It is for me a great honour to address this Assembly, an important forum in the struggle for the preservation of peace and the consolidation of friendship and solidarity among peoples. The United Nations plays an essential role in easing world tension and containing conflicts. It is the cornerstone of closer diplomatic ties between Member States and of the struggle for progress and development.
In addressing the forty-second session of the General Assembly I should like to express my delight at seeing the presidency in your hands, Sir, you are an experienced diplomat who has achieved a high standing in international relations and I am confident that the present session of the General Assembly will benefit greatly from your wisdom and even-handedness. I should like to pledge my country's determination to co-operate closely with you in carrying out your duties.
I also congratulate the President of the forty-first session, Mr. Huraayun Rasheed Choudhury, Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, on the energy he devoted in bringing that session to a successful conclusion. I have the pleasure of conveying a message of appreciation and recognition from the Mozambican people to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar. Your commitment and devotion to the search for solutions to problems besetting humankind have earned you, Mr. Secretary-General, the admiration and esteem accorded to great international personalities. Your name will forever be associated with the international community's efforts aimed at seeking solutions to serious problems obtaining in southern Africa. Your name will be particularly associated with all that has been done to relieve the human suffering caused by natural calamities and the war of aggression against Mozambique.
Ten years ago the President of the People's Republic of Mozambique, Marshal Samora Moises Machel, addressed this Assembly for the first time. We brought a message from a country that  having just won its independence by force of arms, fully understood the need for peace to build a future of prosperity and well-being. Samora Machel devoted all his energies to the search for solutions to southern Africa's problems.
On 19 October 1986 Samora Machel was returning from yet another mission for peace and development when the aircraft in which he was travelling was diverted from its normal route by an unregistered radio beacon (WR). As a result of that diversion, the aircraft crashed in South African territory, causing the death of President Samora Machel and 34 people accompanying him. We are convinced that this radio beacon (VOR) was deliberately installed and operated with criminal Intent. The Mozambican Government reaffirms its determination to pursue the investigation until the whole truth is revealed. Those who assassinated Samora Machel are the enemies of peace, progress and justice. Those who killed Samora Machel are the enemies of the purposes that guide the United Nations. In evoking the memory of President Samora Machel, I should like to thank all those who, in those tragic moments, enveloped us in the mantle of their sympathy and strengthened our determination to pursue the struggle for peace.
My country continues to experience a difficult situation brought about by an undeclared war waged against us by South Africa. With repeated massacres and massive destruction of our social and economic infrastructures, this war of aggression, which initially was led by the racist and minority regime of Ian Smith of the then Rhodesia and was taken over in 1981 by the apartheid regime of South Africa, has reached an unprecedented scale. At various moments this war has involved either direct military aggression by the South African armed forces or attacks by mercenaries and terrorists recruited, trained, armed, directed and supported by Pretoria. As a backdrop to this war, and using the vast financial and technological resources at its disposal, the apartheid regime resorts to threats, blackmail, economic blockade, sabotage and a campaign of d is in formation and calumny against our country.
The Nkomati Agreement, signed in 1984 by the People's Republic of Mozambique and South Africa with a view to establishing a climate of peace and good neighbourliness between the two countries, has not yet fully achieved its purpose. As the Gorongosa documents have amply demonstrated. South Africa, instead of ceasing its involvement in the aggression against Mozambique, has escalated the infiltration of terrorists into our country and increased military support to them. Despite the unmasking of this scheme, through the irrefutable evidence provided by the Gorongosa documents, Pretoria has remained captive to its plan of waging an undeclared war against Mozambique, Despite the immense propaganda effort made by the circles that finance the armed banditry in an attempt to give it an acceptable face, these terrorists and mercenaries in the pay of Pretoria remain faithful to their criminal, anti-social and anti-national character. That is proved by, among other things, the massacres perpetrated by the terrorists in Homoine, Manjacaze, Mandimba, Mechungwe and Sena. It is proved by the destruction of property and social and economic infrastructures and by the looting, robbery, rape and sadistic mutilation of defenceless populations.
Without being exhaustive, the following are some of the nefarious effects of the attacks perpetrated by the terrorists: From 1982 to 1986, the terrorists destroyed or looted 1,500 shops and consumer co-operatives, 1,800 schools, affecting 315,000 students; 490 hospitals, health posts and centres, affecting more than 2 million citizens, who lost access to regular health care. In the same period, more than half a million people died as a direct or indirect result of the terrorist attacks; more than half of this total is made up of children below the age of five.
But who are these criminals that indiscriminately sow death and destruction? Who are these murderers that, under the command of foreigners, brutalize and massacre the Mozambican people? Who are these terrorists - or armed bandits, as they have become known in Mozambique and throughout southern Africa? They are agents of colonialism who were always opposed to the liberation struggle of the Mozambican people and who, after the triumph of this struggle in 1974, desperately attempted to prevent the realization of our rights to self-determination and independence.
In their ranks we find drug addicts, thieves, outlaws and criminals, mercenaries and murderers. Their creation and leadership were dictated by objectives and interests foreign and hostile to the most legitimate aspirations of the Mozambican people. On the testimony of their very creator, the former head of Rhodesia's intelligence service, Ken Flower, this group was formed in 1974 in Ian Smith's Rhodesia, It was created as a pseudo-guerrilla movement based on Ken Flower's experience gained from the Portuguese array in Angola. To this pseudo-movement the Rhodesia secret services gave the name of MNR in the middle of 1976.
As a consequence of the war Pretoria is waging against us, and of the natural calamities that affect our country, 4.5 million Mozambicane have been displaced inside the country or have sought refuge in neighbouring countries. In the face of this catastrophe, the international community has shown gratifying understanding and solidarity. On the initiative of the Secretary-General, and in response to our appeal, an international meeting on humanitarian assistance to Mozambique was held earlier this year. As a result. United Nations specialized agencies, governmental and non-governmental institutions, humanitarian and religious bodies have been giving our country precious support in foodstuffs, clothing, medicine, seeds and tools. Thanks to this programme, it has already been possible to save the lives of thousands of Mozambicane.
On behalf of the Mozambican people, I thank all the donor countries and the entire international community for the support given our country, without this support it would have been impossible for us to cope with the countless difficulties faced by the population displaced by war or returning from neighbouring countries where they had sought refuge.
The war in southern Africa is a creation of the apartheid regime. The forces that carry out the massacres are an extension of Pretoria's army. The South African regime wants to subjugate the whole of southern Africa. That is very obvious to the countries in the region. Therefore, Zimbabweans and Tanzaniane are today fighting in Mozambique, side by side with Mozambicane, against South African aggression, in operations that have the logistical support of Angola, Zambia and Botswana. The front-line States understand that what is at stake in Mozambique is the future of the region as a whole. The war being waged against Mozambique is a struggle between freedom and oppression, between equality and racial discrimination, between independence and colonialism.
Even beyond the borders of the front-line States, we are beginning to note positive signs of co-operation intended to bring an end to this terrorism. That is the case of Malawi, with which we have signed a security agreement that is being implemented with positive results.
The broad movement of solidarity we enjoy from member States of the Organization of African Unity, the Non-Aligned Movement and the international community in general strengthens our determination to fight and our confidence to Our economy reveals deep structural and conjectural distortions, as a consequence of a combination of factors such as the financial and trade imbalances  the unprecedented reduction in prices of commodities which constitute the main source of revenue for developing countries  unemployment  the disproportionate increase in the prices of manufactures from industrialized countries  high real interest rates  the adoption of protectionist measures that hamper the access of exports from developing countries to developed countries' markets  recurring hunger that affects millions of human beings  the critical situation inherited from colonialism; the losses occasioned by the implementation of sanctions against Southern Rhodesia direct and indirect military aggression and economic blockade pursued by South Africa; natural calamities  and our managerial shortcomings in the implementation of our economic policy, as recognized by the Fourth Congress of our Party.
Of all those factors, it is the war of aggression being waged against us by the South African regime that most aggravates our economic and financial difficulties.
Between 1975, the year we became independent, and 1981 we scored successes in our national reconstruction. During this period our gross domestic product achieved a reasonable annual growth rate. Our exports reached a peak of $OS 280.8 million. In the field of education, the illiteracy rate, which was 92 per cent at the time of independence, was reduced to 72 per cent by 1980. Our success in the field of health resulted in the establishment of 900 rural health posts. In 1981, for the first time in our country's history, every district had the services of a health professional able to provide diagnosis and treatment.
Significant achievements were registered in many other economic, social and cultural fields. It is those successes that are being threatened by the escalation of South African aggression.
Between 1981 and 1985 our economy registered a decline every year, which brought a decrease in standards of living and an increase in our foreign debt.
Analysing our situation, we concluded that, although the war was the main aggravating factor in our economic crisis, we could not wait until its end to adopt fundamental measures to deal with and overcome the crisis. On the contrary, rehabilitating our economy was a condition of paramount importance for us to win the war.
So at the beginning of this year our Government devised an economic recovery programme that envisages, among others, the following measures: a new system of exchange control that encourages exporters! the abolition of price control on some goods; incentive to producers by means of an increase in the prices of produce; better management methods in the co-operatives; reorganization and rationalization of some State farms, with a resultant redistribution of land to the family sector, co-operatives and private farmers; and a new salary policy, with the aim of increasing productivity. The goal of this four-year programme is to revitalize the national economy and to obtain a level of growth in gross domestic product of the order of 12 per cent by 1990. The assessment made of the first six months of implementation of the economic recovery programme has been encouraging. In the first six months of this year, industrial production rose by 34 per cent over the same period last year. Furthermore# there is likely to be a rise of 12 to 15 per cent in agricultural marketing this year over 1986, owing mainly to an increase in production in the family sector.
In general, we note that the various economic elements are reacting in a positive way to the measures that have been taken and there are indications of a trend towards an overall recovery in our economy. It should be pointed out that there is inevitably a high social cost to be paid for the adoption of an economic programme such as this one.
The international economic crisis, the impact of the war imposed on us by Pretoria, and the disproportionate increase in foreign debt servicing that absorbs or even exceeds our export earnings have all meant that Mozambique, like many other developing countries, finds itself in a strait-jacket of foreign debt which, little by little, is restraining our efforts and initiatives.
To complement our national efforts, we have negotiated the rescheduling of our debt. In May of this year we came to a better understanding, and the terms agreed on were reasonably favourable.
The recent meeting of the Consultative Group for Mozambique resulted in encouraging promises of new resources to revive our economy and sustain a new start. However, we note that in reality a large part of the additional resources will enter our country only to leave almost immediately in the form of payments of outstanding obligations. We therefore add our voice to the growing demand for profound reforms in international financial and economic relations and for lasting, effective and equitable solutions.
In this context, we share the views held by many countries, organizations and personalities, such as the Vatican, on an ethical approach to the issue of international indebtedness that emphasizes the need for both creditor and debtor countries to share equitably in the sacrifices and efforts required by the adjustment programmes, and criticizes the prescription of authoritarian and technocratic measures that do not take into account the particular circumstances of each country. This view reinforces the authoritative stand taken in favour of an equitable settlement of the debt of the developing countries.
Some of these concerns are echoed in the Venice Declaration made by the seven industrialized countries, which shows an awareness of the need to encourage structural changes and to review the intolerable interest rates. It is my hope that this awareness will generate the necessary will to work out a just and equitable solution of the debt problem.
The undeclared war waged against Mozambique by South Africa is part of the latter’s strategy of domination of the whole of southern Africa. The twin vectors of this strategy are to maintain the essence of apartheid within the country, on the one hand, and to impose South Africa's hegemony on the region, on the other. This hegemony has been challenged by the triumph of the national liberation struggle in Angola, Mozambique and Zimbabwe.
The attempts to mask apartheid through cosmetic reforms that do not change the essence of the system are firmly opposed by the South African people. The South African people are not struggling for the modernization of the racist regime: they are fighting for a democratic society in which all women and men have equal rights and duties, and where all - black, white, Coloured and Asian - are simply citizens of one country. The declaration of a state of emergency, the strikes, the demonstrations and the mass arrests are clear signs of the failure of the reformist option in South Africa. In response to the popular uprising, the regime is becoming more deeply entrenched in obstinacy and violence. It has now become more obvious to the international community that Pretoria is not sensitive to the demands of the South African people for freedom and democracy and that it refuses to negotiate the end of the apartheid system.
The international community must firmly support the struggle of the South African people under the leadership of the African National Congress of South Africa (ÄNC) and other democratic forces in South Africa. It should, moreover, exert effective pressure on the South African regime to persuade it to accept the only peaceful means of solving the conflict, namely, to abolish the racist laws, to free Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners, to legalize the ANC and other democratic political bodies, and to negotiate with them the political future of the country.
We note, with satisfaction, that wider and wider circles in the South African white community understand the need to tread this path. The movement against apartheid inside South Africa draws to its ranks thousands of white South Africans, especially the young, who want to destroy the artificial barriers imposed by racism and to play a role in building a non-racial and democratic society. Significant political, economic, social, cultural and religious circles in the white community are establishing contacts with the ANC in the hope of finding a solution to the problem of South Africa. Since its independence in 1975, the People's Republic of Angola has been facing devastating invasion and attacks carried out directly by the South African armed forces. It is the duty of the Assembly to reaffirm its condemnation of the South African aggression against Angola and to demand the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the South African regime's troops. We reiterate our fraternal solidarity with the people and Government of the People's Republic of Angola.
Regarding Namibia, we pay a tribute to the recent proposals made by the People's Republic of Angola aimed at bringing to an end South Africa's aggression and occupation of parts of Angolan territory and creating conditions conducive to a negotiated settlement of the issue of Namibia. We once again reject the policy of "linkage" and demand immediate and unconditional implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). We salute the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), the sole, legitimate representative of the Namibian people, who are struggling with courage and determination for Namibia's independence.
It is encouraging for us to note that there is, on the part of the international community, an increasingly clear understanding of the real nature of the conflict and the difficulties southern Africa faces. Evidence of this can be found in the growing support that the front-line States enjoy in their efforts to establish a lasting peace in the region. The international community must ensure the strengthening of the defence capability of the countries in the region so that they may effectively face South Africa's aggression.
The international community in general and the Western countries in particular should make a firm commitment to promote the economic and social development of the independent countries of southern Africa. This commitment could find expression through bilateral or multilateral channels, particularly within the framework of the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC), which has shown itself to be a valuable instrument in the struggle for economic emancipation and to lessen our dependence on South Africa.
The proliferation of conflicts in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Latin America, the continuous growth in stockpiles of nuclear arms and other means of mass destruction, the steadily widening gap between developed and developing nations - all are issues that represent a grave threat to the future and the very survival of mankind.
Despite the efforts made by our Organization in the promotion of peace and international security, it has to be admitted that the progress achieved so far is modest.
On the African continent, the occupation of parts of the territory of the Sahraoui Arab Democratic Republic and the denial of the right of the Sahraoui people to self-determination and independence continue. We are still convinced that solution of this problem will be made possible by implementing the relevant resolutions of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations. We reiterate our support for and solidarity with the Sahraoui people.
Speaking of the conflict between Chad and Libya, we regard as positive the acceptance by both parties of a cease-fire, as announced in Ethiopia by the current Chairman of the OAU. Similarly, we hope that Chad and Libya will co-operate with the efforts of the ad hoc committee that recently met at the summit level in the Zambian capital, Lusaka.
Regarding the issue of the Middle East, the People's Republic of Mozambique reaffirms its support for the just cause of the Palestinian people under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), their sole, legitimate representative: the establishment of a free, independent and sovereign State. We favour the convening of an international conference on the Middle East as a step towards a negotiated settlement of this question.
We demand that Israel withdraw its forces from all Arab territories occupied since 1967 and respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all the States of the region, including Lebanon.
We renew our appeal to the Governments of Iran and Iraq to bring to an end the fratricidal war that is devastating both countries and to co-operate with the United Nations endeavours for a negotiated settlement of the conflict.
We support the efforts being made by the Secretary-General with a view to helping the two Cypriot communities find a just solution to the problem of Cyprus without foreign interference.
The Asian continent continues to suffer from violence and war.
We urge the withdrawal of foreign forces occupying the territory of East Timor, in order that the Timorese people may freely exercise their right to self-determination and independence, in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and Security Council.
We express our solidarity with the struggle of the Timorese people, led by FRETILIN, for the attainment of their legitimate and inalienable rights.
On the Korean peninsula, the People's Republic of Mozambique supports the initiatives of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea for a peaceful reunification of that nation.
We encourage the Secretary-General to pursue his efforts aimed at finding a just and lasting solution to the question of Afghanistan.
One can consider positive the results reached in the negotiations between Indonesia and Viet Nam on the issue of Kampuchea. My country is following developments in Latin America with attention and concern. We express our solidarity with the people of Nicaragua in their struggle in defence of their national sovereignty, territorial integrity and peace. We pay a tribute to their repeated readiness to find a negotiated settlement of the conflict affecting Central America. We are in solidarity with the struggle of the people of El Salvador for the triumph of democracy in their country. The efforts made in that region to resolve current conflicts by means of negotiations - and particularly the Agreement reached by the Central American countries in Guatemala - offer hopeful prospects for the restoration of peace in the region. №e People's Republic of Mozambique supports these initiatives and hopes that the international community will do likewise.
In the South Atlantic, we favour a negotiated solution to the question of the Malvinas. The good offices of our Secretary-General can play an important role in this question.
Turning now to the Indian Ocean, of particular interest to my country are the efforts being made to turn the Indian Ocean into a zone of peace, free of nuclear weapons.
In this context, we urge all Member States to co-operate with the Ad Hoc Committee on the Indian Ocean, so that it can successfully complete its work and fulfil its mandate without further delay, and pave the way for the early convening of the international Conference on the Indian Ocean. It is with anguish that all humankind notes that the stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction at current levels entails in itself the danger of destroying the life of our planet. It is essential not only to halt the development of these means of mass destruction but also to ensure their limitation and complete elimination.
The People's Republic of Mozambique regards as highly significant the talks between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with a view to reaching agreements on the limitation and elimination of nuclear weapons and other arms of mass destruction.
We welcome the result already achieved on medium-range missiles. This is a significant step towards general and complete disarmament. We hope that the commendable efforts made and the flexibility demonstrated by the two parties will continue. We look forward to seeing the redoubling of the political will of all those whose contribution is relevant to the success of this endeavour. Detente between the nuclear Powers will decrease tension and the tendency to create zones of influence detrimental to the interests of the world community as a whole. The reduction of arms will release resources that must be used to the benefit of the harmonious development of nations, particularly developing countries.
The Mozambican people are steadfast and determined. We love freedom and we prize independence. Now, as in the past, we are making huge sacrifices to preserve our freedom and independence.
Today, when we take up arms, we do it solely in defence of a nation that is ours, in defence of a freedom that was achieved through a hard-fought struggle. We do it in defence of the interests of our people, of the objectives of our non-aligned State, of our ideals of liberty, peace and social progress. The solidarity we enjoy is evidence that the international community understands that this is the guiding force of our people and the main aim of our State.
In saluting the international community, governments, international institutions - the United Nations specialized agencies in particular - and non-governmental and humanitarian bodies for the assistance rendered to our country, we urge them to continue and increase their support so that our people may defend themselves more effectively from the aggression to which they have been subjected.
In concluding, I want to reiterate our adherence to the principles of the United Nations. We reaffirm our determination to co-operate with the United Nations system and all countries in the realization of the objectives of this great world Organization, namely, the elimination of focal points of tension  the containment and elimination of conflicts; the establishment of a just international economic order  disarmament  the elimination of wars, small or big, local or world-wide  and the preservation of peace and security. Our active non-alignment is the foundation of the strengthening of our friendship and co-operation with all nations regardless of the economic and ideological systems they embrace. We are always ready to co-operate with all those that respect our independence and those that wish to work with us on the basis of mutual respect and all the universal principles of the United Nations.
I am confident that representatives will faithfully convey to their peoples and Governments this message of co-operation, friendship and peace. The struggle continues.


It is my pleasure to extend to you, Sir, the warm congratulations of my country on your election to the presidency of the current session of the General Assembly. Your election to this high office reflects the international community s appreciation of your outstanding abilities. I wish you success in conducting the affairs of this session.
Allow me also, Sir, to convey to your predecessor my country's deep appreciation of the wisdom and ability with which he presided over the work of the previous session.
Democracy is the best option of the peoples of the free world. Our Sudanese people has unanimously opted for democracy and adamantly clings to liberty. The Sudanese have experienced dictatorship and military rule at first hand.
It is a source of pride for me to be able to state that my country has now succeeded in building a number of multilateralist democratic institutions. Our belief in political democracy must of necessity lead to the democratisation of our country's economic and social life. Thus the fabric of democratic rule would become whole. It is for this reason that the Sudan strives after economic and social development. This is no easy task in a country as vast as ours which, as a third world country suffers from the accumulated problems of the past and the present, which beset its endeavours vis-à-vis the challenges of the future.
The nascent democratic experience in Sudan faces numerous internal and external challenges. Therefore, it needs the support of all the democratic forces of the world. Experience has shown that the developing nations can find it beyond their reach to tread the path of democracy in the face of the difficult problems which stand in their way.
My country is a case in point. Only the concerted efforts of the international  community represented by the United Nations system and friendly countries, threw us a lifeline when we faced the horror of famine. The problems facing my country are the following: first, the problem of drought and desertification. This is one of the most dangerous threats to life for man and animal alike in the continent of Africa to which the Sudan belongs. It is a deadly threat because it begets famine and its attendant miseries. Therefore, it calls for regional and international co-operation in the study of its root causes and practicable preventive measures. It also calls for the provision of the material and technical means that would make possible the study and the development of such measures. In this respect, my country commends the efforts of the United Nations and its specialized agencies and calls for the continued assistance of the entire international community.
Secondly, the refugee problem. For more than three decades now, Sudan has become the recipient of ever increasing numbers of refugees. It has adopted a constantly hospitable policy vis-à-vis this problem. This was only natural in the case of a country with its deeply rooted traditions of hospitality and a strong commitment to the relevant regional and international instruments. However, the influx of refugees is on the increase, especially in the eastern, western and southern areas of the country. Refugees now constitute more than 10 per cent of the total population of the country. Obviously, this has created excessive pressures which the country's economic and human capabilities cannot withstand.
While the Sudan fully abides by the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of its neighbours, it favours the voluntary return of the refugees to their countries of origin. The Sudan will spare no effort in seeking appropriate ways and means to achieve the national reconciliation which would ensure the voluntary return of the refugees to their countries. In the meantime,   is necessary to organize the refugee situation in such a way as to ensure their safety, and provide them with the necessary health and educational facilities without overburdening the country's means or jeopardizing the security and Well-being of Sudanese society.
While we deeply appreciate the support of the international community in this connection  my delegation looks forward to more efforts being made to find lasting solutions to the root causes of the refugee problem and to step up the relief operations.
In this connection, Sudan welcomes all missions dispatched by the world body. We also highly commend the report of the specialized inter-agency mission which visited Sudan last year and warmly welcome the mission now assessing our country's needs in relation to the refugee problem. Sudan also sets great store by the implementation of all the recommendations relating to the linkage of relief assistance to development efforts in the refugee areas.
In the context of the collective responsibility of the international community in addressing the problem of refugees, my delegation wishes to give notice that we all face an extremely grave situation which will deteriorate further unless all the United Nations resolutions and recommendations relating to the refugees are fully and urgently implemented.
The third problem facing my country is that of indebtedness. The present democratic Government in the Sudan inherited, among other problems, a heavy burden of external debts which were incurred, on the one hand, as a result of the reckless policies of the deposed military regime and, on the other, because of the worsening of the acute international economic crisis. The cost of debt servicing now exceeds our export earnings.
Sudan, like other less developed nations, is unable to strike a balance between the repayment of its debts and the continued provision of urgently necessary and basic services to its people. The debt situation, in our view, calls for mote concerted efforts on the part of the international community and the immediate development of creative remedial solutions. It also calls for new and more concessional repayment and rescheduling over more extended periods of time, with longer grace periods.
In this context, my delegation welcomes the positive signs which indicate the earnestness of the international community in seeking a solution to the debt problem. We welcome also the final statement of the recent Venice summit of the Western industrialized countries. We sincerely hope that those intentions will be translated into practical, positive steps. Together with other African countries, my delegation calls for the convening of an international conference to consider the ever-escalating problem of African indebtedness.
The current world economic situation continues to affect adversely the economies of many countries of the world, particularly in Africa. Those are countries which face deteriorating conditions that make it extremely difficult even to think of formulating plans of economic and social development. Lack of foreign exchange is not the primary difficulty in that respect. In many instances it is the inability to provide the local components required for the implementation of development plans that is the greatest difficulty.
By the end of this decade, all the countries of the world, regardless of wealth, will face grim prospects that will threaten their very existence, unless North and South join hands and co-operate in all economic areas. Such concerted efforts will require greater sacrifices and concessions on the part of the developed nations and more diligence on the part of the developing nations in putting their house in order and redressing their administrative and financial infrastructure to eliminate shortcomings and adverse elements.
We have continued to call  from this rostrum and in other forums, for the sort of genuine and effective international interdependence that would meet all our needs. Our world has become so compact and interdependent as to make all its small nations vulnerable to the repercussions of any policy decision by any of the industrialized countries.
We remain convinced that a proper formula for addressing economic backwardness and the problems of development will never be achieved under the existing inequitable international economic order. An equitable formula is essential if we are to protect the rights of producers of primary commodities and make them compatible with the interests of the manufacturers.
The hope of a new international economic order, though distant, still seduces the peoples of the third world. None the less, we concede that it is incumbent upon our Governments to rationalize their economic and fiscal policies. In this respect, we wish to put it on record that many African Governments have taken considerable steps towards the achievement of that goal in line with the resolutions of the African Steering Committee. However, the African attempts at rationalization have not been matched by a parallel attempt at economic rescue. While the returns on our commodities have slumped, the costs of agriculture inputs and other manufactured goods have soared. Aid has dried up, our export earnings have fallen. We are indeed caught in a vicious circle.
The United Nations was created primarily to maintain international peace, ensure security, bring about international co-operation in the economic and social fields, foster the principles of good-neighbourliness, resolve disputes by peaceful means and ensure non-interference by any State in the internal affairs of others. We have acted to translate those lofty purposes and principles into guidelines in the conduct o£ our foreign policy and our relations with our neighbours and the other countries of the world.
It is the duty of Members of the United Nations to demonstrate the Organization's credibility and reaffirm its world role. We can do that by showing respect for the spirit and the letter of the Charter, applying its principles and adhering to them in coping with international problems. Non-compliance with the provisions of the Charter, the partisan, self-seeking approach of some countries at the expense of the international community's interests and the tendency of certain States to bypass the United Nations in dealing with disputes constitute, in our opinion, an infringement of the commitments of Member States with regard to the Organization and a retreat from what the world had agreed upon when this Organization was created.
The achievements of the United Nations are a source of pride to us all. We believe that this is the view of all Member States. However, there are evident shortcomings. The Organization is still unable to ensure independence and sovereignty for the Palestinian people on their native soil. It has failed to achieve the independence of Namibia. It has failed to put an end to the heinous policies of apartheid practised by the white minority in South Africa. And it has failed to curb the nuclear and conventional arms races.
The United Nations continues to face a naked challenge in the Middle East. The situation there is deteriorating. The adoption of yet more resolutions to be added to those already on the records of the Organization would no longer be useful. The dimensions and origins of this question are clear enough. The international community is well aware that peace in the Middle East cannot be achieved without justice. The Organization's resolutions state that quite clearly. The Palestinian question is the crux of the conflict in the Middle East and its root cause. There can be no peace in the Middle East without Israel's total and unconditional withdrawal from all the Arab territories it has occupied since 1967f including Al-Quds Al-Sharif# that is# the Holy City of Jerusalem.
Israel's continued disregard of United Nations resolutions, its contempt for the international consensus and its persistent and flagrant violation of the Charter are, in our view, the cause of the deteriorating situation in the region.
In view of all this, we reaffirm once more the importance of convening an international conference on peace in the Middle Last, in accordance with the 1983 Geneva Declaration on Palestine, endorsed by this Assembly. The international conference should be held under the auspices of the United Nations, with the participation of the Palestine Liberation Organization the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
My country watches with sorrow and anxiety the Iran-Iraq war, which has entered its eighth year. That war has exacted a heavy toll in lives and resources of the two countries, with which we have close spiritual and historical ties. The developments arising from that conflict have created a new situation fraught with danger for the security of the region and the peace of the world. My delegation commends Security Council resolution 598 (1987), which is proof enough of the wish of the international community to see an immediate end to the conflict. We also commend the efforts of the Secretary-General towards the implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987), and hope that he will continue his mission of good offices and achieve a comprehensive and honourable settlement to this protracted dispute.
Many years have passed since the international community voiced its first unequivocal condemnation of the abhorrent crime of apartheid practised by the racist minority in South Africa. None the less, the racist Pretoria regime continues to defy the international will, and ignore the world Organization's resolutions, following the lead of its twin, the Zionist entity in Israel.
The overwhelming majority of the people of South Africa are still deprived of their basic human rights and subjected to the most brutal measures of oppression and racial violence. From this podium, we salute the struggle of the South African people and laud their just cause. We reiterate our unflinching support for their just revolution under the leadership of the African National Congress of South Africa and the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania. We also reiterate our conviction that the dismantling of the abhorrent system of apartheid and the realization of the aspirations of the African majority in South Africa can be achieved only through the cornering of the Pretoria regime and imposition of a total embargo and comprehensive sanctions against it under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. The world is duty-bound to undertake further concerted action in support of the just struggle of the people of South Africa in order to bring about the long awaited change in that part of the African continent.
The international community has reiterated often enough its condemnation of the racist regime's continued illegal occupation of Namibia and its plundering of the wealth of that Territory. All the African States agree that there must be a peaceful democratic solution to this problem. However, the manoeuvres of the racist regime continue to obstruct and thwart every effort aimed at achieving a just and lasting peace. It should be emphasized here that the only acceptable framework for a comprehensive, urgent and peaceful settlement of this problem is Security Council resolution 435 (1978), Until such time as that resolution is implemented, there is no alternative but to support the struggle of the people of Namibia under the leadership of the South West Africa People's Organization until the attainment of full Namibian independence and sovereignty over its entire territory. We therefore call upon all peace-loving nations to continue to support that people's just struggle for liberation.
We listened attentively to the statement of the delegation of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, which gave details concerning the policy of national reconciliation recently declared by the government of Afghanistan and its new intention to make Afghanistan an independent non-aligned country. We are of the view that unless all foreign troops are withdrawn from all Afghan territory, realization of the aspirations of the Afghan people to national reconciliation, complete independence and non-alignment will remain remote.
We share the view that national reconciliation is but another facet of peaceful coexistence, a principle which we have embraced as a guiding light for our policy. Such national reconciliation, in Afghanistan or in Kampuchea, cannot be achieved without the total withdrawal of all foreign forces from those countries. Withdrawal would be the starting-point and the essential springboard for national reconciliation.

The arms race has pushed all nations, especially those in possession of huge arsenals, to the brink of a very dangerous situation and has caused them to manufacture ever increasing quantities of new, more lethal weapons. Like other developing countries, my country looks with anxiety and alarm upon the vast resources being squandered on nuclear and conventional armaments at a time when millions in Africa and the rest of the third world are dying of hunger and millions are suffering from disease, poverty and ignorance.
In recent years, the arms race has sucked in certain developing countries under the pressure of regional conflicts. The acquisition of weapons by those countries has placed a heavy burden on their resources, hampered their development programmes, put them deeper in debt and exacerbated their economic problems.
Despite all this, we feel heartened by the initial agreement in principle between the United States of America and the Soviet Union on the elimination of short-range and medium-range nuclear missiles in Europe. We hope that this significant step will be followed by further steps towards the cessation of the arras race.
We hope too that the Conference on Disarmament will be able to formulate a comprehensive test-ban treaty that would prohibit nuclear testing in the atmosphere, underground and under water. The conclusion of such an agreement is a prerequisite for an end to vertical and horizontal nuclear proliferation.
The International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, which recently concluded its deliberations here in New York, was a landmark; it affirmed the principles of multilateralism in disarmament negotiations, and highlighted the link between disarmament and development. For the first time in the history of international relations, the Conference succeeded by promoting acceptance of the principle of trade and development. The very fact that it was possible to convene the Conference sent a strong message to the major Powers that disarmament negotiations are no longer the preserve of nuclear Powers. The Conference recognized too that non-military threats are among the dangers facing regional and international peace and security.
Although the final document of the Conference was adopted by consensus, it fell short of the hopes and aspirations of developing countries, which are the prime victims of the arms race and of its negative impact upon their security and their social and economic development. Nevertheless, my delegation sees in the Conference a beginning of a long path which may lead to success if we show the resolve to affirm the principle of collective security, as envisioned by the Charter.
In conclusion and notwithstanding the foregoing, we meet at the forty-second session in hope and optimism. We feel optimism because the international Organization has restored its credibility and regained its ability to cope with hotbeds of tension and solve conflicts between its Members forcefully and with firm perseverance, and because Member States have recognized that the obnoxious system of apartheid cannot be reformed and must be eradicated, and the major Members of this Organization have begun the march towards disarmament. Another reason for optimism is that the international community has highlighted the grave and imminent dangers that threaten our world. Moreover, there is growing progress regarding the peace initiatives in Central America, and constructive bilateral and multilateral consultations are now under way to solve the critical situation in Angola, which could accelerate the attainment of complete independence for Namibia. It is our earnest hope that this optimism will prove justified.


Mr. President, your great country, the German Democratic Republic, and your region of Eastern Europe, have done the international community great honour in making available to it the services of such an outstanding internationalist as you are. We are confident that your stewardship will be rewarded with Important achievements for our Organization. As a member of the General Committee, my delegation will give you its unstinting support as you carry out your tasks. I also congratulate my namesake, Mr, Joseph Reed, on the new career upon which he has now entered.
What can we say about your predecessor, Mr. Humayun Rasheed Choudhury. It was his tireless efforts and patient negotiating skills that brought about bold compromises on the difficult question of restructuring the United Nations system, a process that we hope is genuinely aimed at revitalizing the delivery system of the United Nations rather than at crippling the Organization. The Assembly will miss his authoritative gavel but it can take comfort in the fact that his successor is a man of no less sound diplomatic skill and experience.
Our Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, continues to be a true successor of the great men of letters and impeccable credentials who have come to our Organization to serve their fellow men. His annual reports are invaluable tools in our work. We must heed his advice on what needs to be done to deal with the intractable problems confronting us. My delegation salutes him and his staff at the end of another year of their dedicated service on behalf of us all.
As the year 1987 draws to a close, there is mounting evidence that the international economic situation will not be much different from that of last year. The overall environment still presents blurred images and conflicting visions. Most economic observers agree that growth, even in the industrialized countries, remains sluggish and volatile.
For the developing countries, this means that the spectre of woes that has haunted their economies in recent years, is still present. But for Africa, which in solidarity with the international community adopted the African Priority Programme for Economic Recovery (1986-1990) in this Assembly last year, the situation is particularly serious. The unity of purpose demonstrated at that historic session has not been vindicated. Although Africa has demonstrably tried to initiate the reforms called for by the Programme, the international economic environment has, on the other hand, deteriorated sharply since last year, making nonsense of some of the reforms we have undertaken.
The economically ravaged continent has enjoyed no relief. Prices of primary commodities from which African countries derive most of their foreign exchange remain terribly depressed, the debt burden has become unbearable, interests rates are still sky-high, exchange rates of major currencies have remained volatile, while protectionist tendencies are rearing their ugly heads and multilateral official development assistance has been reduced. Add to this litany of economic woes persistent natural calamities ranging from drought, desertification and cyclones to crop pests and the population explosion, as well as man-made ones, such as civil wars and destabilization: and one has a continent on the verge of economic collapse.
The World Bank estimates that during 1986 the economies of developing countries grew by only 4.2 per cent of gross domestic product. This was hardly enough to cope with the population growth rate, which is around 3.5 per cent in a number of these countries. African economies grew by only 1.2 per cent in 1986. The prospects for this year are such that for developing countries the overall growth would hardly average between 3 and 4 per cent of gross domestic product. Out of these figures, the Economic Commission for Africa (EGA) estimates that the African region will experience a growth rate of between 2 and 2.5 per cent of gross domestic product.
The Commission has been quick to point out, however, that even these figures may have to be revised downwards, given the fact that in a number of African countries the output of cereal and agricultural products is threatened by new dangers. In spite of the good rains that have fallen in some parts of Africa, locusts and grasshoppers are threatening crop harvests in East and southern Africa, the Sahel and some parts of West Africa. In southern Africa, it is already clear that cereal harvests have not been good this year, owing partly to these pests and also to persistent drought and destabilization - destabilization caused by another pestilence, namely that of apartheid.
The fact is that Africa has done its very best to implement the Priority Programme. Painful structural reforms have been initiated in a bold attempt to rehabilitate and revitalize the economies of the continent in response to the Programme and the urgings of the international community. There is more than enough evidence of that a fact to which ECA can attest, and what is lacking is a decisive response on the part of the international community. While we sincerely appreciate and welcome concrete pledges made at the special session, some of which we know will be made good, it is our studied conclusion, nevertheless, that the international community at large has remained generally indifferent to our plight. And this does not help the reforms upon which we have embarked.
We are somewhat disappointed also that the recent seventh special session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) held in Geneva has not met our expectations. The problems of resource flows, money and finance, commodities, international trade, and the least developed countries were basically hedged and thus left without any fundamental and permanent solutions. It is out hope that more follow-up efforts will be put forth to continue to seek meaningful and durable solutions to these problems.
Similarly, we welcome the continuation of the Uruguay Round talks in the belief that they will find solutions to the problems of tariffs and non-tariff barriers which restrict free trade in the world to the detriment of third world countries. We, in Africa, are determined to play our role in the difficult search for solutions to these problems both in terms of developing strategies of self-reliance and in terms of playing the role of co-operating partners with other countries, especially the developed countries. It was in this spirit that an international conference on the challenge of Economic Recovery and Long-term Development in Africa was held in Abuja, Nigeria, in June this year, and an African Symposium on Grassroots Development was held in Niamey, Niger, during the same month. Heads of State of the Organization of African Unity have also called for an extraordinary session on the debt problem in the not-too-distant future.
My delegation also welcomes the setting up of an advisory group by the Secretary-General to look at the question of African resource flows. We hope the report of this eminent group will be considered seriously by those in a position to assist.
The political agenda of the session is familiar. It is almost the same agenda we have seen year after year, session after session in the past several decades. In our part of the world, in that troubled region of Southern Africa, the deadly menace of apartheid remains a source of great anxiety to the people of the region. The situation there is worse that it was when we met here last year. The country-wide state of emergency, through which the South African authorities had hoped to shield their strife-torn country against the eyes of the world and thus give free reign to the brutalities of apartheid, remains in force, but it has not given the country the peace it so desperately needs, nor has it made apartheid any less despicable and evil, or the pressure for change any less imperative.
South Africa remains a violently racist and polarized country, despite the deafening rhetoric about reforms in Pretoria and Cape Town. Despite all the urgings of the international community for change — and dramatic change - black townships are still under military occupation and detentions without trial of anti-apartheid activists - trade unionists, members of the clergy, students and even children - continue unabated. Even leaders of the United Democratic Front, who have taken such pains to follow the rules of peaceful agitation for change, are either in hiding or in prison. Indeed, no organization or institution in South Africa which seeks to identify itself peacefully with the struggle for change has been spared. Universities have become the latest candidates for emasculation and/or pacification. This may come as a surprise but talking peace and change in South Africa has become a dangerous undertaking. I must repeat, talking peace and change in South Africa has become a dangerous undertaking, if not a crime, for those who are not part of the same government which does not want peace and change on terms acceptable to the totality of the people of South Africa. The visit to Senegal a few months ago by a group of white South Africans who have accepted the wisdom of talking peace with the real leaders of black South Africans has become an act of treachery in the jaundiced view of the rulers of South Africa. Those who engage in such extra-parliamentary but peaceful activities have been threatened with dire consequences.
My country remains adamant in its conviction that if there is a way out of the quagmire of apartheid - and we believe there is for the rulers of South Africa - it is the way of peaceful negotiation, the kind of negotiation which the Commonwealth mission of peace that went to South Africa last year had tried to encourage, without success. We know what happened to that mission. It is not the kind of negotiation envisaged by the so-called National Council on which "black moderates" are to be invited to serve while the African National Congress of South Africa (AWC) and those other leaders of black South Africa who are considered radical are to be included only on condition that they renounce violence.
We ask: how can a government that employs so much violence - a government which has killed so many children, so many old people, men and women - simply to enforce apartheid demand renunciation of violence on the part of apartheid's victims, the very same people it kills with impunity? As the Commonwealth negotiating concept envisaged, violence is to be suspended, not renounced, on both sides to enable the initiation of negotiations. This remains the best way to proceed with negotiations, and the onus is on the Pretoria regime to prove that its lavish rhetoric on negotiations is not one of those transparent ploys it often resorts to mask continuing intransigence on its part.
The necessary conditions have to prevail for meaningful negotiations to have a chance of success. First, the white community, or its leaders, must accept as a fundamental and inescapable point of departure, the principle that nothing short of the creation of a truly democratic political order in a united non-racial South Africa will bring peace to that country. Nothing short of that would bring peace to that country. And an important corollary to that is the release from prison of the very leaders - Mandela and others - whose absence from amongst their people will not allow any negotiations to begin. Also necessary and crucial as prerequisites for a successful launching of genuine and meaningful negotiations ate; the lifting of the state of emergency; the removal of troops from black townships; and the un banning of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC), Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC) and other political organizations whose unfettered participation in the creation of a new democratic constitutional order in South Africa is indispensable. Anything less is a waste of time. Just as we have said, and we say now, the so-called reforms are a waste of time - a waste of time and a vindication of our contention that all these reforms are designed to modernize the tyranny of apartheid, to make it acceptable or bearable to its victims, if that were possible.
It is nearly 10 years - and this is another scandal - since the Security Council adopted resolution 435 (1978) as a blueprint for peaceful decolonization, of Namibia. That the resolution remains a dead letter to date speaks uncharitably of the United Nations. Where is the Security Council which drafted resolution 435 (1978)? Where are the Western Powers, the so-called contact group that worked so hard nine years ago to have that resolution adopted by the Security Council? Why the silence, the inaction now?
The failure to implement this important resolution cannot be explained away in any credible way, for the simple fact is that the Security Council has allowed itself to be enfeebled by the arrogance of a small Power, with the result that its own plan - its own blueprint - is likely to die an unnatural death. The United Nations Charter contains all the powers the Security Council needs to have its resolution 435 (1978) implemented. The Security Council must demand - and demand with conviction and with a determined sense of purpose and not with equivocation - that South Africa co-operate in the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) or face the consequences. In other words, the demand for implementation of that resolution calls for the same toughness and determination with which the implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (197b) on the Iran-.Iraq conflict is being pursued. We want to hear all the permanent members of the Security Council in unison, as we saw them the other day on television, threaten dire consequences if Security Council resolution 435 (1978) is not implemented.
That is what they have been doing with regard to implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) . But we do not see the difference between the two conflicts - the conflict in southern Africa threatens peace; the conflict in the Gulf threatens peace. Hence we do not see why people should spend sleepless nights and restless days trying to implement resolution 598 (1987) , and when we ask them to implement resolution 435 (1978) they resort to the veto. We cannot understand that.
So we call for a redemption of honour on the part of the United Nations: the United Nations must redeem its honour. The people of Namibia must not be forced to continue to die needlessly in a war whose termination was decreed by the Security Council nearly 10 years ago through the adoption of resolution 435 (1978) . The South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) is ready, and has always been ready, to begin implementation. The Secretary-General has been itching for action. The front-line States are ready to be as helpful as they can in the implementation of the resolution.
Too much is at stake in our region. Thousands of lives are being lost in wars whose root cause is the situation in South Africa - in other words, apartheid. Like the sword of Damocles the apartheid military machine hangs over our heads. The majority-ruled States of the region have been reduced to war zones where bandit gangs in the employ of the Pretoria regime, complemented occasionally by its commando incursions, sow death and destruction. Massacres such as those that have been occurring with increasing frequency in the People's Republic of Mozambique are threatening to become the order of the day. Using Namibia as a buffer to protect white supremacy in South Africa and as a base from which repeated acts of aggression are committed against its neighbours, Pretoria and its UNITA bandits are carrying out a scorched-earth policy in the south of Angola where untold misery is a common plight, the common plight of the people who live there. The cost in destroyed economic infrastructure runs into billions of dollars.
Of the nine countries of the Southern African Development Co—ordination Conference (SADCC), only the United Republic of Tanzania has not been physically affected by South Africa's war of destabilization. For the rest, the magnitude of the havoc wreaked by destabilization is ghastly. It is estimated that between 1980 and 1986 the cost in destroyed social and economic infrastructure in the SADCC States is roughly $US 30 billion. This is infrastructure SADCC needs desperately if its member States are to liberate their economies from South Africa's economic colonialism.
But there is another cost which cannot be quantified: the cost in human life. How does one put a price on the massacred victims of Homoine, Majacaze, Mandimba, Mechungwe and Sena in Mozambique? How can we put a price on them?
And yet the RENAMOs and UNITAs of this world still have friends here from the Western world and elsewhere. South Africa is not alone in playing godfather, employer and financier to them. They still get weapons and stinger missiles from some Members of this Organization. There are those who seem to derive comfort from the bloody carnage in southern Africa so long as their own interests, be they ideological or simply racist, are served.
The countries of SADCC have no capacity to wage war against South Africa, not is it their intention or ambition to acquire such a capacity. They have sought to devote their meagre resources and the energies of their peoples to the development of their economies in an endeavour to lessen their dependence on South Africa and to promote regional economic integration in the spirit of the Lagos Plan of Action. In this endeavour they have sought and received the assistance of the international community, it is what we do with this assistance - the bridges, oil storages, hospitals, schools and several other socio-economic infrastructures in the SADCC countries - which the bandits and their South African supporters are reducing to rubble. Is this what the people who give us aid want to see happen to their aid? Do they want to give us aid to build schools and hospitals only to allow them to be turned to rubble by their friend, the South African Government?
We appeal to the international community to help us end this madness. All we want for the countries of SADCC is to be allowed to develop our economies in peace and tranquillity. That is all we ask of the international community.
The Middle East has continued to be a hotbed of tension. There appears to be no willingness on the part of Israel to countenance the establishment of a homeland for the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. Israel continues to spread Jewish settlements in the territories it captured in war. Meanwhile, Palestinians remain in squalid refugee camps all over the Middle East, with no respite in sight to their misery.
Botswana does not accept the supposed incompatibility of the existence of the State of Israel within internationally recognized borders alongside an independent homeland for the Palestinian people in the West Bank and Gaza. We believe that that is the only sure basis for durable peace between Israel and its Arab neighbours. My Government does not accept the policy of might is right, and we will never accept it. The Jewish people who have suffered for so long should not be the ones to show so much insensitivity to the plight of others, especially people with an equally sound and legitimate historical claim to the land of Palestine. The long-talked-about international conference on the Middle East must be convened with the full participation of all parties to the conflict, including the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), because we believe that therein lies the hope for peace in the area.
I speak as one who comes from a war-torn region, but I still find the continuation of the Gulf war incomprehensible, for this is a war that really benefits no one, especially the two protagonists. The destruction it has wreaked on the economies and lives of the peoples of the two countries is horrendous and unspeakable. We appeal to the two sides to implement the recent Security Council resolution 598 (1987) , calling for a cease-fire and an end to these hostilities.
On the questions of Kampuchea and Afghanistan, we remain unshakeable. We remain convinced that withdrawal of foreign troops in each case would constitute a first important step to normalizing the political life of these two war-torn countries. Meanwhile, my country will continue to encourage international efforts whose aims are to find lasting negotiated solutions to both questions. We have noted in both cases that, indeed, efforts of one form or another have been made to try and promote solutions through dialogue. But as long as foreign troops remain in those two countries we remain convinced that the best way the United Nations can approach the problem is to ask that those troops be withdrawn.
The problem of Western Sahara continues to defy solution. One party to the conflict has just completed the building of the so-called defence wall. This move can only create more stumbling-blocks in the search for peace in the Maghreb. We reiterate our conviction that the good offices of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations remain the only logical means whereby the parties to the conflict can engage in a free and fair dialogue aimed at allowing the process of self-determination to take place in the territory.
The question of Chad is important to us. That the people of that war-torn African country have never known peace since they attained their independence is a painful fact known to us all. This is why we attach a great deal of importance to the current efforts of the OAU to bring an end to the conflict. And we ask all strangers to that purely African conflict to stay away from it - very far away from it - and to refrain from inflaming the passions of the belligerents and making business out of the fratricidal horrors between those sister African countries,
Chad and Libya,
Looking at the Latin American region, we are encouraged that after a period of inactivity on the diplomatic front concrete steps have been taken to bring peace to the region. The agreement signed by the leaders of Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador in Guatemala City in August has the potential to end fratricidal strife in Central America, if given a chance. It is our fervent hope that outsiders will not find other excuses to sabotage these efforts for their own selfish ends. Let the people of Central America lead the way to their own destiny. Let nobody tell them how they must run their own affairs.

We similarly invest our hopes in dialogue in the search for solutions to the problem of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) . The United Nations has always been ready to assist Argentina and the United Kingdom to resolve their differences at the conference table. The sooner they co-operate in this crucial endeavour, the better for peace and tranquillity in the South Atlantic.
Botswana's position has not changed on the question of the reunification of Korea, because the factors that tutored us into adopting that position have not changed. We remain adamant in our insistence that: first, the two Koreas must be unified peacefully; secondly, there must be dialogue between the two sides to resolve common problems; and, thirdly, there should be no foreign interference in such a dialogue.
On the question of war and peace, Botswana welcomes the ongoing negotiations between the super-Powers aimed at reducing their nuclear arsenals. We have no doubt that any significant reduction upon which they can agree on this score will be welcomed by all nations. We urge them to persevere in this constructive endeavour.
The holding of the International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development in New York during the period 24 August to 11 September this year was long, long overdue. Although its results were not anything dramatic, the Conference nevertheless explored many worth-while possibilities that deserve serious attention in the future. The fact that there is an organic relationship between disarmament and development can no longer be in dispute.
Resolutions of the General Assembly and Security Council must not be taken lightly or dismissed with the kind of contempt to which we have grown accustomed. The image and credibility of our Organization are not enhanced by the very painful fact that Cyprus remains an occupied country despite the adoption of Security Council resolution 365 (1974) and General Assembly resolution 3212 (XXIX), indeed, the indications are that the grip of occupation is tightening. That is very sad, foe Cyprus is a non-aligned country with impeccable bona fides, a Commonwealth member of no mean import and a third-world country whose only crime apparently is to have been placed by geography and fate, like my own country, near a powerful neighbour. Cyprus must not be allowed to perish under the heavy boot of military occupation. The United Nations must prevent this from happening. The independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-alignment of that harmless and peaceful island are very important, at least to the continuance of the precarious existence of small countries of the third world.
The OAU has finally adopted a declaration of its own on the protection of human rights. This is as it should be, for as newly independent countries, some of which are literally still trying to find their feet or bearings, we have a lot of human rights to protect, because the process of growing up following decades of colonialism is not always a peaceful one. None the less, we deeply believe that no human life should be devalued on any basis whatsoever, be it ideological, religious, ethnic or racial.
We pay homage to the High Commissioner for Refugees for his selfless dedication to the cause of refugees. We have found his work invaluable and would urge increased support for him in his difficult task.
The terrorism perpetrated by individuals, groups of individuals and States which have lost their sense of humanity is a universal scourge. My country is pleased to note that there is now a concerted international effort to combat this scourge in all its aspects or branches, including State terrorism. States enjoy no exemption, regardless of their size and the power at their disposal. All forms of terrorism are evil and must be fought without let.
Drugs also continue to wreak havoc in the world. The young generation of today is a hallucinated generation. We note with satisfaction the outcome of the International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, held in Vienna this past summer. The steps and remedies that were agreed there roust be implemented without delay. The United Nations may not have been able, in the 4 2 years of its existence, to satisfy all our expectations in the struggle for the creation of a better world for mankind. Indeed, the agenda before us clearly shows that we still live in a dangerous world - a far cry from the kind of world envisaged by the founding fathers of the Organization. But we are not bereft of hope. The United Nations is the best human edifice ever built. Our imperfect world would have been far worse without it. So I reaffirm my country’s unshakeable faith in the Organization, and I say this with the confidence and hope that it can still use all its potential to respond decisively to the needs of our troubled world in order to remain faithful to its principles and attain its objectives.


My delegation extends to you, Mr. President, our heartiest congratulations on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly of the United Nations at its forty-second session. We have no doubt whatever that the conduct of the business of the Assembly is in capable hands. I wish also to express our deep appreciation of the firm and skilful manner in which Mr. Humayun Rasheed Choudhury conducted the work of the forty-first session of the General Assembly.
I have the honour to address this Assembly as head of the new Government which came peacefully and constitutionally to power by the will of the people, overwhelmingly expressed in a general election held in December 1986. A peaceful transition has taken place in my country after 30 years of unbroken rule by the previous regime. This has certainly been an extraordinary, if not an unparalleled, event. The mandate given to my Government in that election was reaffirmed only three weeks ago in another election at the local government level. The commitment of our people to government by consent of the governed is abiding and irrevocable.
Nearly 30 years ago I attended the United Nations General Assembly for the first time as an observer and a member of Parliament. It was the year which witnessed the entry into the United Nations of an unprecedented number of new States. It was a time of great hope and promise in the decolonisation movement and of a remarkable upsurge of nationalism in what has since come to be known as the third world. It was the era of new, dynamic nationalist leaders whose ideas and personalities ignited the pride and aspirations of millions throughout the developing world.
In the Caribbean we were at the time struggling to weld together a federal State out of ten separate territories with a population of about 5 million and forming an archipelago spread over 1,000 miles of sea, from Jamaica in the north to Trinidad and Tobago in the south. That ideal still remains a dream. Meanwhile, we have been seeking to define and redefine the meaning and limits of independence and sovereignty - not unlike the United Nations itself.
We continue to face the contradiction between formal political independence and the reality of continued economic dependence. We contend with the psychology of dependence, sometimes reinforced by political oligarchies whose narrow interests are served by the time-worn strategy of divide-and-rule. We have come, through long and difficult years, to the hard-won understanding that co-operation among States enhances independence and does not detract from it.
We have therefore been forging closer economic ties and have progressed from а free trade association to a common market, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), serviced by a secretariat and a number of regional institutions. Apart from our institutional arrangements, we are in the process of building a network of relationships and contacts among each other at the level of private enterprise organizations, labour bodies and professional groups and associations, as well as intensifying our cultural and sporting contacts.
The Government which I have the honour to lead is deeply committed to the ideal of regional unity. We have cultivated a closer relationship with other CARICOM leaders and have consciously adopted a CARICOM perspective in our dealings with the wider world. We applaud the move towards a political union within the Organization of Eastern Caribbean states, a sub grouping within CARICOM. It is by such incremental steps that we will move towards the realization of our inevitable Caribbean destiny.
We in the Caribbean are the product of the cataclysmic historical forces that fashioned European, African and Asian civilizations. We are the triumphant survivors of the dehumanising horrors of slavery. We have been influenced and inspired by the great revolutions and liberation movements of Europe, America and the third world, whose themes have been the inalienable rights and the quintessential dignity of man. In the Caribbean we cherish passionately the concept of the dignity of the human being. If we oppose war, racism and the iniquitous system of apartheid, as well as terrorism and totalitarianism, if we struggle to eradicate poverty, famine and disease, it is because we consider them to be an offence to human dignity. The struggle against these forms of oppression is deeply rooted in our history.

The Caribbean region has often been simplistically regarded as a historical backwater, a mere tourist destination whose main offerings are sea, sun and sand, yet the reality is that geographically, historically and culturally the region constitutes a link between North and South and East and West and has played - and continues to play - a part in world affairs out of all proportion to its size and population.
We take pride in our intellectuals and artists who have become world figures - Marcus Garvey, C. L. R. James, George Padmore, Eric Williams, V. S. Naipaul, Derek Walcott, George Lamming, Arthur Lewis, to name but a few. Our sportsmen, particularly in the field of cricket, have written their names in international halls of fame.
We have created the only new musical instrument of the twentieth century out of an industrial artefact, the steel oil drum. We have married it to our indigenous rhythms, the rhythms of carnival and calypso, and made it into a versatile instrument capable of rendering the most intricate musical compositions. Out of many transplanted peoples brought together to service the capitalist and plantation systems, a human phenomenon has evolved - a coexistence and intermingling of peoples of varied ethnicity, religion and culture with growing appreciation of the values of each other's culture and philosophy, and with increasing awareness of a shared identity of ideals.
The peoples of the Caribbean form a virtual Diaspora of their own, and their culture has always exerted and continues to exert a subtle influence far beyond its boundaries. In reality, therefore, we are a crucible where a new civilization is taking shape. Compounded of the civilizations of Asia, Africa, Europe and the Americas, Caribbean man is forever developing new and exciting variations of cultural synthesis.
Our commitment to the brotherhood of man, our historical evolution and experience as a people determine decisively our attitude to world affairs. Hence our attitude, for example, to the system of apartheid practised in South Africa. We consider that system a heinous assault on human dignity. Its continued existence is a burning reproach to all of us here today, a blot of shame on our international community. Its perpetrators must understand that their conduct is repugnant and totally unacceptable to civilized humanity. There must be no accommodation with apartheid in South Africa.
My Government will continue to interdict economic, cultural, sporting and other links with South Africa. At the international level, we will continue fully to support measures aimed at ending the apartheid system, including the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.
We strongly condemn South Africa's acts of aggression against the front-line States, and the use of the illegally occupied Territory of Namibia as a platform for the launching of attacks. The sacrifices of the front-line States in the anti-apartheid struggles of the peoples of South Africa and Namibia are deserving of the maximum political and economic assistance by the international community.
We invoke the support of the international community for the Namibian people in their just struggle for self-determination, freedom and genuine independence. Essential ingredients in any measures of support are, first, strict adherence to Decree No. 1 for the Protection of the Natural Resources of Namibia  secondly, unswerving support for the universally accepted United Nations plan for Namibian independence contained in Security Council resolution 435 (1978); thirdly, rejection of and dissociation from any illegally installed administration in the Territory? and, fourthly, the extension of sanctions adopted against South Africa, which must be mandatory and comprehensive.
It is also of the utmost importance that this Organization closely monitor the situation in the other 17 countries on the United Nations list of Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories. The United Nations must seek to protect the rights, including the right to self-determination and independence, of the peoples of these dependencies. We must assist in ensuring that no policies or practices are adopted in these colonies that may eventually lead to heightened tensions and conflict in their post-independence period.
I turn now to the situation in Central America. The Procedure for the Establishment of a Firm and Lasting Peace in Central America, signed by the Presidents of Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua in Guatemala City on 7 August 1987, is a laudable attempt by the peoples of the region to solve their problems by a regional initiative. The Guatemala agreement is a delicate plant which will need careful and sensitive nurturing if it is to blossom as it can, into the enduring peace which the peoples of the region so deeply desire and need. The agreement responds to the historical imperatives of the region and reflects the ideals and inspiration of the great liberator, Simon Bolivar.
It is also in the spirit of those ideals and aspirations that my Government looks forward to the early ratification of the amendment to the Charter of the Organization of American States, which would permit Belize and Guyana to take their rightful place in the family of American nations.
Trinidad and Tobago is a proud member of that distinguished family. We value highly our links with the nations of Latin America and the wider Caribbean with which we share common traditions, common origins and common interests. And we shall work towards a strengthening of these bonds in the years to come.
I turn now to the situation in the Middle East. Permit me to congratulate the Secretary-General on his dedicated efforts, with the full backing of the Security Council, to bring about an end to the conflict between Iran and Iraq. We trust that these efforts will be rewarded with an early peace. We are also painfully aware that problems of equal gravity remain, and I refer, in particular, to the Palestinian question, the resolution of which is fundamental to peace in the area.
In this connection, we endorse the proposal for an international peace conference on the Middle East. We also urge an intensification of the search for a just and lasting peace which recognizes the rights of all States in the region to exist within secure and recognized boundaries and which guarantees a homeland for the Palestinian people.
It is not only in the Middle East where problems afflict us. Throughout the world there are areas of conflict which must be satisfactorily resolved. I recognize that the task will be a long and difficult one, but it is one we ignore only at the risk of continued global instability and disorder.
The issue of nuclear disarmament continues to be a source of great concern to the international community. All nations, large and small, developed and developing, would be affected by the consequences of a nuclear conflagration. For this reason, we will continue to voice out deep disquiet and apprehension over the spiralling arms race and to highlight the dangers of nuclear arsenals which, in the final analysis, add to a sense of insecurity among peoples throughout the world.
We welcome the recent agreement in principle entered into between the United States and the Soviet Union on the elimination of intermediate range nuclear missiles. It is a development of the first importance and engenders optimism for the future. The leaders of both countries merit our warmest congratulations on this historic step.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that threats to security are not only military in nature. My Government shares the views of those who recognize the importance of social and economic development as a stabilizing factor in the quest for security. From its inception the United Nations recognized disarmament and development as two of the fundamental issues facing the world community· The recent International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development not only reaffirmed the validity of this perception, out also underscored the profound linkages between these two most urgent challenges of our times.
Reduced spending on arms by the industrialized nations can result in the release of enormous financial resources for development. We of the developing world ourselves, however, also have a responsibility in this process to reduce spending on armaments. Too many of our developing nations expend inordinate amounts of scarce financial resources on increasingly sophisticated weapons. These acquisitions very often tend to disturb regional balances and to aggravate tensions, leading to the perceived need for more and more weapons and to the negation of efforts to attain the desired goals- Every effort must be made to break this vicious circle. Its cost in human, material and financial resources is unacceptable-
I turn now to the global economic and financial situation. Most developing countries have experienced in the 1980s sharp economic and social decline. The world economy has grown but slowly and, in the process, the benefits have accrued largely to the developed countries, with the result that the gap between developed and developing countries continues to widen. For the countries of the developing world the major constraints inhibiting growth and development have been chronically low commodity prices, difficulties in securing financing for productive investments, the imposition of trade barriers which restrict access to export markets, and the burden of servicing a tremendous external debt. These influences on the world economy must be addressed if we are to avoid in the 1990s the hardship and wasted opportunities of the 1900s.
The new international economic order, which was conceived as a vehicle for promoting a more equitable distribution of global wealth and resources between developed and developing countries, has continued to elude us. The fundamental rules of the existing international economic system are still determined by a few wealthy nations and weighted against the economic aspirations of developing countries. Many States advocate a free and open trading system, but too often words are not matched by the necessary action to encourage access to domestic markets. We cannot overemphasize the fact that measures to facilitate trade remain a vital requirement for redressing the imbalances in the flow of resources. My Government consequently welcomes the decision taken last year at Punta del Este to launch a new round of multilateral trade negotiations within the context of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. This decision provides the international community with an opportunity to tackle, and resolve, the problem of the many impediments in the international trading system.
The need to facilitate capital flows to developing countries must also be urgently addressed. Concessional assistance has stagnated and the international commercial banking sector, stunned by the debt crisis, has moved swiftly to withdraw and to reduce its exposure in developing countries. In addition, countries like Trinidad and Tobago are denied access to resources solely on the basis of the criterion of per capita gross national product. Such decisions lack sensitivity to changing situations and to the negative effects of declining national income, particularly on vulnerable groups. Decision-making by multilateral institutions should surely take into account a wider range of economic and social factors.
It has now come to be accepted that structural adjustment is an imperative for developing countries during this period. Structural adjustment must, however, be regarded as only one aspect of a meaningful, growth-oriented process. Multilateral financial institutions, particularly the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which have been the main proponents of such policies, should be afforded the necessary resources for an expanded and supportive role in this process. Their impact on an expanding world economy can be enhanced only if they are provided with a larger capital base and allowed more flexible and innovative approaches.
The debt problem has largely been met with a series of uncoordinated responses determined out of frustration and anxiety. Debtors are thus caught on a treadmill of debt-servicing and rescheduling and have in fact become net exporters of capital. The perverse situation in which developing capital-deficient countries are forced to be net suppliers of capital is neither acceptable nor sustainable.
We owe it to our peoples, which hopefully follow our deliberations, to search for and find new and imaginative responses to this crisis- We believe that the agreements struck at the recently concluded seventh session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) will provide a basis on which we could build and advance. We emphasize that solutions to the problem must be based on the acceptance of shared responsibility between debtors and creditors. We support the several positive proposals put forward to that end at the recent joint meetings of the Bank and Fund in Washington.
We of the developing world need not wring our hands in despair or be mere passive observers of international economic interaction. It is incumbent upon us, as developing countries, to take bold and decisive steps to improve our performance and economic structures, and to make them more efficient and responsive to the goals and aspirations of our peoples. Several of our countries are doing exactly that. Collectively, the countries of the South must awaken to our vast potential and diverse strengths. These must not be squandered but harnessed in our striving for development. Joint action by the international community, however, is the inescapable imperative for our continued existence on this planet.
We the Members of this body are committed by our Charter to work towards a world in which nations coexist in peace based on respect for law and justice. If the measure of a State's ability to make a significant contribution towards this end is the extent of its coercive power, then we in the Caribbean are indeed irrelevant to the deliberations of the Assembly. But we do not hold that power can be so narrowly defined or that international affairs can be conducted on the basis that might is right.
It is the cause of man, the cause of human dignity, for which we plead. It is for this reason that we remain committed to the community of the United Nations; because it is here that the weak, the poor, the oppressed, the hungry millions who form the majority of the peoples of this earth, can find a voice and receive a hearing among the leaders of the world. And I am confident that their voices will be heard.