edicts issued by the Taliban in areas of
Afghanistan that they claim to control. Under those edicts,
they have in fact imprisoned every woman and terrorized
every man.
Their latest ignominious act has been to arrest Emma
Bonino, the European Union Commissioner for
Humanitarian Affairs, her aides and a group of visiting
international journalists, including CNN’s Christiane
Amanpour. Outraged by the Taliban’s act, the German
Foreign Minister, Mr. Klaus Kinkel, said that he considered
it a slap in the face and an act of “cynical disregard for the
entire European Union”. The group was eventually released,
but not before at least two of its members were beaten with
the butt of a Kalashnikov rifle. Ms. Bonino told Reuters
that the experience had given her a taste of what Afghans
go through every day under the Taliban.
“This is an example of what people here go
through every day: in a situation of random terror.”
[Reuters News Wire, “EC commissioner released by
Taleban,” 29 September 1997]
An Afghan quoted in The New York Times of 24
September 1997 stated,
“Most days I wake up thinking we’d all be better off
dead than under these fanatics.”
These are just a couple of facts to open a small window
onto the gloom and despair facing our people.
As this terror continues in Afghanistan, we are here
today to discuss the Afghan question, which is now an
international issue.
As the crisis in Afghanistan continues to unfold, we
must ask — and answer — important questions, questions
to be answered particularly by those who, under the guise
of neutrality, equate the aggressors with the victims of
aggression. Those questions are: Who is following the rules
of the civilized world? Whose actions warrant recognition?
Who deserves to participate in civilized discussion at a
global level?
On the battlefield, we continue, of course, to defend
ourselves and our nation. In this imposed war, we are
taking what we consider to be the moral high ground of
negotiation and dialogue.
The Islamic State of Afghanistan — like many
others in the world, including some prominent Pakistani
politicians and commentators — still identifies Pakistani
intervention and interference in the internal affairs of
Afghanistan as the root cause of the prolonged conflict
and the subsequent suffering of our people.
Pakistan constantly alleges that the Taliban control
two thirds of Afghanistan, including Kabul, where peace
prevails. Mr. William Maley, the renowned Australian
expert on Afghanistan, stated earlier in the year that the
Taliban brought peace to Kabul in the same sense that
Hitler brought peace to Warsaw.
On 7 August 1997, Mr. Gohar Ayub Khan, the
Foreign Minister of Pakistan, said:
“In Afghanistan ... the majority in the country is
Pakhtoons, who are 60 per cent. The other groups,
including Uzbeks, Tajiks, Hazaras and Ismailis
collectively, constitute about 40 per cent.”
The Pakistani Foreign Minister is blatantly inventing
fraudulent statistics to fuel the flames of ethnic hatred and
conflict in Afghanistan and to justify Pakistani objectives.
No valid statistics could claim that any ethnic group in
Afghanistan — Pakhtoon, Tajik, Uzbek or other —
constituted more than 37 per cent of the population. If
Pakistan continues its irresponsible policy of perpetrating
ethnic hatred in Afghanistan, a consequential escalation of
“ethnic cleansing” will threaten the national unity of our
country.
Pakistan maintains that it has no favourites in
Afghanistan. The reality is that the Pakistani
establishment has designated one group of Afghans to be
the natural rulers over all the rest and conceivably to turn
Afghanistan into a subservient protectorate State.
The reality was best expressed by Fred Halliday, an
international affairs specialist at the London School of
Economics, who wrote last November:
“The capture by Taliban guerrillas of the
Afghan capital, Kabul, however short- or long-lived,
has come after two years of one of the most
obnoxious interventions by one State in the affairs of
20

another in many years. Reported in the West as an
indigenous struggle, in fact Pakistan set up the Taliban
as a semi-regular fighting force in 1994 ... providing
them with ... guns, money, fuel and technical support
... Since its creation in 1947, Pakistan has harboured
the goal of dominating its northern neighbour.” [The
Nation, “Kabul’s Patriarchy with Guns”, 11 November
1996, p. 19]
And, finally, the Pakistani Government, by proposing
the dubious “vacant-seat” formula for Afghanistan, strives
to expel from the United Nations a country that has been a
member of this global body since before the birth of
Pakistan.
My delegation is grateful to the Secretary-General, Mr.
Kofi Annan, for having summarized the tragic situation in
Afghanistan in his address to the fifty-second session of the
General Assembly on 22 September 1997.
According to General Assembly resolution 51/195 B,
which was adopted unanimously on 17 December 1996, and
fully supported by the Islamic State of Afghanistan, the
Assembly is
“Strongly committed to the sovereignty,
independence, territorial integrity and national unity of
Afghanistan”. [resolution 51/195 B, seventh
preambular paragraph]
The General Assembly also stressed
“the importance of non-intervention and non-
interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan”.
[ibid., sixteenth preambular paragraph]
Unfortunately, since last year the supply of weapons and
ammunition from abroad has massively increased and
constitutes a very important programme of action by the
powerful Pakistani intelligence service, Inter-Service
Intelligence (ISI).
The situation has also worsened with regard to what
the resolution called
“actions undermining the security of State frontiers,
including the growing illicit traffic in arms and
narcotics by criminal elements and groups from
[Taliban occupied] areas of Afghanistan and ... the use
of [occupied] Afghan territory for the training and
harbouring of terrorists”. [ibid., eighteenth preambular
paragraph]
It is amazing that some of the countries that consider
terrorism a threat to peace should nonetheless — while
claiming impartiality — favour the rejectionist Taliban by
equating them with the Government of the Islamic State
of Afghanistan, which shares the mounting concerns of
the General Assembly in this matter.
With regard to the peace process, we share the view
that
“the main responsibility for finding a political
solution to the conflict lies with the Afghan parties”.
[ibid., paragraph 2]
The Taliban, however, favoured, encouraged and assisted
by the cross-border political and military support,
consider their only responsibility to be the waging of an
aggressive war aimed at conquering the whole of Afghan
territory by crushing all resistance movements.
The Taliban’s intransigence and disregard for United
Nations General Assembly and Security Council
resolutions calling for a peaceful settlement of the Afghan
problem are a fact well known to the international
community. The report of the Secretary-General dated 16
March 1997 indicates that:
“The Taliban, judging both from their words and
from their activities on the ground, appear
determined to gain military and political control of
the whole of Afghanistan and to establish their
vision of an Islamic State”. [A/51/838, paragraph 7]
The Secretary-General’s report (A/51/929) of
16 June 1997 equally illustrates Taliban’s choice of the
military option and its intention to overrun the country by
force. This utterly bellicose position of the Taliban, while
prolonging the suffering of the Afghan people is
aggravating the concerns of the countries in the region,
which views it as a serious threat to the region’s peace
and security. It is worth mentioning that the Taliban’s
aggressive attitude is encouraged by military intelligence
services of neighbouring Pakistan, which still hopes to
install a puppet regime in Kabul, subservient to its
expansionist and hegemonic desires. The dull-minded
interventionists should read the history of Afghanistan
once again and learn from the defeat of previous
aggressors in this homeland of dauntless and courageous
people.
We are fully aware
21

“that a cessation of armed hostilities ... and political
stability are indispensable if reconstruction measures
are to have a lasting effect”. (Resolution 51/195 A,
eighth preambular paragraph)
The Taliban have expressed no interest in the urgently
needed reconstruction of the country. In fact, starvation by
blockade is their favourite weapon against Afghans.
We express our full
“support for the continuing efforts of the United
Nations Special Mission to Afghanistan” (Resolution
51/195 B, thirteenth preambular paragraph)
led by Mr. Norbert Holl, and the special assignment on
30 July 1997 of Ambassador Lakhdar Brahimi as Special
Envoy of the Secretary-General to assess the situation and
the role of the United Nations in Afghanistan.
We reaffirm the full support of our Government for
the
“activities of the United Nations Special Mission to
Afghanistan, in facilitating ... in cooperation with
[neighbouring and] interested States and international
organizations, the political process towards the goals
of national reconciliation and a lasting political
settlement with the participation of all parties to the
conflict”. (ibid., paragraph 5)
Because of the shortage of time, I am omitting some
paragraphs from my prepared text.
The Taliban have refused to negotiate any political
settlement and have insisted on a unilateral military
solution.
The Islamic State of Afghanistan honours
“its commitments regarding the safety and full
freedom of movement of United Nations personnel, in
particular the personnel of the United Nations Special
Mission, as well as the security of their premises in
Afghanistan.” (ibid., paragraph 7)
Recently, however, as a result of the disturbances
brought about on 14 September 1997 by Taliban
infiltration, the premises belonging to international aid
agencies and non-governmental organizations in the city of
Mazar-i-Sharif were plundered. This city was previously a
haven of peace and security. The Islamic State of
Afghanistan remains committed to the safety of the
United Nations personnel and the personnel of other aid
agencies in Afghanistan.
The Islamic State of Afghanistan, in the light of the
mounting needs of the Afghan people, appeals to all
donor agencies not to abandon Afghanistan, particularly
in the face of the upcoming harsh winter.
Security Council document S/1997/588 of
25 July 1997 explains the Islamic State of Afghanistan’s
agreement to a Declaration of the United National and
Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, the
foundation for an enlarged body representing all ethnic
groups from all over Afghanistan. The Declaration
addresses an appeal in favour of the peace process to the
Taliban and the Pakistani Government.
We favour
“An immediate and durable ceasefire among the
Afghan parties, to be supervised by a commission
composed of representatives of all the warring
parties, facilitated by the United Nations”. (ibid.,
paragraph 8)
One of the most important elements in the General
Assembly and Security Council resolutions on
Afghanistan is the call for
“demilitarization of Kabul, with adequate safeguards
to ensure security and public order”. (ibid.)
The Islamic State of Afghanistan considers this point to
be very important. It could constitute a credible precedent
that could be applied in the future in other parts of the
country.
The
“establishment of a broad-based and fully
representative authoritative council” (ibid.)
as required by the General Assembly resolution, will be
feasible if the appeal of the United Front inviting the
Taliban to join the Front is heard. The Islamic State of
Afghanistan, in this regard, extends its full cooperation to
the United Nations. It is imperative to secure the
agreement of the Taliban with the United Nations and to
ensure its full cooperation with such a broad-based
authoritative council.
22

We are ready to cooperate for the creation of
“a national security force to provide for security
throughout the country and oversee the demobilization
of all the warring parties through the collection and
safeguarding of all heavy weapons in the country, and
to stop the flow of arms and of equipment related to
arms production to the parties”. (ibid.)
We are grateful to the leaders and Governments of the
central Asian republics of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and
Turkmenistan for their respective proposed peace initiatives,
as well as to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Apart from
supplementing each other, these initiatives may be
coordinated so as to lead to the convening of useful
negotiations with a specific agenda under the auspices of
the United Nations. The proposals, however, thus far have
not been accepted by the Taliban.
The General Assembly deplored
“the civilian casualties inflicted by the indiscriminate
use of landmines.” (ibid., paragraph 11)
The Taliban have recently spread landmines in and around
the northern city of Kunduz. This is only one example of
Taliban mass use of landmines.
The Islamic State of Afghanistan shares the General
Assembly’s deep concern over and denunciation of
“the discrimination against women and girls and other
recurring abuses of human rights in Afghanistan ...
emphasizing the importance of democracy and of the
realization of human rights in any future political
process in Afghanistan”. (ibid., ninth preambular
paragraph)
Mr. Lloyd Axworthy, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of
Canada, said in his statement of 25 September in this
Assembly:
“Canadian women, appalled at the treatment of their
sisters in Afghanistan, have started a letter-writing
campaign. I will be delivering some 5,000 letters
today to the Secretary-General, which call on him to
take the lead in exposing the gross human rights
violations of women in Afghanistan as unacceptable in
the eyes of the world’s citizens.” [See Official
Records of the General Assembly, Fifty-second
Session, Plenary Meetings, 12th meeting]
We draw the attention of the General Assembly to
the recent document (A/52/384) containing the
Declaration of Principles made by the United Islamic and
National Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, adopted
on 20 September 1997 by the Islamic State of
Afghanistan. The Declaration, systematizing a political
framework for the country, contains the following
principles: first, the principle of Islam; secondly, the
principle of independence and international cooperation;
thirdly, the principles of democracy and pluralism;
fourthly, the principles of election and delegation of
authority to local administration; and, fifthly, the principle
of human rights.
The General Assembly last year called on
“all States strictly to refrain from any outside
interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan,
including the involvement of foreign military
personnel”. (Resolution 51/195 B, paragraph 15)
Regarding the involvement of Pakistani military personnel
in Afghanistan, the Government of the Islamic State of
Afghanistan has transmitted amply documented
information to the United Nations.
The book, entitled The Not-So-Hidden Hand —
produced by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the
Islamic State of Afghanistan — has been distributed to
the members of the Security Council, some other
interested countries and the Secretariat of the United
Nations. This book — I will not go through it; it is a big
book — documents directly and proves the physical
presence of Pakistani paramilitary and military personnel
inside Afghanistan, fighting alongside the Taliban against
the Islamic State of Afghanistan.
The book includes, first, identification photos of
each Pakistani captive, prisoner registration forms with
detailed descriptions, fingerprints and other data
pertaining to each; secondly, identification cards taken
from some prisoners that illustrate their membership in
extremist Pakistani organizations responsible for terrorist
acts in South Asia, such as Anjuman-i-Sipah-e-Sahaba
Pakistan; and thirdly, correspondence from most of the
prisoners to their families in Pakistan, written mostly in
Urdu — the official Pakistani language, which is not
spoken in Afghanistan.
I should like to remind the Assembly that on 3 July
1997 Mr. Francis Okelo, the Deputy Head of the United
Nations Special Mission to Afghanistan, together with a
23

United Nations military adviser, paid a visit to Maimana
prison in northern Afghanistan and verified the physical
presence of Pakistani military prisoners in the prison. And
The News of 6 September 1997 — printed in Islamabad —
contains an article entitled “Pakistanis in Masood’s captivity
plead for release”.
The General Assembly called upon all States
immediately to end the supply of arms, ammunition,
military equipment, training or any other military support
to all parties to the conflict in Afghanistan. Furthermore,
document A/52/403, dated 29 September 1997, confirms the
recent dispatch of some 600 additional military personnel
and that shipments of arms from Pakistan to Afghanistan
have significantly increased.
The General Assembly has reiterated that the
continuation of the conflict in Afghanistan provides a fertile
ground for terrorism and drug trafficking, which destabilize
the region and beyond. The United Nations Information
Service reported on 11 September 1997 a rise in opium-
poppy production in Afghanistan to 2,800 metric tons in
1997, an estimated 25 per cent increase over 1996.
Mr. Derek Fatchett, a Minister in Britain’s Foreign Office,
pointed out in The Guardian of 25 June 1997 that the
Taliban war chest is financed by drug money. Furthermore,
96.4 per cent of Afghanistan’s total opium production
originates in provinces currently under Taliban control,
according to the United Nations Information Service report.
Afghanistan, as a State party to the Convention for the
Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage of
23 November 1972, has recognized its primary duty to
ensure the identification, protection, conservation,
preservation and transmission to future generations of, inter
alia, the cultural heritage situated in the country. The
General Assembly has called upon all Afghan parties to
take appropriate steps to prohibit, prevent and, if necessary,
put a stop to any form of theft, pillage or misappropriation
of and any acts of vandalism directed against, cultural
property of the Afghan nation. The Taliban, however, on 17
April 1997, out of fanaticism expressed its intention to
demolish the two largest statues of Buddha in the world. In
spite of great concern by the Secretary-General and
Mr. Federico Mayor, Director of the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO), and many Buddhist leaders throughout the
world, the Taliban did not exhibit any change of attitude.
Fortunately, its military push was repulsed and the colossal
statues remain intact.
In this context, reference should be made to the
ancient artifacts plundered from the rich Kabul National
Museum. According to Pakistani press reports, the
artifacts have been added to the personal collections of
the former Pakistani Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, and
the former Minister of the Interior, Nasirullah Babar. On
behalf of the people of Afghanistan, I call upon the
Pakistanis to return these irreplaceable Afghan artifacts,
which are also part of the world’s cultural heritage. I urge
UNESCO to investigate the matter.
I should like to announce that the delegation of the
Islamic State of Afghanistan, together with some other
countries of the third world, will co-sponsor the draft
resolution entitled “Towards a culture of peace,”
submitted under agenda item 156. My delegation also
supports the resolution of the Economic and Social
Council adopted in Geneva entitled “Proclamation of the
Year 2000 as the International Year for the Culture of
Peace”.
We want to establish the best fraternal relations with
Pakistan and other neighbouring countries. Afghanistan’s
pivotal location places it, as always, at the crossroads of
different corners of Asia. Naturally, no regional economic
cooperation — in the context of the transit of goods,
petroleum and natural gas — can succeed without a
peaceful Afghanistan enjoying administrative unity.
Afghanistan must cease to exist as a country of
confrontation, discord and clashes. Rather, it must turn
into a land of interrelation, association, joint action and
cooperation. This is the genuine desire of all patriotic
Afghans and of the true friends of Afghanistan.
Fifty-two years ago, the United Nations was founded
on the paramount ideals of a safer world and on
parameters of global peace and collective security. The
Foreign Minister of Italy, His Excellency Mr. Lamberto
Dini, said in his speech last week before the General
Assembly:
“We no longer live in a world of purely
national interests. More and more, policy-making is
informed by global concerns such as human rights,
solidarity and social justice. At the threshold of the
twenty-first century, let us pledge to settle religious
and ethnic conflicts through dialogue, tolerance and
cultural exchange, and to find collective answers to
international terrorism, organized crime, drug
trafficking and the degradation of the environment.”

Let me from this rostrum remind all of us here, as the
general debate draws to a close, that we must ask ourselves
about the level of our commitment to the implementation of
the ideals I have mentioned.


Allow me to begin by
congratulating you, Sir, on behalf of the delegation of
Suriname, on your election to the presidency of the fifty-
second session of the General Assembly. I am convinced
that under your wise and able guidance our deliberations
will be fruitful. May I express our appreciation for the
excellent manner in which your predecessor, Ambassador
Razali Ismail, presided over the fifty-first session of the
General Assembly.
I also take this opportunity to convey our profound
admiration of and gratitude for the dynamic leadership of
the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, in pursuance of the
noble objectives of this unique world body in this era in
which new challenges and opportunities face humankind.
We salute his efforts to bring our Organization more in line
with the pressing demands of our time.
When we express our feelings of solidarity with the
less fortunate of the world, our sympathy also goes out to
the Government and the people of the sister island of
Montserrat as they suffer the consequences of a geologic
disaster in these dismal days of their history. The important
support that the Caribbean Community (CARICOM)
countries, within their limited possibilities, have given to
Montserrat to help alleviate the pain merits recognition and
is worth following. I therefore seize this opportunity to
appeal to other countries to fulfil their moral obligations to
our brothers and sisters in need.
Within the context of an increasingly integrated and
complex global economic system of production and
distribution, trade liberalization and globalization of
financial markets, the major thrust of the development
strategy of the Government of the Republic of Suriname
lies in the revitalization and strengthening of production and
export capacity as the main engines of growth while
maintaining financial and monetary stability.
In response to the need to diversify the export base of
the economy, a good deal of impetus was given this year to
the expansion of the mining sector by the recent opening of
an oil refinery that will enable my country to meet
domestic demands for heavy oil, by new gold-mining
operations and by the commercial exploitation of other
mineral deposits. Furthermore, we have initiated the
construction of two important bridges. Together with the
rehabilitation of vital infrastructure, including access roads
in the coastal area and to the interior of the country and the
operation of a ferry service with our neighbouring country,
the cooperative Republic of Guyana, these bridges will
offer new opportunities for trade, house construction,
transport, tourism and employment in Suriname.
It is often said that progress in building lasting
democracies and stronger market economies is
increasingly threatened by slow growth, weak institutions,
poverty and wealth inequality. Persistent economic
hardships for the majority of the people can likewise
damage the credibility of democratic Governments. The
struggle against poverty and social injustice is therefore
the greatest challenge to the Government of Suriname.
In our ceaseless struggle as a small nation to achieve
people-centred development goals, the present
Government, within the international constraints of
sustainable development and environmental protection,
will continue its endeavours to increase domestic
efficiency and international competitiveness in agriculture,
production, manufacturing and export, as well as to
strengthen the institutions of local entrepreneurship, with
a view to ensuring political stability and fostering
equitable economic growth.
Bearing in mind that which has been referred to as
the dark side of the globalization process, and with a view
to avoiding marginalization and creating outsiders to the
global economy, it is imperative that we continue to
recognize the small, fragile and vulnerable economies of
the Caribbean, including Suriname, and of other regions
in the world. This should guarantee that they will be
given special treatment during a transitional period in
which they will still require exceptions, waivers and other
transitional arrangements in the broader context of
international trade liberalization and economic integration.
Hence the Surinamese Government attaches special
significance to the May 1997 Bridgetown Declaration of
Principles on Caribbean Community-United States
cooperation in responding to the challenges that the new
millennium poses for our region, and it is looking forward
to an expeditious implementation of the Plan of Action
appended thereto. We also attach great importance to the
timely implementation of the Programme of Action for
the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing
States and are looking forward to the 1998 review session
of the Commission on Sustainable Development on
outstanding chapters and issues of the Programme of
Action.
The Government of Suriname welcomes the call of
the United Nations Commission on Narcotic Drugs for a
6

renewed and concerted international commitment to a
forward-looking drug strategy for the twenty-first century
and, to that end, the convocation of a special session of the
General Assembly in June 1998. That session will prepare
a global drug-control strategy and new ways to promote
international and regional cooperation in the fight against
the worldwide drug problem that undermines in particular
the economic and social prospects of many small
developing nations.
While Suriname cannot be considered a drug-
producing country, it is afflicted by this scourge through
producers from outside the country who misuse its territory
as a transit point for drugs bound for other countries, where
the availability and extensive use of drugs is creating a
huge, profitable market that threatens the well-being of so
many and feeds the greed of but a few.
To demonstrate our resolve to eradicate this evil from
our territory, we will join with neighbouring countries to
coordinate our strategies and efforts. For that purpose
Suriname will convene, at the beginning of 1998 and in
concert with Guyana, Brazil, France and Venezuela, an
international conference on defining strategies and actions
against the misuse and illicit trafficking of drugs. We
appeal to those who are also committed to this struggle to
assist us in this endeavour.
Reflecting on our special session on the
implementation of Agenda 21, the Government of Suriname
applauds the adoption in July of this year of the Programme
for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21, including the
statement of commitment by Member countries. We expect
the next comprehensive review of its implementation in the
year 2002 to demonstrate greater measurable progress in
achieving sustainable development.
The Government of Suriname feels concern about the
issue of finance for sustainable development. Since Rio
1992, only four developed States have fulfilled their
Agenda 21 commitment towards the target of providing 0.7
per cent of their gross national product as official
development assistance. As it was agreed that for most
developing countries official development assistance is still
a main source of external development financing and cannot
generally be replaced by private capital inflows, I should
like to urge the donor community to intensify efforts to
reverse the declining trend in official development
assistance as we experience it today.
The situation in the Middle East continues to pose a
great threat to international peace and security. The Oslo
agreement of 1993, signed by the two parties, embodies
the hope that a lasting solution to this conflict is within
reach, since it establishes the basis for a lasting peace in
the Middle East. We feel that the peace process must be
carried on urgently, with a well-defined timetable. We
therefore support the co-sponsors of the peace process in
their effort to bring the parties back to the negotiating
table with a view to securing durable peace in the Middle
East.
Allow me to make a few remarks on the important
issues of the reform and strengthening of the United
Nations and of more equitable representation in the
Security Council. Since its birth, our Organization has
grown from 5 to 185 Member States, but the Security
Council still reflects the world as it was in 1945. The
Government of Suriname therefore underscores the need
for an expansion of, and a more equitable representation
in, the membership of the Security Council.
The reform of the Security Council should not only
make the Council’s membership more representative and
more legitimate but should also enhance its transparency
and openness towards other Member States and non-
members in order to convey its important messages in an
amplified and more effective manner. Hence we welcome
the recent measures taken by the Council to enhance its
transparency.
The present Government of Suriname takes the
position that the countries of the Caribbean and Latin
America should be included in any agreed expansion of
the Council, within the context of the principles of
equitable geographic distribution and the sovereign
equality of States. The reform should not result in
discriminatory treatment between the developed and the
developing countries. We furthermore consider as integral
parts of Security Council reform its expansion, the reform
of its working methods and the issue of the veto. The
veto should preferably be restricted to issues falling under
Chapter VII of our Charter.
Increased globalization and the emergence of new
challenges and threats require closer cooperation between
States at a global level. Within this context, it is of
utmost importance to reaffirm and maintain the role of the
United Nations as a major actor in cooperation between
States, especially development cooperation. In this light,
my Government welcomes the initiative of the Secretary-
General to propose a comprehensive reform programme
to the General Assembly which is geared towards
strengthening the efficiency of the Secretariat and fixing
7

a stronger focus on economic and social development
issues.
The Government of Suriname supports in general the
reform proposals of the Secretary-General and their key
elements. These reform proposals as a whole represent a
timely and welcome initiative, given the fact that in today’s
world the need has progressively increased for global
common action on a number of pressing problems, such as
the eradication of poverty, humanitarian emergencies,
refugee problems, climate change and desertification,
diminishing official development assistance funding, drugs,
nuclear disarmament, the implementation of Agenda 21,
democracy and the maintenance of peace and security in
various regions of the world.
All this calls for a stronger United Nations to promote
a renewed multilateral cooperation based on common
interests and shared responsibility. We must empower the
United Nations now so that it can confront the global
challenges of the twenty-first century.
One of the best ways to re-establish trust in the United
Nations is to enhance the impact of United Nations
development activities at the country level. In this regard
the Surinamese Government endorses the proposal to
establish a “United Nations House”.
In closing, I wish to reiterate that the Government of
the Republic of Suriname is committed to contributing to
the ongoing process of reform of our Organization.
We see the reform proposals of the Secretary-General
as a first step in the right direction, although much more is
left to be done. We feel that the United Nations system
should be made stronger, more effective and more efficient
in order to meet the priorities set by all its Members — not
just the priorities of the economically strong and the
militarily powerful but, especially, the priorities of the weak
and vulnerable States, which should be prevented from
becoming outsiders in the global economy.


The tragedy of the millions of human beings who are
suffering the ravages of poverty affects Panama very
deeply. This is a deplorable scourge which has reached
intolerable levels. Those of us present here are facing the
shameful paradox of having produced the highest level of
wealth ever known to mankind while at the same time
having the highest level of unemployment in our
economies in history.
Poverty and exclusion are the battlefronts that call
for political and moral will. From this standpoint, Panama
is concerned that the tenor of this debate on the financial
or military attributes of the many aspirants to membership
of the Security Council may make us forget why the
Organization was created.
Panama, a founding Member of the United Nations,
signed the Charter of the United Nations to give a voice
to those who had been silenced by colonialism and to
those who clamoured for justice, freedom and
18

development; to restore dignity to peoples such as mine that
had been deprived of their sovereign rights; and to give
those who had been discriminated against and persecuted
the right to dream about a better world in which no one
would be hated for the color of his skin or his beliefs, or
for being part of a given ethnic group, or of one gender or
the other.
Panama signed that beautiful document, a tribute to
the humble of the Earth, in order to give democratic
institutions, civil and political rights and multilateral forums
to all those people — men and women of good will — who
did not want war to return, destroying their homes, legacies,
cities and towns and plots of land. They also did not want
to see war rub out entire generations by sacrificing them to
obsession, fanaticism and extremism.
Like many others here, Panama signed the San
Francisco Charter so that the poor of the world and those
suffering from disease and malnutrition would have two of
the simplest and most moving of human attributes: faith
and hope.
The more than 50 years that have passed since then
have brought about considerable advances that have
changed the face of the world. Many of them would not
have been possible, however, if cooperation had not
imprinted a new meaning and purpose on our Organization.
In fact, few vestiges of colonialism remain to be solved;
ethnic groups and nationalities, prohibited cultures and the
prosecuted now work together in pride to design a
polychromatic world that calls for equality in difference and
tolerance towards diversity.
The number of nations which are Members of the
United Nations has increased three-fold, and its agenda
reflects their pain, suffering, struggles and aspirations. Its
orientation and contents have changed, and everyone has
been given a forum in which to express his opinions and
find support and understanding.
If a planning board had tried to identify, as is now
proposed, which problem had priority and deserved
attention, financing and debate, the Security Council would
never have met in my country, Panama, nor would that
event have changed so decisively the course of negotiations
when Panama attempted to regain its sovereignty and its
Canal.
There are important achievements in the daily life of
the United Nations. However, none of them would have
been possible if the United Nations had not attained the
quality, the representative nature and the legitimacy that
it has achieved through universality. It must be recognized
that there remain unacceptably acute differences and
deficiencies, which are becoming more serious and are
constantly and forcibly knocking at the very doors of our
homes.
At the same time, thousands of people are dying
before our very eyes because of hunger, intolerance,
hatred, terrorism, fratricidal warfare, authoritarianism and
violence; thousands of children are looking at us through
television screens with languid and sad eyes, only to
become mere statistics at the end of the programme.
There are still those who peddle illusions, who would
have us believe that conflicts reside at the end of a rifle
and that they can be resolved by having more powerful
rifles. The figures on what the world spends on weapons
are so disproportionate when compared to expenditures
for development that only mentioning them makes us
ashamed.
We should have already learned the lesson that when
people are motivated, for whatever reason, there is no
bullet or defence system, no matter how sophisticated,
that can eliminate the causes of conflict; that the
instruments of force can lower the fever but they cannot
eliminate the turmoil which causes it; and that there is no
military solution to social and political problems. History,
life's teacher, shows us that violence usually is the result,
not the cause, of conflict; that war is more often than not
the symptom rather than the cause of the ills; and that the
only way to resolve conflicts and the violence that goes
along with them is to act on their true, underlying causes:
hunger, malnutrition and extreme poverty and the lack of
means to overcome them; ethnic, gender and cultural
discrimination; intolerance and authoritarianism;
fundamentalism and political and religious persecution;
unemployment, slave labour and immoral salaries;
humiliation and national oppression. The majority of us
who came here over 50 years ago, as well as the many
who arrived later, did so in order to find solidarity and to
take refuge in the realm of law, not to shield ourselves in
a new military alliance or to take shelter in the shadow of
a cannon. Circumstances then forced us to live under an
ominous nuclear balance which made the interrelations of
military forces the determining factor in international
relations.
19

Today — under a completely different setting in which
the balance of power is measured in terms of the potential
and economic strength of markets — nothing compels us to
continue to live under the model of the cold war.
The greatest impending threat to international peace
and security is poverty, whose reach is as extensive as that
of the most pervasive of plagues. Which current or future
Security Council member's army will be able to put an end
to the threat if it is the mother of all illnesses and
resentments and harvests more human lives than any
bacteria, virus or ancient or modern plague?
If what we are contemplating is a resurgence of the
old and festering conflicts which were frozen by the cold
war, would we not be substituting the ancient balance of
bipolar nuclear terror for a new and expanded military
alliance to resolve those conflicts under the umbrella of the
United Nations?
Panama certainly does not believe that force is not
necessary as a deterrent, nor are we unaware that such a
tool in responsible hands is useful, particularly when it is
legitimated by world-wide consensus, as the Charter
proposes.
What concerns us is that most of the discussion in the
world about the reform of the United Nations
disproportionately stresses the use of force and disregards
what is important, and indeed imperative — that is to say,
cooperation for development.
Hence, to assert that the most important function of
the United Nations is to have a big force to maintain
international peace and security, while at the same time
proposing the reduction, streamlining and elimination of the
Organization's social and humanitarian components, raises
important questions about the final nature of our reform and
modernization exercise.
To maintain that financial and material contributions
to peacekeeping operations should be decisive in
determining who can and who cannot sit on the Council,
while at the same time stating that social and humanitarian
tasks, development programmes and environmental
protection programmes should be placed in other kinds of
management and organization categories, greatly concerns
us. This compendium of proposals must be rebalanced and
given its proper dimension.
If what we are going to discuss is the package, then
the only one we should talk about is the package of the
fundamental principles of the United Nations already
enshrined in the Charter.
From that integral perspective, the purpose of
politically and financially strengthening the Organization,
and the Security Council in particular, is to ensure that it
can fully discharge its major mission: the promotion of
social and economic and human development as the most
effective way to prevent conflicts.
The profound developments in the last 50 years have
changed the international community. The deepest change
has occurred in the parameters of, and the language used
to define, relations among countries. The Powers of the
past no longer exist, and new Powers are emerging —
even though there are obvious military weaknesses.
It is no longer war that marks the trend towards
contemporary development or the course or content of
international life. Why organize the United Nations on the
basis of what no longer exists? Now it is peace, trade, the
sharing of the fruits of knowledge and technology, and
the deep changes designed to ensure higher levels of
tolerance and open-mindedness that are features of
international coexistence. It is not military tools to prevent
war that have to be strengthened but, rather, the tools to
build peace, to achieve international cooperation, as is
stated in the Charter, in solving international problems of
an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character,
and in promoting and encouraging respect for human
rights and for fundamental freedoms for all (Article 3).
International peace is not guaranteed by rifles or cannons,
or by one or several allied Powers. This has been proved
by recent, and not so recent but no less painful,
experiences.
The small and brave country Uruguay, which makes
the highest per capita contribution for peace-keeping, has
taught us such a good lesson in this respect.
If it is true that the greatest restriction on creativity,
thought and intelligence is dialectically established by
language itself, then we have to cast aside once and for
all the language and the thinking process left over from
the cold war. We must design something that more
appropriately represents what we wish to do.
Panama does not feel that its juridical status has
been diminished when it acknowledges that some
countries have special attributes or can better discharge
the tasks of the Security Council. On the one hand, the
problem is to define these tasks, to determine whether
20

what we want is a guardian or a promoter of development
and cooperation. On the other hand, the problem relates to
the degree of responsibility a member of the Council has
vis-a-vis the rest of us. For, if its membership of the
Council is based solely on its individual attributes —
rejecting any kind of representation of us — then it can sit
in that seat in the Council until someone simply wrests the
seat from it by violence.
Everything indicates that we should define these tasks
in a coherent manner in keeping with the whole set of
purposes of the United Nations. From this standpoint, each
region has to determine the degree of representativity and
responsibility that its members should have, as well as who
can occupy those seats. It is difficult to think that after the
Members of the United Nations have acquired such long
and productive experience of working in regional groups
and organizations, everything would be discarded in order
to vote for a country on an individual basis. We would like
to know what benefit there would be in reigning in a
vacuum.
Furthermore, neither ideological nor military blocs
appear any longer on the map of the world, nor should
geographical distribution alone. These have been nothing
but obsolete instruments which have served to draw
simplistic and arbitrary borders and, hence, to face us at
times with tragedies.
This new international reality must be fully
recognized. The new borders that are now forming are
trade, ethnic, religious, and cultural borders, and it is
precisely because they were disregarded during the cold
war that we are still faced today with all these upheavals.
It is those upheavals that seduce even the most conservative
among us into being guided by one of the left-over thoughts
of the bipolar world — vis pacem para bellum.
On the other hand, if we really feel comfortable with
one-third of the membership not rotating and two-thirds of
the membership rotating, then it would be sane and
judicious for any expansion to maintain those proportions,
which practice has shown to be efficient and which have
been agreed to.
Why, then, should we go on using language that draws
a distinction between the regular budget and the
peacekeeping budget? This accounting dichotomy became
a policy and crudely revealed how individual interests could
separate the package from the founding principles, to such
an extent that they would be truly contradictory. There are
those who say that it is shameful for the regular budget to
have to be financed out of the peacekeeping budget. I
would say that it is even more shameful that the
disproportion in amounts, both in payments and in
voluntary contributions, is so overwhelming that the social
and humanitarian functions are now secondary to the
security functions, as if, in the final analysis, civic-action
programmes are dependent upon military operations. This
reflects the unstated reversal of focus between the
secondary: the operations for the maintenance of security,
and the primary: the human-development programmes.
A single budget, which conforms to a periodically
agreed-upon political strategy, should respond in each
case to the changing challenges of the new international
dynamism. In our view, it is not compatible with the new
spirit of democratization in our Organization or with the
new international realities for one or a few countries to
subsidize the entire budget in a disproportionate way, for
this can lead to the danger of concentrating the decision-
making power and thereby affecting the Organization's
functioning.
In the final analysis — and we do not want to give
lessons to anyone — we feel that what is necessary is a
good arsenal of general and flexible criteria, the key to
the search for consensus — that is, representativity,
legitimacy, non-discrimination, equity and legal equality.
We must move from the particular and discuss individual
aspirations, in order to design a compendium of criteria
that would be applicable to all, whether or not their seats
on the Security Council rotated.
From that standpoint, we think that we should not
discuss the veto in the abstract, as a privilege or as a
category in and of itself. With the passage of time, there
has been a distortion in the original spirit of the Charter,
under which the members of the Security Council were to
represent in the Security Council the general interests of
the international community, not act in accordance with
their exclusive military or political strategic interests.
In that context, part of the reform should be the
negotiation of an agreement restricting the use of the veto
to what is stipulated in Chapter VII and to what was
agreed in the gentlemen's agreement in London 1948.
From that standpoint, we need a formula that can
prevent a single country from standing in the way of the
general interest. One such formula would be allowing
vetoes to be overridden by a two-thirds majority. The
optimal solution, of course, would be to get rid of the
veto.
21

Let me here and now thank the public and private
sectors of the international community for the support and
solidarity given to my country during the Universal
Congress on the Panama Canal.
This is a good opportunity to report that Panama is
continuing to take the necessary legislative and
administrative steps to turn this international public service
over to an agency that would be constitutionally
autonomous — administratively, politically and financially.
Panama is certain that scrupulous observance of this
autonomous status will make the interocean waterway more
competitive and more efficient and will also allow the
agency to take advantage of the many opportunities that
will be created by the Canal’s upcoming incorporation into
the Panamanian economy.
We must remember that until now military needs for
the Canal have always been dominant, and this has made it
impossible to exploit the Canal’s many competitive
advantages for trade and international civil-maritime
activities. From this standpoint, Panama’s greatest strategic
concern during the transition process has been to gain
complete control of the Canal so as to undertake a vast,
multimillion-dollar programme to modernize and widen it.
This programme includes widening the Gaillard Cut — a
critical area for ships crossing from the waters of Lake
Gatun — as well as the systematic studies undertaken in
cooperation with the United States, Japan and the European
Union in order to construct the third system of locks, which
will allow passage of ships weighing up to 150,000 dead-
weight tons.
Given the international importance of the Panamanian
interoceanic waterway, we intend to announce formally to
this General Assembly session that, in order to ensure
respect for the neutrality of the Panama Canal, Panama will
conduct its external relations in such a way as to reduce
international tension and conflict and not to get embroiled
in issues that would require us to take sides for or against
members of the international community with which we
have friendly relations, or for or against the community as
a whole. We are convinced that this new policy is the most
important contribution Panama can make to international
peace and security.
From this standpoint, we will concentrate our efforts
on contributing to understanding, cooperation and friendly
relations among peoples and governments. The Panama
Canal, as an international public service, must be open to
all users, public and private, regardless of the flag they fly
or the economic system they represent.
In this regard, we are pleased by our admission to
the pro tem secretariat of the Rio Group as of 1998, and
we are committed from now on to undertaking intensive
diplomatic efforts to strengthen the Group’s role as a
leading forum for interregional and intra-regional
discussion and political understanding.


Allow me first of all, Mr. President, to congratulate you
on your election to preside over this new session of the
General Assembly. We are sure that the experience you
have gained in your years of activity in the Organization,
together with your personal qualities and technical skills,
will, under your mandate, contribute to the strengthening
of this most important body of the Organization.
Allow me also to express our congratulations to the
outgoing President, Ambassador Razali, for the work he
performed, which certainly contributed to the
strengthening both of the presidency and of the role the
General Assembly is called on to play in the United
Nations.
Undoubtedly, the central focus of our attention will
continue to be the issue of the reform of the Organization,
the essence of which is now contained in the document
submitted by the Secretary-General.
My country fully supports and has every confidence
in the appointment and endeavours of the Secretary-
General, Mr. Kofi Annan. We have thus paid the greatest
attention to the package of reforms he has submitted, and
we are prepared to promote deliberations on them so that
they can be concluded as soon as possible.
4

We understand that the document is aimed at the
objective of equipping the Organization with an
administrative structure that will permit more flexible
management, prevent duplication of functions and secure
coordination among its organs and programmes, all of
which will result in an improvement in terms of both
economy and management.
Within the overall issue of reform, the specific topic
of the Security Council is one of the most important
because of the political significance that organ has had and
will continue to have within the structure of the United
Nations. Uruguay endorses an enlargement of the Council
because it believes that its structure should be adapted to
the new realities in the world, which differ substantially
from those that existed when the Organization was
established, since at that time account was taken of the
power structure resulting from the Second World War.
In this regard, we support an increase in the number
of both permanent and non-permanent Members of the
Council, to a total of not more than 25, so that efficiency
is not impaired. Our country particularly supports an
increased presence of developing countries to ensure a
better balance in the membership of this singular organ of
our Organization. We believe that the newly created seats
should be occupied on the basis of real equality of
opportunity for all States.
However, my country believes that the reform of the
Council should not be confined to the topic of its
membership. Equally important is ensuring that its activities
are transparent and that information provided to and
communication with the States that are not members of the
Council flow freely and are up to date.
The Eastern Republic of Uruguay has expressed strong
support for progressively limiting the right of veto, and to
that end we have submitted a proposal to the effect that on
certain subjects, the right of veto could be suspended by the
General Assembly by a majority to be determined. That
mechanism, essentially democratic in nature, would thus
help reduce the absolute power of the right of veto as
currently provided for in the Charter, while at the same
time it would strengthen the competence of the General
Assembly.
Nonetheless, our country will be ready to analyse any
other proposal that might be submitted aimed at limiting the
absolute individual veto.
While the reform of the Security Council and the
possible revision of the scale of assessments have recently
been, and continue to be, the focus of political attention,
we should also study the question of strengthening the
General Assembly. A calm and dispassionate analysis of
the organizational structure and respective areas of
responsibility of our Organization shows that the forum
where the principle of juridical equality of States reigns
supreme is undoubtedly the General Assembly.
There has been and still is much discussion
regarding the composition of the Security Council and the
exercise of the right of veto, in the context of the new
parameters of international realities. That is all well and
good, but at the same time, we need to find practical
ways of revitalizing and invigorating the activity of the
Assembly.
The General Assembly is a unique body in
international institutional machinery. In it, representativity
is practically universal. States participate on an equal
footing without regard for their size or power, and the
ideal of international democracy attains its clearest
expression, at least in formal terms. The decisions of this
body have great moral and political force and accordingly,
it is essential to formulate them better and make them
more timely.
For these reasons, the General Assembly not only
needs to function more flexibly and utilize its resources
more rationally, but also, and essentially, requires greater
substance. Only thus will we be able to give its
resolutions greater operative force.
Consequently, we should take a new approach and
open a new chapter in the reform process, not confining
our reflections and aspirations to reforms of the Security
Council or to reforms of a financial nature, but extending
them to the organ that brings together the international
community as a whole, namely, the General Assembly.
After 52 years of the Organization's existence, the
maintenance of international peace and security continues
to be one of its essential functions. Peacekeeping
operations, to which my country is proud to have been a
contributor from the outset, must be fully maintained
while adapting to new kinds of conflicts.
Uruguay is prepared for this, and, accordingly, we
reaffirm here once again our commitment not only to
continue to make our traditional contribution but also to
5

diversify it in order to adapt it fundamentally to peace-
building.
In this connection, we welcome the signing, with the
Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations, of
a memorandum of understanding regarding our
contributions to the United Nations standby arrangements
system. This will contribute to facilitating the planning of
future peacekeeping missions in the shortest possible time.
The General Assembly's recent adoption of the
resolution putting an end to the use of “gratis personnel
provided by Governments and other entities” fulfils one of
my country's long-standing aspirations and does justice to
the principles of equitable geographical representation and
the equality of Member States, both enshrined in the
Charter.
Similarly, the recent General Assembly resolution
adopting uniform and standardized rates for payment of
awards in cases of death or disability sustained by troops in
the service of the United Nations peacekeeping operations
seems to us an important step that puts an end to an unjust
situation.
We fully support the Middle East peace process
initiated at Madrid in October 1991 and continued at
Washington, and the Government of the Eastern Republic
of Uruguay continues to encourage the necessary holding of
direct talks between Israel and the Palestinian National
Authority. It is essential for both parties to respect in good
faith the commitments entered into in the Madrid and
Washington declarations.
Our Latin American continent does not want an arms
race; it wants, on the contrary, to be free of nuclear
weapons and of other sophisticated weapons of mass
destruction that can create instability. We want to work in
peace, allocating the largest possible amount of resources
to our economic and social development.
However, this should not be an obstacle to limited
purchases of arms by our armed forces solely for the
purpose of replacing their obsolete equipment, thereby fully
discharging their constitutional mandates.
We must work to ensure a continuation of the mutual
confidence and security that prevails in the region today,
without third countries weakening and taking advantage of
our continent through the sale of sophisticated weapons.
Uruguay will continue to support with firm
conviction all disarmament processes, and, accordingly,
we recently signed in Oslo the Convention on the
Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and
Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines, those lethal weapons
that have caused not only death and serious injury to
soldiers but also the loss of thousands of innocent lives.
Protection of human rights has been and will
continue to be one of the priority objectives of both our
domestic and international policies. Without full exercise
of human rights, there can be neither peace nor security,
neither economic prosperity nor social equity, and the
existence of a democratic system of government will
therefore also be impossible.
In addition, there can be no full exercise of human
rights without a minimum economic, social and
educational base, and my country will be prepared to
contribute to ensuring the existence of such a base.
In this connection, we fully support the restructuring
proposed by the Secretary-General while at the same time
endorsing the philosophy on which it is based, embodied
in his idea that the question of human rights should be
part of all the substantive spheres of the Secretariat's
programme of work: peace and security, economic and
social affairs, development cooperation and humanitarian
affairs.
The financial crisis the Organization is experiencing,
which has no counterpart in its history, stems primarily
from the failure to pay assessed contributions. While not
intending to justify any delay in payment, Uruguay
believes that the current scale of assessments requires
adjustments to make it fairer, more transparent and better
based on the capacity of States to pay. That should not,
however, mean that developing countries would assume
new and additional commitments today; that would, in our
view, be unjust and unacceptable. The system of
contributions should be based on objective criteria of
financial responsibility. We agree that there is a need to
correct and manage the budgets of the Organization in
order to reduce expenditures and increase efficiency, thus
striking a balance between expenditure on peace and
security and expenditure on development, each of which
is a cornerstone of the other, without weakening operating
and information activities.
We cannot but express our public satisfaction at
seeing the importance the Secretary-General attaches to
development, which he regards as one of the priorities
6

and essential functions of the Organization. There can be no
peace without development.
On the threshold of a century that is already taking
shape and that, unfortunately, seems to be marked by
growth without equity, uncertainty in employment and a
proliferation of crises and conflicts, good management of
development assistance is today more necessary than ever
before. At a time when human concerns seem to be alien to
us, it is essential, in Uruguay's view, to support an
Organization that holds that people must be placed at the
very heart of the development process if we want growth to
be compatible with the human condition and development
to be conducted by and for people.
In this context, we consider it very important to
maintain unconditionally the principle of universality and
the right of all developing countries, without exception, to
benefit from international cooperation and to receive
technical assistance with a view to achieving sustainable
human development.
Uruguay considers international technical cooperation
essential for consolidating the processes of development and
integration in the various regions. It is a fundamental tool
for attaining greater economic growth.
We support the development of South-South
cooperation as an important tool for promoting the
improved development of nations. We believe that a new
concept of technical cooperation will have to respond to
traditional demands, such as humanitarian affairs, as well
as others associated directly with the process of integration
into the international economy, such as, for example, the
redefinition of the role of the State, its modernization and
its decentralization.
We believe that a positive contribution to political and
democratic stability and to economic growth is made by
processes of regional and subregional integration. In our
case, the Southern Cone Common Market — composed of
Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and our country — is a clear
example of democratic stability and expansion of trade,
within and outside the region, compatible with the rules of
the World Trade Organization.
Uruguay continues to assign to international law a
primordial role as a regulator of relations among States.
Respect for and compliance with international law are
essential for peaceful coexistence. For this reason, we
support the holding of an international conference to discuss
a draft convention establishing an international criminal
court for autonomous and independent hearings on certain
crimes, such as genocide and others which, because of
their seriousness, are roundly condemned by the
international community. We also support the work of the
Ad Hoc Committee on the elaboration of a convention for
the suppression of terrorist bombings.
In times of change, which we all see as appropriate
and inevitable in order to revitalize the Organization, we
nevertheless identify more than ever before with the
essential purposes and principles established 52 years ago.
These bind the Organization together and, despite the time
that has elapsed and the important changes that have since
taken place in the world, continue to constitute and must
continue to constitute, today as yesterday, the goal and
objective of all the changes the United Nations will have
to face at the dawn of the twenty-first century.
People, simple people, call for us to be effective and
efficient in our activities and bold in our decisions in
preventing conflicts, and to act on their behalf in
rebuilding civil societies. The citizens of every nation, of
every country of the world, call on us today to be firm in
our commitment to the Charter and to adapt our new
activities to the changing times.


The unanimous election of the President of the
fifty-second session of the General Assembly of the
United Nations was a tribute not only to his outstanding
diplomatic qualities, but also to his country, Ukraine —
with which the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros
fully intends to have good relations of friendship and
cooperation. I would like to associate myself with the
previous speakers in extending to him, on behalf of my
delegation, our warm congratulations and to wish him all
success in carrying out his noble task.
Allow me also to pay a well-deserved tribute to his
predecessor, Mr. Razali Ismail, for the dedication and
skill with which he guided the work and shouldered the
task of President of the fifty-first session of our General
Assembly.
I would also like to take this opportunity to extend
my sincere congratulations to our new Secretary-General,
Mr. Kofi Annan, on his outstanding election. I would like
to express our deep gratitude to this illustrious advocate
of the ideals of peace, solidarity and justice for his
unswerving dedication to the service of our institution.
His experience in international affairs, together with his
personal qualities, clearly guarantees that the United
Nations will be given new impetus as it faces the new
challenges confronting it.
7

At a time when we are meeting in the General
Assembly to assess — as is our custom — the work carried
out by our Organization in the areas of peacekeeping, the
strengthening of international cooperation, the development
of reforms required if the United Nations is to adapt to the
needs of our time, we are obliged to note that the world
continues to fall prey to numerous types of threats, tensions
and ills of all sorts.
Thus, it is obvious that our Organization must play a
very critical and primary role. However, in this period of
globalization — of the obvious and irrevocable
interdependence of nations, democracy, good governance
and transparency in the management of public affairs —
our Organization remains the target of those who wish to
minimize and limit its role by preventing it from paying
still greater attention to the problems of poor and
disadvantaged countries. It goes without saying that this
concept is not conducive to promoting the atmosphere of
detente in international relations that has been awaited for
so long.
Bearing in mind the noble tasks for which the
Organization was founded, in particular the building of a
just, peaceful and better integrated world society, it would
be wise and reasonable for the major concerns of our
Organization, since the end of the cold war, to be
mobilization for disarmament and the search for solutions
that can encourage the development policies of States,
cooperation and international solidarity.
The trials and tribulations of history have once again
placed my country, the Islamic Federal Republic of the
Comoros, on the first page of international news. The tragic
events of the last few months are the result of an
unprecedented social and economic crisis which is battering
my country. Indeed, counted among the least developed
countries, over the last few years the Comoran State has
witnessed a deterioration of the markets for its export
products — vanilla, cloves, perfume oils, and so forth —
due to strong international competition.
The poor sales of these products, which are the major
sources of revenue for the State, and therefore for a
majority of the inhabitants of the Comoros, have been
compounded by the devaluation of our currency, without
appropriate accompanying measures. This economic state of
affairs has only served to exacerbate the already poor and
vulnerable condition of a considerable sector of the
population of the Comoros. Here I have in mind the
galloping unemployment and the rising curve of poverty.
In this situation, which is of concern in many ways,
the authorities of the Comoros, together with the Bretton
Woods institutions, decided on a number of measures
aimed at balancing State revenues and expenditures.
These include a reduction in gross salaries; the
privatization of State firms; a reduction of the operational
State budget; and the launching of projects to generate
revenue and permanent jobs.
These new guidelines were put forth on the eve of
the free and democratic elections organized under the
aegis of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the
European Union and the United Nations. On 16 March
1996, these elections carried President Mohamed Taki
Abdoulkarim to the highest post in my country.
Indeed, the catastrophic situation inherited by the
newly elected President required the swiftest possible start
of political, economic and social reforms capable of
meeting the numerous challenges impeding the building
of a democratic, prosperous and united society.
Among the efforts made along these lines by the
new political authorities of the Comoros, we could
mention the regular payment since 1997 of State officials'
salaries.
However, despite this new impetus, the discontent
spawned by a series of crises and tragedies in my
country's recent history finally caught up with the harsh
socio-economic facts of life of the Comorian people.
Expressed in different ways, in line with the
susceptibilities on all sides, the rumblings of this
discontent got out of bounds on the Comorian island of
Anjouan. Indeed, since March 1997, various
movements — both trade union and political — coalesced
into an organization whose activism threatens the very
heart of the Comorian State.
From the illegal occupation of public buildings to
the trampling underfoot of the national flag, these factions
sowing terror on the island of Anjouan used all kinds of
methods to provoke the central power.
These outrageous actions, which have been
unanimously condemned by the international community,
were exacerbated by the proclamation of a pseudo-
independence of the island of Anjouan.
Despite all these acts of provocation, the President
of the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros,
8

determined to preserve peace and national unity, opted for
the path of dialogue and agreed action. Within this
framework, the Government of the Comoros requested the
mediation of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) with
a view to achieving a peaceful settlement of this domestic
crisis.
As a result of the discussions initiated by the OAU
mission, certain decisions, accepted by all sides, were taken
designed to facilitate a return to normalcy — in particular,
the withdrawal of military reinforcements, the provision to
the island of vitally necessary foodstuffs, the organization
of examinations at the end of the school year, and so on.
The response to this spirit of reconciliation by the
separatists was the continuation of one act of escalation
after another; they occupied the presidential residence at
Hombo, in Anjouan and levied direct and indirect taxes on
the island, having emptied the coffers of the State.
Faced with such an exacerbation of the situation,
which was a violation of the authority of the State, the
Government was obliged to send a military mission to
Anjouan to re-establish public and Republican order.
This mission, which began on the morning of 2
September, had nearly achieved its goal by 4 September,
without bloodshed. But the subsequent turn of events led
the President of the Republic, still determined to preserve
civil order, to take the necessary emergency measures under
article 20 of the Constitution of the Islamic Federal
Republic of the Comoros, dealing with full powers.
This is why, acting under this Article, a State
transition commission was appointed and given the
prerogatives normally given members of the Government:
to carry on the conduct of current affairs of State; to
continue the indispensable negotiations begun with the
OAU, the United Nations, the League of Arab States and
all other bodies involved in the search for a solution to the
crisis afflicting the country; to implement and give concrete
form to solutions agreed on, in consultation with the World
Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF); to
prepare for signature the programme of adjustment with the
Bretton Woods institutions; and to prepare the final
procedures for ultimate signature of the eighth European
Development Fund, in collaboration with the European
Union and the countries of the Asian, Caribbean and Pacific
region.
During this transitional stage it should be possible to
restructure institutions with a view to giving the islands of
the Republic broad management autonomy and more
active participation in the process of development in the
islands of the Comoros as a whole.
At a time when my country's territorial integrity
remains threatened, at a time when arbitrary separatist
actions are again battering my country, I should like from
this rostrum to launch a heartfelt appeal to the entire
international community to assist the Islamic Federal
Republic of the Comoros to eradicate the ills which are
destroying it, namely underdevelopment and
destabilization.
While it is true that we must first and foremost
count on our own strengths, the Islamic Federal Republic
of the Comoros also knows that it can count on the
United Nations, our Organization, with its specialized
agencies, including the United Nations Development
Programme, the United Nations Children’s Fund, the
World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture
Organization.
The Comoros also knows it can count on OAU, the
League of Arab States, the Organization of the Islamic
Conference, and the European Union.
We can only reiterate here our full confidence in,
and deep gratitude for, the tireless and determined efforts
they have unceasingly made to ensure the economic
development of, and peace and security for, the Islamic
Federal Republic of the Comoros.
After this broad overview of the terrible events
which my country is enduring, we are obliged to note
that, today, more than ever before, the question of
underdevelopment remains the major source of threats to
peace and international security.
While we recognize that on the threshold of the third
millennium our Organization remains the guarantor of the
emancipation of peoples and the progressive elimination
of poverty, it is also incontestable that the daily struggle
with hunger, malnutrition and illiteracy and the problem
of ensuring good health for everyone are challenges to
our collective conscience.
What can more significantly illustrate the will of our
institution to eradicate these scourges than the series of
conferences which have been held throughout the past
decade? I have in mind the New York World Summit for
Children, the Rio Conference on Environment and
Development, the Vienna World Conference on Human
9

Rights, the Cairo International Conference on Population
and Development, the Copenhagen World Summit for
Social Development, the Beijing Fourth World Conference
on Women, the Istanbul Conference on Human Settlements,
and the Rome World Food Summit. All these conferences
aroused great hopes in all of mankind but their effects are
still in an embryonic stage, particularly for the developing,
least developed and island countries.
The hopes born of these international meetings are like
a distant horizon that seems to recede as one gets nearer to
it.
The Government of the Islamic Federal Republic of
the Comoros reaffirms its support for the reforms
recommended for our Organization, in particular those
relating to the enlargement of the Security Council, since
our evolving world has taken on new contours. These
include new forms of violence, and our current means of
dealing with them seems increasingly inadequate and
unsuitable. The strengthening and maintenance of peace
within States is today a new concern of our Organization,
confronted as it is by civil wars, genocide, ethnic cleansing,
terrorism, mercenaries and all forms of transnational crime.
The new international political landscape is, to be sure,
a result of the new forms of tension, which tend to
overshadow some of the conflicts well known to our
Organization.
Since horrors know no limits, the Comoros
Government is still concerned by the resurgence of violence
in the Middle East, which has had a negative effect on the
dynamism that had been set in motion by the signing of the
Oslo agreements between the Palestinians and the Israelis.
Thus the provocations by the new Israeli authorities,
the continuation of the settlement policy, the closing off of
Palestinian territories, the demolition of houses, and the
arbitrary arrests all furnish eloquent proof of the
impediments to the peace process.
The new conflagration in that part of the world
requires the international community to redouble its
vigilance so as to ensure the peoples of the subregion the
right to peaceful coexistence, for which one of the
prerequisites is respect for the right of the Palestinians to a
free and independent State.
Along the same lines, the occupation of part of
Lebanese national territory by foreign troops is a serious
threat that every day delays the national reconciliation of
a long-suffering people that continues to seek stability.
From East to West, from North to South, other
conflicts with various motivations continue to rage and
pose serious threats to international peace and security.
While it is true that it has been possible to find the
beginnings of solutions thanks to the perseverance of our
Organization, it remains no less true that other solutions
which have been advocated have proved of limited value.
The pictures of desolation, exposing the sufferings
endured by countries subject to economic embargoes, lead
us to question the effectiveness of a solution that first and
foremost punishes vulnerable and innocent populations.
Africa unfortunately has not been spared the cycle of
violence, despite the resolution of certain conflicts that
had long plunged this continent into fratricidal wars.
Other hotbeds of tension remain, and Africa therefore
continues to be at the forefront of the international
community’s concerns. In the Great Lakes region, the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan and Somalia
continue to be theatres for bloody and tragic events.
Faced with all these situations of crisis and conflict,
my Government unreservedly supports the initiatives
underway to achieve negotiated settlements.
As for Sierra Leone, the Comorian Republic most
firmly condemns the violent coup against the leaders of
Sierra Leone, whom the people of that country —
wishing to break with the practices of a bygone age —
legally and democratically chose.
As two sides of the same coin, at the international
level, political and economic situations remain closely
linked. Thus this gloomy view of the international
political landscape is made even darker by the
disheartening international economic environment.
Despite the priorities and objectives set forth by the
new development strategies, we are obliged to note that
the results are less than expected. But we venture to hope
that the United Nations System-wide Special Initiative on
Africa, which recently became a supplement to the New
Agenda, will provide the impetus to speed up Africa’s
integration into the international system of trade. Under
this system, small States continue to experience reduced
prices for their raw materials, and their burden of debt is
becoming ever more unbearable.
10

The Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros, a small
island State and one of the least developed States, shares
the plight of those who are excluded from the international
market. For, in addition to limited natural resources and the
high cost of international transportation, it suffers from
other political and structural restraints, which are slowing
down its socio-economic development.
Given the virtually chronic instability that has
characterized the recent history of the Comoros, the
Comorian people are obliged to ask whether they have the
right to peace and the right to life.
The Comorian people remain convinced that the search
for a just and lasting solution enabling it to embark on a
path of harmonious socio-economic development
necessarily hinges on a final settlement to the question of
the Comorian island of Mayotte, which is under French
administration. I reserve the right to speak on this subject
during the debate. For there can be no doubt that the
present events in my country are a corollary to the
incomplete decolonization and to the socio-economic crisis
from which the Comorian people have suffered.
In conclusion, I associate myself with previous
speakers in extending to the brotherly and friendly
Government and people of Indonesia condolences on the
crash of the aircraft that claimed so many lives, as well as
our profound grief at the disaster that their country has
suffered as a result of the fires that are devastating their
forests.