I begin by
congratulating Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko on his election as
President of the General Assembly at its fifty-second
session. I am confident that the skills and vast experience
he has acquired throughout his distinguished diplomatic
career will provide the guidance we need to guarantee the
successful outcome of the session.
I must also recall the remarkable diligence of his
predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Razali Ismail, and his
valuable contribution to the work of the fifty-first regular
session and the nineteenth special session of the General
Assembly.
As the twentieth century comes to an end, it is
evident that all countries in the world, advanced,
developing and transitional, will be substantially affected
by globalization. Further specialization, the widening of
markets through trade, a broader division of labour and a
more efficient and more diversified allocation of financial
resources should increase overall productivity and raise
16

living standards. However, no country will benefit from this
trend spontaneously or automatically. The major tasks that
Governments face today are development and the pursuit of
sound policies and appropriate structural adjustments to
meet the challenges and take advantage of the opportunities
of globalization.
Economic reforms, which Armenia began immediately
after its declaration of independence, have changed all key
sectors of the economy, particularly agriculture, enterprises,
prices and wages, the banking industry and the fiscal,
foreign trade and exchange systems. Concurrently, the
country began the institution of secure property rights and
a judiciary strong enough to protect them.
After a devastating fall in real output from 1991
through 1994, macroeconomic and structural reforms,
combined with privatization, have stabilized the country's
economy while bringing down inflation, and allowed
Armenia to achieve significant growth in 1996. Armenia's
gross domestic product, which dropped 25.3 per cent on
average from 1991 to 1993, has turned around and has
averaged 6.3 per cent annual growth since then. This is
despite a disastrous earthquake in 1988, the conflict
between Nagorny Karabakh and Azerbaijan, which caused
the inflow of more than 300,000 refugees, and continuing
problems in obtaining stable energy and industrial supplies
because of a blockade imposed by neighbouring Azerbaijan.
The drastic changes were coincident with the adoption
of a medium-term macroeconomic reform programme
supported by the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund. The major objectives for the 1997 period
are: to maintain a real annual growth rate in gross domestic
product of about 6 per cent; to continue curbing the
inflation rate for the whole year and keeping it under 10
per cent; and to augment the level of gross foreign
exchange reserves to the equivalent of 2.8 months of
imports.
Also, the Government of Armenia will go on to take
several measures during the programme period aimed at
continuing to refine the targeting of social safety-net
benefits to alleviate a sharp decrease in average
consumption levels and improve income distribution.
For Armenia and countries with economies in
transition as a whole, the move towards world market
prices brought severely deteriorated terms of trade. The
introduction of currency convertibility and a notable
increase in external borrowing began to cause frequent
unsustainable external debt positions. The resources which
are urgently required to modernize the industrial structure
to internationally competitive levels and to improve the
general infrastructure immensely exceed domestic saving
capacities. This situation underlines the necessity of
addressing more thoroughly the needs of countries in
transition by the international donor community, though
this should not cause a decrease in official development
assistance flows to the developing world.
In this context, Armenia welcomes the adoption of
the Agenda for Development by the General Assembly
earlier this year as one of the major documents which
should be among the guidelines for actions of the United
Nations system and affiliated institutions to strengthen
international cooperation for development. We also
support the appraisal of conditions in Africa, least
developed countries, small island developing States and
landlocked developing countries as “Critical situations and
special problems” within the Agenda for Development,
and we hope that the post-cold-war international
community will pay more attention to these issues of
prime concern.
The interaction between the United Nations and
other multilateral development institutions, including the
Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade
Organization, should be intensified, involving the field
level in particular. Joint efforts could be concentrated
especially on those areas where private investors need
encouragement, and where without such general
institutional support they would hesitate to commit long-
term capital. Proper intergovernmental follow-up and
implementation of the corresponding General Assembly
and Economic and Social Council resolutions and
decisions are capable of facilitating this process.
Sustainable development and related environmental
issues are other areas of strategic importance where the
United Nations must further strengthen its credibility. We
acknowledge the outcome of the nineteenth special
session of the General Assembly for the purpose of an
overall review and appraisal of the implementation of
Agenda 21 as an important step to enhance the
implementation of the major international global and
regional environmental agreements.
Economic and democratic reforms are
complementary and heavily interdependent. Political and
economic freedom means more predictable, more
transparent, more constitutional, less discriminatory and
less corruption-prone law-making and enforcement.
17

We recognize democracy and respect for human rights,
universal access to knowledge and information and a high
level of public awareness as preconditions for sustainable
social development. We welcome the Secretary-General's
efforts to strengthen the role of human rights within the
United Nations system.
Armenia considers self-determination to be an
inalienable human right. In this respect, the Nagorny
Karabakh conflict continues to occupy the Government of
Armenia. Despite concentrated negotiations of the past
several years, the maintenance of a ceasefire for more than
three years, and the intensified efforts of the international
community, the Nagorny Karabakh peace process continues
to suffer from a lack of serious progress. The Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Lisbon
Summit of December 1996, which was expected to reflect
on the peace process, to consolidate the ceasefire and to
provide impetus for a possible breakthrough this year, failed
to serve its intended purpose. Instead, by attempting to
predetermine the final status of Nagorny Karabakh, it
unnecessarily stiffened Azerbaijan's position and minimized
the possibility of a mutually acceptable compromise
solution. We believe that the final status of Nagorny
Karabakh should be negotiated between the parties directly
involved and not dictated by outside interested parties.
Armenia appreciates the most recent efforts of the
Minsk Group Co-Chairmen to reach a compromise solution,
which were also manifested in the Denver statement of the
Presidents of the three co-chairing countries. Armenia has
provided a detailed response to the proposal of the Minsk
Group Co-Chairmen, insisting on securing commonly
recognized freedoms for the Nagorny Karabakh population,
as well as guaranteeing their security so that their physical
existence and control over their territory and destiny are
never threatened.
Armenia believes that a resolution acceptable to all
parties involved is key to establishing durable peace and
stability in the region and to stimulating economic growth
and prosperity in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorny
Karabakh. My country remains committed to a negotiated
settlement of the conflict and will continue to engage
constructively in the peace process. However, we urge
Azerbaijan to negotiate directly with the elected officials of
Nagorny Karabakh, for we strongly believe that no final
solution can be achieved without Karabakh's direct
participation in the deliberations on its own political status.
The Republic of Armenia has been actively
participating in the fields of arms control and disarmament.
We reaffirm our commitment to full implementation of
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT) objectives. To that end, Armenia welcomes the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) programme
on strengthening the effectiveness and improving the
efficiency of the safeguards system. We have already
expressed our readiness to conclude a supplementary
protocol to the safeguards agreement with the IAEA.
Last year the overwhelming majority of United
Nations Member States signed the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. We join the international
community in calling upon all States to sign and ratify
this Treaty to ensure its early entry into force.
The Chemical Weapons Convention was another
historic accomplishment in the field of global
disarmament. As a founding member of the Organization
for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, Armenia will
advocate the full and effective implementation of the
Convention.
Armenia also supports the complementary efforts —
through the Ottawa process — aimed at achieving a
complete ban on anti-personnel landmines. We realize the
importance of developing technological solutions to mine
detection and clearance, and we fully support programmes
on assistance to mine victims.
The reform of the Security Council should become
another important component of the overall reform within
the United Nations. Armenia supports the current
discussions on improving the representative character of
the Security Council. We are in favour of expansion in
both categories, permanent and non-permanent. However,
while strengthening the capacity of the Council, such an
increase should also safeguard its decision-making
efficiency. We believe that five new seats should be
allocated as permanent for the Security Council to better
reflect present political and economic realities. This
arrangement should include improved representation for
the countries of Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the
Caribbean. We also support the desire of Germany and
Japan to acquire the status of permanent members of the
Security Council.
As regards the non-permanent seats, it is our view
that the expansion should take into account the legitimate
interests of the Eastern European Group, whose
membership has more than doubled in recent years.
18

The Government of Armenia welcomes the proposals
by the Secretary-General for the reform of the United
Nations. We fully support his commendable efforts to refine
the structure of this Organization and to streamline the
operations of its system, to make it more flexible and
capable of adequate, timely responses to the challenges of
today's world. These proposals are a sound basis for
immediate actions, further negotiations and deliberations by
the General Assembly. There is a strong need to consolidate
the ongoing attempts of the United Nations system and
Member States to alter and develop the Organization. At
the same time, we should avoid reducing the evaluation of
these reforms to a purely financial or managerial approach.
Reform must enable the United Nations to attain more
effectively the mandates and priorities enshrined in the
Charter.
In conclusion, let me assure the Assembly that
Armenia, keenly aware of the importance of an effective
and active United Nations, is committed to contributing its
share in the strengthening of this Organization.


The delegation of Ghana
congratulates His Excellency Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko on
his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at
its fifty-second session. His long experience in the affairs
of this Organization and the great qualities which he brings
to this high office assure us that under his wise guidance
the work of this session will be fruitful and constructive. To
that end my delegation pledges to him its full support and
cooperation.
My delegation also wishes to pay a special tribute to
his distinguished predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Razali
Ismail, who conducted the business of the fifty-first session
with remarkable zeal and efficiency. The promptitude and
energy with which he discharged his responsibilities as
President has left an enduring imprint on the work of this
Organization.
To our distinguished Secretary-General and my
compatriot, His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan, we wish to
express our deep appreciation for his sterling qualities of
leadership. The people of Ghana are indeed grateful to the
world community for having chosen a son to head this very
high and important body. Barely nine months after
assuming his onerous responsibilities, Kofi Annan has
demonstrated an indefatigable energy and commitment to
the reform and efficient management of the Organization
to enable it to measure up to the purposes and objectives
of its existence. We pledge to him our continued
unflinching support.
At the fifty-first session, Member States warmly
welcomed the conclusion of the Pelindaba and Bangkok
Treaties establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Africa
and South-East Asia respectively. We also welcomed the
adoption of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty,
which has since been signed by the vast majority of
States, including my own. We view these as progressive
steps on the road to nuclear disarmament. We therefore
renew our call on the nuclear-weapon States to cooperate
with the rest of the international community for the
commencement and early conclusion of multilateral
negotiations on a universal and binding convention
prohibiting the development, production, stockpiling and
use of nuclear weapons, and mandating the destruction of
the existing stockpiles.
We make these appeals not as an annual ritual but
because of our deep conviction that the elimination of
weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, chemical
and biological weapons, will go a long way to promote
international peace and security, a principal purpose for
which this Organization was established.
While weapons of mass destruction deserve the
priority attention accorded them by this Assembly, the
question of conventional weapons cannot be ignored
either. The illicit transfer and use of this category of
armaments are a source of great concern, since they
constitute a threat to the stability of States and fuel the
numerous conflicts which bedevil the world today,
particularly in Africa. They also provide terrorists, drug
barons and other criminals the means with which to
pursue their illegal activities. We must adopt all available
means to curb the illicit traffic. In the same vein, we
support ongoing international initiatives to conclude a
treaty banning the production, transfer and use of anti-
personnel landmines, which continue to kill and maim
innocent people and disrupt the economic and social life
of millions, long after the end of the conflicts in which
they were laid.
Though the end of the cold war has greatly reduced
the threat of another global war, which twice in this
century brought untold sorrow to mankind, intra-country
conflicts and civil wars continue to wreak havoc in
17

several countries, with resultant loss of lives, destruction of
national infrastructure, displacement of innocent persons
and outflow of refugees into neighbouring countries. In
Afghanistan, Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia, Somalia,
Angola, Liberia and Sierra Leone and the Republic of the
Congo, we see the havoc caused by this new trend and its
potential threat to regional and subregional security.
We in Africa are all the more concerned. For while
the international community is prompt to react to conflicts
in regions of economic or geo-strategic interest to the rich
and industrialized world, conflicts in some developing
countries, particularly in Africa, I am sorry to say, fail to
elicit the same degree of response. Thus, peacekeeping,
which is a primary function of this Organization, has also
fallen prey to geo-strategic parochial considerations. We
hasten to warn that such double standards threaten the
concept of collective security which constitutes the very
foundation of this Organization.
In the West African subregion, we have endeavoured
to fill the gap left by international inertia and selectivity.
After nearly eight years of fratricidal civil war and the
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) intervention in Liberia,
countries of the subregion, with only the limited assistance
of the international community, finally succeeded in
supervising the conduct of presidential and legislative
elections in the country in July 1997, under conditions
generally acknowledged to be free and fair.
We are happy to welcome the worthy representatives
of the elected Government of Liberia to this Assembly. For
true and lasting peace in that country, we urge the
international community to stand by the people of Liberia
as they set out on the difficult road of national
reconstruction. We are proud to have been part of the
process to restore peace and legitimacy in Liberia, and pray
that the Liberian Government and people will continue on
the path of national reconciliation in order to consolidate
the hard-won peace, which is vital for social and economic
development.
While we applaud the return of peace to Liberia, we
deplore the onset of violence, disorder and destruction
following the unjustified overthrow of the democratically
elected Government of President Tejan Kabbah in Sierra
Leone. We call on the leaders of the coup to heed the
unequivocal condemnation of their act by the international
community and cooperate with the efforts of ECOWAS to
restore constitutional order in Sierra Leone.
In recent years, my delegation has had cause to
express its concern and regret at the continued imposition
of unjust sanctions on Libya by the Security Council, in
defiance of the expressed wish of the vast majority of
States represented in the League of Arab States, the
Organization of African Unity and the Non-Aligned
Movement. We note that Libya has fully met the
requirements of Security Council resolution 731 (1992)
and is willing to cooperate with the other parties
concerned in the dispute. We urge the Security Council to
revisit the issue and ensure a peaceful solution of the
conflict and an end to the sanctions.
We also reiterate the call of the Non-Aligned
Movement and other States on the United States of
America to put an end to the economic, commercial and
financial measures and actions unilaterally imposed on
Cuba, in contravention of the United Nations Charter and
all principles of international law.
We urge the people of Korea to work together in
peace to realize their aspirations. Since the end of the
cold war peace on the peninsula has needlessly been
under threat on a number of occasions.
On the question of Western Sahara, we maintain our
confidence in the power of direct dialogue, under the
auspices of this Organization, as the best means by which
the Settlement Plan can be revived to enable the Sahrawi
people to exercise their right to self-determination,
through a free, fair and impartial referendum. The news
that the Secretary-General’s personal envoy, in the worthy
person of His Excellency Mr. James Baker III, has
succeeded in brokering a compromise agreement through
such direct talks is reassuring, and we hope that very
soon, this long, drawn-out conflict will be amenable to
successful resolution.
May I also avail myself of this opportunity to
express my Government’s regret that the Middle East
peace process has been put in grave jeopardy by the
actions of the Israeli Government, which, defying
international outcry, continues its settlement activities in
East Jerusalem. For these are the very actions which
encourage extremists among the Palestinians to organize
terrorist acts against the Israeli population. We would also
urge the Palestinian leadership to continue more
assiduously in its efforts to achieve the objectives of their
treaty with Israel through non-confrontational means.
Many a representative has drawn attention to the
continued and widespread growth of the global economy
18

as we move towards the close of the century and to the
broadening of the reach of economic growth in developing
countries to include an increasing number of low-income
countries. Indeed, many African countries have achieved
stronger growth of output and incomes in 1996 and 1997.
This encouraging trend has been achieved through the
adoption and pursuit by Governments of policies and
measures aimed at ensuring, among others, macroeconomic
stability, inflows of foreign direct investment, open and free
markets and stable and transparent legal and regulatory
frameworks.
However, it is pertinent also to point out that despite
these efforts, many African countries, and especially the
least developed countries, continue to face important policy
challenges, particularly in the areas of enhancing resource
mobilization and allocation, strengthening savings and
investment and financing development. The difficulties
inherent in these challenges are compounded by the adverse
impact of globalization and liberalization. These countries
have not participated in, nor benefited from, globalization.
On the contrary, they have become even more marginalized
in the global economy for the very simple reason that they
lack the physical, financial and human resources as well as
the institutional infrastructure necessary for effective
competition and integration in the international markets.
In specific terms our countries, despite various
structural reforms, have been unable to attract in sufficient
quantities the necessary capital inflows for investment, and
are confronted at the same time with domestic supply-side
constraints which limit our export potential, an
unsustainable debt which swallows a great part of our
national income, and declining levels of official
development assistance, among others. The “prosperity-
poverty” gap, or gulf, between the haves and the have-nots
is ever more yawning.
Under these circumstances, what we need is a new
development strategy based on genuine partnership between
the developed and developing countries and which takes a
holistic view of development, combining within itself all
the tools of development, including trade and investment as
well as official development assistance and South/South
cooperation. Such a strategy will also necessitate the
democratization of international relations, particularly in the
economic sphere; the establishment of open, equitable and
transparent international regimes; the creation of fair
opportunities for all; and the protection of the weakest
members of our community.
It is in this context that we welcome the successful
conclusion and adoption of the Agenda for Development,
which is intended to serve as an initial framework for
renewing and strengthening the partnership for
development on the basis of mutual benefits and genuine
interdependence. While acknowledging and affirming our
commitment to the primacy of national policies and
measures to achieve our development goals, we wish to
stress the importance of the fulfilment by all parties of the
global commitments aimed at supplementing national
efforts. In this connection, we express the hope that the
commitments and internationally agreed targets reached at
recent major United Nations conferences will be fully
implemented by all parties. It is also our view that the
United Nations must be strengthened and adequately
equipped to carry out its important role in development.
In seeking to achieve our goals, we the countries of
the developing world need to cooperate more among
ourselves as a means of strengthening our self-reliance
and complementing international development
cooperation. We therefore need to strive to enhance
cooperation at all levels — bilateral, subregional, regional
and interregional — in the important areas of trade,
investment, finance, science and technology, environment,
human resources development, and information and
communications. This, in the view of my delegation, will
constitute an important strategy for facilitating the
effective participation of developing countries in the
global economy.
The review and appraisal of the implementation of
Agenda 21 last June revealed worsening trends for
sustainable development, as well as the continued
deterioration of the state of the global environment as a
result of the failure of the international community to
fulfil the commitments it undertook in 1992. This is a sad
state of affairs. But even sadder still was the failure of the
review session to make any significant progress on the
critical issues of Agenda 21, owing to the unwillingness
of Member States to establish time-bound and quantified
commitments. It is absolutely necessary that we all
recommit ourselves to the global partnership established
at Rio in 1992 and to the fulfilment of the obligations
voluntarily assumed under Agenda 21.
Ghana has in various forums indicated its support for
the establishment of an international criminal court. We
are gratified that the Preparatory Committee for the
establishment of the Court made significant progress in
that direction at its last two sessions. We hope that with
the same determination and spirit of compromise which
19

has characterized the work of the Preparatory Committee
since its inception, the establishment of the Court will soon
become a reality. We wish to recognize the useful
contributions of the various non-governmental organizations
which have worked closely with governmental delegations
on several difficult aspects of the proposed international
criminal court.
Progress on the Law of the Sea also deserves mention.
With the establishment of the Commission on the Limits of
the Continental Shelf, all institutions envisaged by the
Convention have now been put in place. It is our hope that
adequate resources will be made available to these
institutions to enable them fully to attain the objectives for
which they were set up. It is also our hope that cooperation
between the appropriate United Nations agencies and
developing countries in the sphere of the Law of the Sea
will be intensified to enable developing countries fully to
utilize the benefits conferred on them by the Convention on
the Law of the Sea.
The critical financial situation of the Organization is
a major source of concern to my delegation, as it places our
Organization in jeopardy at a time of challenge and of
opportunity to promote the objectives and purposes of the
Organization. It is regrettable that a number of countries,
including some of the largest contributors, are neither
paying their contributions nor making good on their arrears,
while some even wittingly aggravate the situation by
attaching unacceptable conditions or benchmarks to the
discharge of their Charter obligations in this regard. My
delegation strongly believes that support for the United
Nations must be demonstrated not only by an eagerness to
promote reforms but more importantly by the willingness of
Member States to pay all their assessed contributions
promptly, fully and unconditionally to ensure that the
Organization is financially sound and can meet its mandates
and other commitments.
Ted Turner, an individual with no obligation
whatsoever to support the United Nations, has demonstrated
support in a dramatic and yet effective manner. He has
offered to pay the United Nations $1 billion over 10 years.
What excuse has any country got, then, to say, “We will
not pay”, or “We will pay only if ...”? On behalf of His
Excellency the President of Ghana and of the people of
Ghana, I say thank you to Ted Turner for showing us the
way, for pricking our consciences and for being such a
good citizen of the world.
Today at the fifty-second session, perhaps more so
than ever before, the General Assembly is confronted with
the complex problem of the reform of our Organization.
On the threshold of a new millennium, the United Nations
cannot continue to conduct its business as usual. It has to
adopt bold and imaginative measures to overhaul its
structure and working methods with a view to removing
the obstacles that impede its effectiveness not only as an
instrument for promoting international peace and security
but also as an indispensable agent for resolving the
world’s socio-economic problems.
It is in this context that Ghana has carefully studied
the Secretary-General’s wide-ranging and far-reaching
proposals presented to Member States for their
consideration and reaction. We warmly congratulate the
Secretary-General on his bold initiative. The Secretary-
General has thrown a momentous challenge to all of us,
and we should do everything possible to measure up to
the test by manifesting the necessary breadth of vision
and objectivity of outlook. The United Nations remains
the only international body available to us in our search
for peace, progress and prosperity as well as in the
resolution of differences among nations.
For us as a nation, we are particularly interested in
the new sense of purpose and dynamism that the
proposals seek to inject into United Nations development
activities to make them more coherent and output-
oriented. We support the setting up of an effective
machinery to study the various proposals and how to
implement them, and we stand ready to participate in any
such effort.


At the outset, allow me to take this opportunity
to congratulate Minister Udovenko, our colleague from
Ukraine, on his election as President of this session of
the General Assembly and to express my most sincere
thanks to Ambassador Razali of Malaysia for the
invaluable work he helped us achieve during the fifty-
first session of the Assembly.
It is clear that the way in which we organize
ourselves as a world community is of the utmost
importance for questions of war and peace, poverty and
wealth, and justice and injustice in the world.
The United Nations Secretariat and the leadership of
our Organization have a key role in this regard. All those
serving United Nations institutions deserve our gratitude
for the way in which they carry out their work, both here
in New York and in the field, often in precarious
situations in which some have even lost their lives.
But we should ask whether we, the Member States,
have done enough to find common responses. Have we
given the United Nations the necessary tools for
comprehensive management? Have we not blamed the
Organization for a lack of success in some of its
endeavours, when they may have been doomed to failure
anyway because there was not enough support from
Member States?
We must be fully aware that, as Member States, we
sometimes try to impose tasks upon the Organization
which are beyond its capabilities, while we are all too
often slow to provide help and support whenever and
wherever it is really needed. More than once we have
seen — in Africa, for example — that the United
Nations has had to spread itself too thinly over vast
distances and that adequate support for a United
Nations role has not been forthcoming from Member
States, which has weakened the United Nations ability
to react when a dynamic response was needed in crisis
situations.
Has not the time come, during this session, to
ensure that the Organization can act with renewed
vigour and reconfirm its authority? I am convinced that
the answer to this question should be positive, and that
we should, like the President of the European Union
and other previous speakers, throw our full weight
behind the Secretary-General's proposals to prepare the
Organization more effectively for the coming
millennium.
More efficiency and coordination, greater cohesion
and better cooperation between Headquarters and
agencies in the field are minimal changes, but fully
justified. However, we need to do more because this
year we must resolve the United Nations financial
crisis.
It is unacceptable that Member States should not
pay their dues in full and that they attach conditions to
the payment of what they owe. All the speakers in the
general debate should be able to proclaim from this
rostrum not just that they want to improve the
Organization's efficiency and that they support the
Secretary-General in his efforts to that end, but also
that their contributions have been paid in full,
unconditionally, thus proving their commitment to the
goals of the United Nations and our common agenda.
There can be no doubt that this agenda includes
the achievements of the 12 United Nations conferences
which, from the 1990 World Summit for Children to
the 1996 World Food Summit, have paved the way for
the current agenda in the area of international
development. But responsibilities have often been
distributed injudiciously and too widely, while mandates
have proved insufficient. A more integrated approach in
the social and economic sector has in any case become
necessary. I therefore welcome the fact that the
Secretary-General’s proposals for reform pay particular
29

attention to development, and I subscribe fully to his
proposals.
Furthermore, a well-balanced expansion of the
Security Council should be achieved without delay.
Belgium, together with a number of like-minded
countries that share the general concern with regard to
strengthening the authority of the Security Council, has
clearly stated its views here in New York. We advocate
an increase in both permanent and non-permanent
members, greater regional representativeness, enhanced
Council efficiency and a limitation of the right of veto.
The right of veto is incompatible with the general
interest. It should be possible to modify the
decision-making mechanism so as to avoid recourse to
this instrument, which has become entirely obsolete.
Belgium also pleads for more transparency and closer
cooperation between the Security Council and countries
contributing to peacekeeping operations.
Such organizational and financial reform can
succeed only if it can rely upon a team of officials who
see themselves as being at the service of the Organization
and of the common good. Ultimately, an Organization
reformed along these lines and better able to meet global
challenges will have to strengthen its ties with and
complement regional organizations, not only in the
political field but also at the social and economic level. It
will not be possible to make our world more humane
without the joint effort of all international organizations
in support of a global approach. In this effort, the United
Nations, together with regional and specialized
institutions, is a beacon of hope for millions of people.
Strengthening the United Nations also means
strengthening its ties with other organizations and
associations so that they can keep pace with the overall
reshaping of our Organization and of our world vision.
I should like to provide two examples. With regard
to its policy on Africa, Belgium again stresses the need
for an objective approach on the one hand and
accountability on the other. The approach that we wish to
promote is based on universal principles, the most
important of which is that of human rights sustained by
mutual respect based on equality. It is high time that we
progressed to true mental decolonization. Efforts
originating in the region itself should be given every
chance to prosper and should be fully recognized by the
international community. As for Central Africa in
particular, our common efforts should give priority to the
reconstruction and democratization of the Congo, in the
interests not only of that country and its people, but of
stability in the Great Lakes region as a whole.
On the other hand, in certain areas, such as
Eastern Slavonia, United Nations “blue helmets” have
succeeded in separating warring parties, protecting
populations and preparing for reconstruction. It is
therefore the responsibility first of the parties
themselves and then of the international community to
make every effort to prevent these achievements from
slipping away. By extension, this is also true for the
region as a whole. With regard to Eastern Slavonia in
particular, it is important for the activities of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe to
be based on the accomplishments of the United Nations
Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia,
Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES) and for such
activities to be inspired by and based upon United
Nations experience in the region.
I should now like to focus on another
contemporary issue: disarmament. Needless to say,
weapons of mass destruction should be forbidden. But
this is also true for weapons whose sole purpose is to
destroy human beings, such as anti-personnel
landmines. In Angola, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Cambodia
and elsewhere, these indiscriminate and cowardly
weapons kill some 9,600 people and maim another
14,000 every year. They kill and mutilate more people
than all the weapons of mass destruction put together.
It is high time that these devices were banned. In
less than two years the objective of a total ban on
anti-personnel landmines has met with a positive
response in most parts of the world. Belgium, which
was keen to play a leading role in this field, fully
supports this objective. As chairman of the international
conference on a total ban on anti-personnel landmines,
which took place in Brussels in June, I myself noted
the existence of the political will necessary to achieve a
ban by the end of 1997.
The recent conclusion in Oslo of the negotiations
on a legally binding instrument means that most of us
will be able to go to Ottawa in early December to sign
this important treaty. My country made a great effort to
ensure that we produced a strong legal instrument, with
no exceptions or reservations, and we also advocated
that assistance to landmine victims should be an
essential part of this convention. Belgium is pleased to
note that this international humanitarian standard will
soon become a reality and invites all other States to
30

join in the effort. It is also my firm hope that States will
not wait for the treaty to come into force before they
honour this total ban.
Humanitarian tragedies will continue to occur
throughout the world. Whatever their origins, crises are
become increasingly complicated. Still considerable in
number, they create countless victims and immense
human suffering. Despite greater solidarity and increased
humanitarian assistance granted by a growing number of
humanitarian and non-governmental organizations,
difficulties on the ground have continued to grow in
recent years. Above all, in addition to the problem of
access to victims, the lack of security and total disregard
for international humanitarian law and human rights
require our particular attention. Indeed, I am especially
worried about the recent increase in aggression against
humanitarian personnel. These acts are often carried out
with the sole purpose of blocking their access to
populations who are suffering. It goes without saying that
the authorities hosting the humanitarian workers bear
primary responsibility for their safety.
These authorities must also ensure respect for
humanitarian law, based on values for which a consensus
exists within the international community but whose
concrete application on the ground remains a daily
challenge. This is another task for the United Nations.
Existing legal instruments must be strengthened and
expanded in order to extend the same maximum
protection to humanitarian personnel in the field as is
currently provided for military personnel in peacekeeping
missions. In addition, the directives on humanitarian law
such as those proposed by the International Committee of
the Red Cross should also be revitalized and thoroughly
examined.
Our Organization is increasingly confronted with
crises that require global responses comprising not only
their humanitarian dimensions, but also their military,
economic, political and social dimensions. In these
circumstances, humanitarian organizations must not only
continue to ensure a thorough coordination of the
assistance delivered, but also develop stepped-up
convergence between, for instance, United Nations Blue
Helmets involved in peacekeeping missions and
humanitarian workers.
Greater interaction and cooperation between them is
imperative if we wish to devise an integrated and suitable
response to the ever more complex crisis situations facing
the international community.
I believe that much remains to be done in order to
improve and develop such cooperation: for example,
joint planning for crisis situations, training, defining
roles and mandates and, finally, implementation and
follow-up of operations.
We must bear in mind that humanitarian assistance
must never be used for mere political purposes, and it
cannot by itself be intended to provide a lasting
solution to a conflict. Humanitarian assistance should
therefore never be a substitute for political, diplomatic
and military action.
In this context, Belgium, in close cooperation with
the International Committee of the Red Cross, intends
to organize next year, an international seminar precisely
on the relationship between humanitarian, political and
military actions. The focus will be on interaction
between humanitarian, political and military actors in
situations of crisis. This will be an opportunity to
analyse closely the often widely varying approaches to
this problem.
The objective of international humanitarian
assistance is not only to guarantee the survival of
victims of humanitarian tragedies. It should also help
them be reintegrated into society. Viewed in this
fashion, humanitarian assistance is an important factor
in the protection of human dignity, human rights and
humanitarian law. The international community must
therefore put an end to the impunity of persons
responsible for grave violations of international
humanitarian law, whether committed against
populations or humanitarian personnel.
The creation of the ad hoc tribunals for the
prosecution and punishment of such violations and the
necessary creation of a standing international criminal
court, are important steps towards the fulfilment of
these goals.
However, it is essential that these international
judiciary bodies should be given a fair chance to carry
out their functions. Thus, their legal competence should
be firmly established and recognized by all Member
States.
Respect for human rights has become an essential
yardstick of the legitimacy of the exercise of State
power and is increasingly considered a vital part of a
country’s international status and influence. It has
31

become the new basis for the confidence we bestow on
our fellow Member States.
Next year the General Assembly will devote part of
its session to the commemoration of the fiftieth
anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
That Declaration, without any doubt, is one of the
most important texts of our times. It is the foundation of
the whole array of standards that came after it and that
have been incorporated into a number of international
legal instruments. It is also the bedrock upon which rest
all United Nations activities aimed at better respect for
and promotion of human rights, in accordance with the
Charter.
In the spirit of the Vienna World Conference on
Human Rights, a growing number of Member States, in
full exercise of their sovereignty, have accepted
international commitments by ratifying those human
rights instruments. However, I should like to express the
hope that Member States will also spare no effort in
having their provisions implemented. By so doing they
will contribute to the universality of human rights.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains
an inexhaustible source of hope for all those who are
deprived of their rights, especially the victims of social,
political or economic exclusion or exploitation on the
basis of their race, origin, religion, sex or any other
grounds.
Consequently, I, fully subscribe to the Secretary-
General’s stated intention to integrate human rights
horizontally throughout the full range of United Nations
activities. Belgium reiterates to the Secretary-General its
full support in this respect.
Let me conclude by saying that my country will
make every effort — nationally, regionally and
globally — so that the commemoration of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights will be a resounding
success that reflects the capital importance of the event.


It gives me particular
pleasure to congratulate you, Sir, the distinguished
representative of Ukraine, on your election to the
responsible post of President of the fifty-second of the
General Assembly of the United Nations. I am convinced
that your rich and profound experience in diplomatic
relations, together with your personal qualities, will
facilitate the constructive work of this General Assembly
session and make it an outstanding international event.
The delegation of the Republic of Belarus is ready to
contribute to your endeavours in any way required. I
would also like to use this opportunity to say a word of
gratitude to your predecessor, Mr. Razali Ismail, for his
competent and efficient presidency during the fifty-first
session of the General Assembly.
Every day, international life and international
relations acquire ever more multidimensional and ever
deeper significance, with new meanings and trends in
development that can no longer be constrained within the
7

criteria and standards of the twentieth century. We live at
a time oriented towards the future. A fin de siècle mentality
is not just a nostalgic feeling for the century passing away,
but also embraces a deep concern for the years ahead. The
destiny of mankind, however contradictory and diverse, and
the interests of nations and States may become more
amenable to one common denominator, are increasingly
concerned with the well-being of humanity, and display
numerous convergent features which make it possible now
to discuss the opportunity for a new international order.
Entering the twenty-first century, with its new
international order, does not mean that we renounce the
experience of the last 52 years in the development of the
family of nations under one common programme, as set out
for us by the founding fathers of the United Nations and
outlined in its Charter. On the contrary, it means adjusting
these lofty aims to the new realities of a multifaceted world
and also making the Organization — no matter how
different its separate parts are — the mainstream of human
development, where the economic well-being of people
brings to an end age-old ills such as starvation and
epidemic diseases, as well as huge environmental threats,
and which helps to achieve multilateral understanding
between those participating in this development. Solving
these problems is becoming the overriding ambition and the
main goal and hope of the United Nations, as well as of
mankind as a whole.
Right now, the United Nations has started displaying
its capacity to adapt its structure and policies to the
demands of the future. The orientation of the United
Nations towards the future is the overriding goal that was
established for it during its fiftieth anniversary celebrations.
The change of leadership and the measures that are now
being undertaken in this direction give sufficient grounds
for optimism. We declare our support for these goals and
actions. With a sense of trust and the intention to
contribute, we take note of the actions of the new
Secretary-General, Mr. Annan, in regard to reform within
the United Nations. In this respect, I would like to quote
from a letter dated 5 September 1997 sent by the President
of the Republic of Belarus, Mr. Lukashenka, to the
Secretary-General:
“These reforms are a timely and meaningful response
to the objectives facing the United Nations during this
complex period at the turning point of the millennia,
including problems which ought to be solved with the
purpose of enhancing the effectiveness of the United
Nations system.
“The Republic of Belarus is in favour of a
pragmatic, comprehensive approach to United
Nations reform which would provide for the
strengthening, on the basis of the opportunities
available, of the United Nations potential in
peacekeeping, humanitarian and informational
fields.”
In our opinion, these measures are very important
and represent an up-to-date response to the need to settle
the issues coming before the United Nations during this
complex historical period as we approach the end of the
millennium. These issues need to be solved in order to
enhance the functional efficiency of the family of the
United Nations. When we speak of reform in the United
Nations, we have in mind first and foremost an effective
distribution of United Nations resources, the streamlining
of the Organization’s administrative and organizational
structures, and budgetary and structural reform of the
United Nations Secretariat, as well as personnel
adjustments to meet the challenges of the modern world.
When addressing United Nations reform, we place
special emphasis on the reform of the Security Council,
which is one of the principal United Nations bodies,
responsible for the maintenance of international peace and
security.
Extremely critical in this respect is, of course, the
principle of balanced representation of all regional groups
of United Nations Member States on the reformed
Security Council. The Republic of Belarus is convinced
that allocation of one more non-permanent seat on the
Security Council to the Group of Eastern European
States — whose membership has more than doubled in
recent years — is in full compliance with the provisions
of Article 23 of the United Nations Charter, which sets
forth the principle of equitable geographical distribution.
Among all the new realities that are being brought
into the mosaic of international relations, efficient
mechanisms for global and regional security still seem
paramount. Belarus considers its national security to be
inalienably connected and identified with the collective
security system of the European continent. Each State has,
of course, ample right independently to select the most
efficient means of protecting its own national interests,
including the right to participate in regional security
organizations.
For the last two years Belarus has displayed a firm
stance against the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty
8

Organization (NATO) as a military bloc. I hope for
understanding on the part of the international community in
this respect. In the event that we had on our western
borders not the friendly sovereign Polish State we have
now but a military organization, it would certainly push us
to seriously analyse and reconsider our national security
considerations.
However, recently we have noticed developments
inside the NATO structure itself. We took due note of
several meetings of NATO member States regarding the
transformation of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council
into the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, as well as the
transformation of the major military aims of NATO itself.
Taking into account current realities, we would like to
reiterate our position against NATO’s expansion as a
military organization, but also to add to it that we are in
favour of its development into a universal European
organization for peace and security. It is with this intention
that we have entered into negotiations with NATO and
presented a programme for Belarusian participation in the
Partnership for Peace. We sincerely hope that by
developing a more constructive approach we will reach a
mutual understanding, which could be reinforced by some
mutual obligations.
We would also like to state that with this evolution of
NATO and a thorough analysis of existing world and
regional security systems and treaties, further emphasis
should be attached to well-established regional
organizations such as the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and to their closer
cooperation with the United Nations and its specialized
agencies.
As to the OSCE, we feel certain that it has already
accumulated profound experience and skills in tackling
many important security issues and is able to make a major
contribution to strengthening peace and security on the
continent. Therefore, the Republic of Belarus readily
supports the initiatives of Russia and the Netherlands
concerning a number of special events to commemorate the
one hundredth anniversary of the First Peace Conference.
Should this conference take place in 1999, it would be an
important opportunity to discuss the complex problems of
peaceful cooperation between Member States and to find
and elaborate means to constructively handle major issues
of contention and also to strengthen the legal foundations
of international actions for peace.
I should like to state that the Republic of Belarus, as
one of the founding Members of the United Nations, has
always spoken strongly in favour of the peaceful
regulation of military conflicts in different regions of the
globe and of elaborating new and efficient measures to
prevent the emergence of new crisis situations. That is
why we share the approach of many who have spoken
here, when they expressed concern about the development
of the situation in the Middle East. It is our opinion that
the continuation of the Arab-Israeli dialogue, which will
live up to the agreements previously reached, is a must to
stop terrorism in this region, to put an end to the non-stop
bloodletting of innocent people and to establish a firm
and lasting peace.
The same can also be said of the Balkans, which is
now one of the hottest spots in the European region. We
are convinced that lasting peace in the former Yugoslavia
is possible only under conditions where violence is
renounced and where the parties involved settle their
conflicts in a peaceful manner.
The Republic of Belarus invites the General
Assembly to enable the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
as a founding Member, to resume its participation in the
work of the General Assembly and other bodies of the
United Nations.
Unfortunately, conflicts, including military clashes,
are still a reality of humanity’s everyday existence. We
call upon the Security Council to be more prudent in
handling these conflicts, to be more diligent in seeking
peaceful means to regulate them, avoiding at all costs
economic destruction as well as the political and moral
damage that comes with attempts to apply sanctions.
I should like to seize this opportunity to confirm the
willingness of the Government of the Republic of Belarus
to host the Minsk international Conference on conflict
settlement in Nagorny Karabakh.
As members know, Belarus has always been among
those nations which have spoken and acted strongly to
make effective measures undertaken by the United
Nations in the field of disarmament. I should like to
remind the Assembly that Belarus was one of the first
Commonwealth of Independent States countries, after the
breakup of the Soviet Union, to withdraw nuclear
weapons from its territory. Belarus aims to achieve
further progress in the field of disarmament, in particular
by banning chemical, bacteriological and other toxic
weapons, by putting an end to research into new weapons
9

of mass destruction, and by preventing an arms race in
space. Awareness of these aims means a more secure future
for our children.
The Belarusian position on disarmament issues is firm
and logically predictable. Apart from our refusal to station
nuclear weapons on our soil, we have suggested creating a
nuclear-free zone in the centre of Europe. I must admit that
so far the response to this initiative has been tepid, at best.
But I would also reiterate that no matter the tepid response,
only the creation of regions entirely free from nuclear
weapons and the nuclear threat will facilitate each important
step along the road to the eventual comprehensive
renouncement of nuclear weapons.
Apart from general support for the reform programmes
of the United Nations, I should like to emphasize the
particularly positive approach of Belarus to the idea and the
philosophy of sustainable development. Pursuant to the
decisions and recommendations adopted by the Rio 1992
Earth Summit, the Government of the Republic of Belarus
worked out a national strategy for sustainable development,
whose outline was presented to the General Assembly’s
special session last June.
We appreciate the great assistance rendered to us by
the United Nations Development Programme, the United
Nations Secretariat and the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe, which helped us to hold our
conference on sustainable development in Minsk in April
1997, which was attended by representatives of 30 countries
and more than 30 international organizations. That
conference was an important landmark on the path to
working out an international strategy for sustainable
development and outlined many of the important issues that
are now faced by countries in a period of transition. I
sincerely believe that the sustainable development
programme launched by the United Nations will encourage
the participation of other multilateral organizations in its
implementation, in particular, the World Trade
Organization, which could advance reforms in countries
whose economies are in transition by accepting them as full
members. We fervently hope that the Agenda for
Development, as a long-term policy of the United Nations,
will not only provide reliable mechanisms to deal with
international catastrophes, such as the Chernobyl accident
and others, but will also help establish a system to prevent
such catastrophes and eliminate their consequences in all
parts of the world.
I should like to emphasize that the Chernobyl-related
activities of the United Nations as well as the international
assistance in mitigating the consequences of that nuclear
catastrophe are highly appreciated by the people of
Belarus. Yet the assistance is needed right now —
today — though we will need it in the future as well.
That is a tragic reality the Republic of Belarus is living
through.
As members are aware, sometimes and in some
areas Belarus has been the object of criticism because of
the slowness of reform and democratic transformations.
Concern has been expressed regarding certain internal
developments in the Republic of Belarus. While I would
certainly acknowledge that some of the international
community’s concern has been justified, I would like very
much to say that the Republic of Belarus is a sovereign
State that develops its own policy with due regard for the
opportunities — economic, social, moral and
psychological — of its citizens, within the limits of
international patterns of behaviour and with respect for
human rights and personal freedoms.
It has been an uneasy path, but so far the Republic
of Belarus has avoided the pitfalls in economic and
political areas, and with the due assistance of the
international community expects to attain certain
standards compatible with the developed countries of the
world. Now we are practically the only country of the
Commonwealth of Independent States that had a stable
economic growth of about 16 per cent during the first half
of this year; we have arrested the decrease in volumes of
industrial production and we are a country free from
religious, ethnic or civil strife.
Of course, there are many difficulties still ahead of
us. But as long as a consensus of the people is secured on
major development programmes and aims, the institutes
of government and democracy are stable, and
international cooperation proceeds within acceptable
international norms. There is hope that we shall
accomplish the goals set before us.
Difficult as it might be, we have made quite a few
positive steps to assure the United Nations that we are
seriously focused on strengthening our participation in
this international body. No matter what objective financial
or other economic difficulties Belarus is experiencing, we
seek to fulfil our financial obligations before the United
Nations. This year, the Government of Belarus has
allotted the first instalment to gradually liquidate our
arrears to the regular United Nations budget, and before
the year is over we plan to contribute another $5 million.
However, we hope more careful consideration can be
10

given to reaching a fair solution in the settlement of the
issue related to the payment by Belarus of its arrears in
financial contributions to the United Nations regular budget
and financing the United Nations peacekeeping operations.
I would take up this issue, not to emphasize the need
to avoid payments, but to invite the international
community to distinguish between the cases when payment
is not made due to objective difficulties and when it results
from the absence of will on the part of some Member
States to contribute in accordance with the principle of the
capacity to pay, or is an attempt to exert pressure on the
United Nations and the policy it implements. There must be
a common quest for special solutions to further revise the
scale of assessments, to reconstruct debt in cases where
economic conditions of this or that Member State do not
allow for the regular payment to be made in time.
During the limited time afforded to us, it is not
possible to cover the whole range of problems which
confront the United Nations and which involve special
actions and responsibilities of Member States. I have
outlined only those which the Government of Belarus
considers of the first priority to be addressed in order to
secure the normal functioning of the United Nations.
I would like to close my statement on a note of
cautious optimism. There are many indicators that the
United Nations is advancing in the right direction, and the
participation of Member States in the United Nations
programmes of settling major global issues is a shade better
today than it was yesterday. With all those shades blending
into a positive optimistic colour, the future of humanity is
more secure today than it was yesterday, and certainly a lot
more secure than it was before yesterday.


For some time now the
United Nations has been engaged in a process of reform
and restructuring with the aim of improving its capacity
to address the many challenges which the world now
faces. It has been an arduous and time-consuming
exercise which, if truth be told, has diverted us, to
some degree, from our primary task of promoting
global peace and development. Yet the exercise is a
necessary one if we are in fact to enhance the
Organization's efficiency and effectiveness and to gear
it for service to the international community in the
coming years.
My delegation is confident that, under the able
leadership of the President, we will be able to make
progress in our endeavours. His wide diplomatic
experience, together with his intimate knowledge of the
14

Organization, will serve, I am sure, to orient and
accelerate our efforts. We congratulate him on his
unanimous election and vouchsafe to him our ready
cooperation to make this fifty-second session of the
General Assembly a significant turning point in the life
of the Organization.
To the President's distinguished predecessor,
Ambassador Razali Ismail of Malaysia, we convey our
deep and sincere appreciation for the determination and
dynamism which he brought to bear on the work of the
last session. To his great credit, he laboured tirelessly to
find general agreement on the steps which must be taken
to revitalize the United Nations. His exemplary leadership
will no doubt inspire us to fulfil the task at hand without
undue delay.
I also wish to acknowledge with appreciation the
notable contribution which our Secretary-General,
Mr. Kofi Annan, has made to the reform process since
taking office. In keeping with the promise made to the
Assembly, he has presented us with a set of interesting
proposals for the reshaping of the Organization for
service in the twenty-first century. This comprehensive
and constructive document requires our serious
consideration. I intend, therefore, in the time allocated to
me, to make a few comments which I trust, despite their
brief and preliminary nature, will provide an indication of
our thinking at the present time on the ways and means
by which the Organization can be reformed.
Let me first say that we share the vision which the
Secretary-General has set forth for the future role of the
United Nations. The Organization has proved its capacity
for preventing major wars and forging international
consensus on important aspects of international relations.
It is now poised to explore the many possibilities of
multilateralism. Increasingly, Member States, large and
small, are seeing it in their interest to cooperate with the
United Nations to maximize their ability to deal with
several international concerns. There is increasing
recourse to its machinery in order to deal with such
issues as development, the environment, disease, drug
trafficking and terrorism, to name just a few. Many of
the special agencies, such as the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations
Children's Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations
Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM), and others
too numerous to mention, cater to the needs of the most
vulnerable sections of our population — the aged,
women, children and our indigenous peoples.
Built on the pillars of multilateralism, the United
Nations offers Member States a unique forum in which
they can come together for their common good. Its
grand design, elaborated some 50 years ago, remains by
and large a useful chart for promoting international
comity. It is important, therefore, as we plan for a new
era, that we hold fast to the founders' abiding vision
lest we be dashed against the rocks of isolation and left
to survive as best we can.
The effective translation of this vision into reality
requires strong and dynamic leadership. History has
shown that, much too often, our most worthwhile
aspirations have been left unfulfilled because of
inadequate political commitment and direction. States
often see the world only through the prism of narrow
self-interest and are blind to the virtues of concerted
action. However, the challenges of our times, when no
single nation, however rich and powerful, can hope to
be entirely self-reliant, require the highest level of
international cooperation. For it is only by unity of
purpose that we, the United Nations, can hope to
achieve the aspirations so loftily declared in the
Charter.
We are pleased to note that the Secretary-General,
as the Organization's chief administrative officer, has
demonstrated vision and leadership in outlining his
suggestions for reform. Of particular satisfaction to us
is the fact that in setting his priorities for the
Organization's future work he has accorded high
importance to its development activities. At a time
when financial support is weak, it is imperative that
appropriate strategies be developed to eradicate world
poverty and restore economic and social prosperity,
particularly in small developing countries.
We therefore welcome the Secretary-General's
intention to strengthen management capability within
the Secretariat to provide for full coordination of effort
and for forward planning. We recognize the need for
economy, but hope that this will not be to the detriment
of clear mandates of Member States and to the
fundamental nature of the Organization. It would be a
grave pity if, in reducing costs, the United Nations were
to be starved of substance.
We certainly approve of the idea initially
propounded by the Government of Japan, and
subsequently endorsed by the G-7 countries, calling for
administrative savings to be channelled into
development activities. This dividend, although
15

presumably limited in quantity, may be significant
enough to serve as a catalyst for financing the
development account that the Secretary-General proposes.
Like the rest of the world, we welcome the generous gift
of the Chairman of Turner Communications, who had
participated in the 1994 World Hearings on Development
and has now seen fit to come out in support of this
cause. One can only hope that such philanthropy will be
emulated by others in the private sector.
The recently concluded Agenda for Development,
together with the joint strategy for development of the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) and the Development Assistance Committee
(DAC), provides a basis for moving forward in the field
of economic and social cooperation. Both documents
accept the fact that while private investment flows have
an important role to play in development, they are,
because of their high selectivity and general
unpredictability, insufficient to guarantee the development
of small disadvantaged countries. For those countries —
and here I include my own — development assistance,
debt relief, capacity building and increased trade will
remain crucial to our progress.
At the macroeconomic level, we will continue to
look to the United Nations to play a more central role in
the concertation of development policies. The Secretary-
General has said,
“The promotion of economic and social
progress is one of the United Nations primary
objectives, enshrined in the Charter.” (A/51/950,
para. 68)
It cannot, consequently, be marginalized in the
development process. Instead, it must be its principal
generator.
Accordingly, both its structure and operation must
be such as to provide “a more integrated collaborative
approach”. (ibid., para. 72) Greater coordination of
development activities, both at Headquarters and at the
regional and local levels, is essential. As has been
suggested, the creation of a new development group and
a United Nations development-assistance framework
could possibly provide the necessary focus and direction.
We should be careful to ensure, however, that the
strengths of individual actors and agencies are not lost in
any merger.
We fully support the proposal for a closer and
more cooperative relationship with the World Bank and
other international financial institutions. Over time,
those bodies, although connected with the United
Nations, have moved away from their original mandates
and developed quite independently of the Organization.
It is time that those bodies concentrate on human
development as distinct from the means of
development. We should therefore seek to bring them
into line with the main organs of the United Nations.
To that end, we encourage the Secretary-General to
take whatever steps are needed to achieve that
harmonization of the development efforts. We will also
have to consider at some stage how to strengthen the
relationship of the World Trade Organization (WTO)
with the United Nations.
At the same time, we must complement these
efforts by giving to the Assembly and the Economic
and Social Council the direct and overarching
responsibility for leading the development enterprise. In
the past, those organs have been sadly left behind in the
development process. Although useful as forums for
dialogue and consensus building, they have failed to
engage the key players. We should therefore strive to
transform them so that they can provide a stronger
political impetus for development and ensure effective
global macroeconomic management.
We hope that from this debate will come a clear
indication of proposals and recommendations that are
considered desirable and feasible. There will be some,
of course, which, like the conversion of the Trusteeship
Council into a forum for dealing with issues such as the
global commons, will require further study. These
proposals may be explored in informal working sessions
of the Assembly and then taken up formally as a
package for approval and subsequent implementation.
With diligent cooperation on the part of all, there is no
reason why such reforms cannot be agreed upon early
in the new year.
Institutional tinkering alone, however, will not
guarantee development. The most important dynamic
remains the political will of States. The several
strategies that we have forged and the many
declarations we have issued over the years remain
largely unfulfilled. It is no wonder that poverty is today
the single most important threat to global peace and
security.
16

The reduction and eventual elimination of world
poverty is an imperative which the United Nations cannot
ignore. At the special mid-term review of the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development
(UNCED), held in June of this year, we came close to
agreeing to achieve this target by the year 2015. This
year, at the Kyoto session of the Conference of the
Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change, and later, at the mid-term review of the
Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable
Development of Small Island Developing States, we will
have other opportunities for the further promotion of
sustainable development. We should not fail to take
advantage of these in our continuing efforts to create a
partnership for the benefit of all States.
For its part, my Government remains dedicated to
this end. In demonstration of our seriousness of purpose,
we have honoured the obligations that have been deemed
necessary to national development. As suggested by the
World Bank in its publication entitled Partnership for
Sustainable Growth, we have sought to promote
“global governance in all its aspects, including
ensuring the rule of law, improving efficiency and
accountability of the public sector and tackling
corruption as essential elements of a framework
within which economies can prosper.”
We have created a truly democratic society in which
development is a fundamental human right. The fruit of
our policies has been a constant annual growth rate of
over 6 per cent. Today, all sectors of our society,
including private enterprise and peoples' organizations,
are fully involved in the development process and are
fired by the optimistic confidence that, as a nation, we
will overcome the problems that currently beset us.
In a few weeks, our nation will conduct another
democratic election, open again to the scrutiny of
international observers. Out of this exercise will come a
fresh popular determination to continue along the path
leading to economic and social progress. To facilitate this
pursuit, the Government has prepared a national
development strategy based on a fully participatory
economy. Involved in its preparation were experts from
both the public and the private sectors, who have
prepared a draft text for wider public consultation and
approval. In our view, this provides a useful policy
framework which, by establishing needs and priorities,
can serve to mobilize assistance from the international
community, including donor Governments and
international development agencies.
However, as was clearly recognized by our late
President, Mr. Cheddi Jagan, the hopes and aspirations
of developing countries such as ours will not fully
materialize over the long term until the international
environment is made more congenial to our needs.
Accordingly, he continuously advocated in his lifetime
the creation of a new global human order premised on
sustainable economic development, equity and social
and ecological justice, and based on the creation of a
separate global development fund for assistance to both
the North and the South. This new North-South
partnership must be fashioned in a search for more
positive and innovative ways to cope with the vagaries
of globalization and liberalization, which are
marginalizing millions of people and even many
nations.
Guyana has openly embraced the 20/20 initiative
adopted at the World Summit for Social Development
as a means of sparking international cooperation for
development. In addition, we have called for agreement
on some forms of international taxation, which, like
national revenue at the country level, would provide the
funding necessary to promote global development. Thus
far, some developed countries have been reluctant to
contemplate such innovative means of resource
mobilization. But in circumstances of ever increasing
international obligations and decreasing development
assistance, where will the necessary financing come
from? The answer to this question is key to the future
of the United Nations, for unless the Organization is
endowed with predictable and adequate resources, it
will be incapable of satisfying the many requirements
placed upon it by Member States.
In my delegation's view, the time has come to deal
with this issue. The Economic and Social Council has
broached the question in recent high-level discussions,
but we are a long way from testing the feasibility of the
many ideas that have been advanced to find new and
additional ways of financing multilateralism. Initial
studies done by the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) and other development agencies
have revealed that some of the mechanisms proposed
are indeed feasible. Why, then, are some States
unwilling to entertain any meaningful discussion of
their introduction? Is it that they are afraid of losing
control of the United Nations? Or are they not serious
17

about their proclaimed adherence to the concept of the
interdependence of States?
Assuring the financial stability of this Organization
must be seen as essential not only to development but to
peace. Invariably, instability and conflict within and
among States are due in great measure to economic and
social instability leading to intense competition for
limited resources. An investment in development must
therefore be seen as an investment in preventive
diplomacy and in the building of peace.
Admittedly, these are costly tasks, but there can be
no doubt that the expenditure involved is much less than
that resulting from conflict. The international community
should therefore be prepared to adequately fund activities
in this field to enhance the prospects of their success.
Apart from financial support, there is also a need for
more competent supervision by the Security Council. No
reform of the United Nations will be complete without
reform of the Council, which is the organ primarily
responsible for the maintenance of international peace
and security. Unfortunately, despite the most intensive
search, we are yet to find general agreement on the basis
for restructuring that important body. We must persevere,
however, in the fulfilment of our mandate to devise a
more effective, open and representative Council fully
capable of performing the functions assigned to it under
the Charter.
Guyana, as a member of the Non-Aligned
Movement, believes that this aim can best be served by
an appropriate expansion in the non-permanent category.
However, in a spirit of compromise, we are prepared to
contemplate enlargement also in the permanent category,
providing a balance can be found between developed-
and developing-country representation and agreement
reached on the limitation of the use of the veto and on
the concept of periodic review. We are ready to continue
our work in this direction until a solution is found.
Meanwhile, we are happy to see the progress being
made towards the creation of an international criminal
court, which will be able to deal effectively with several
crimes against humanity.
Last, but by no means least, we wish to see in the
campaign for peace more active interest and participation
by this Assembly in the disarmament process, so that the
weapons of war may be converted into tools of
development. Although we have yet to see any significant
peace dividend from the ending of the cold war, we
believe that a reduction in arms expenditures on both
nuclear and conventional weapons can only benefit the
welfare of all peoples. The Assembly must therefore
encourage the Committee on Disarmament to intensify
its efforts in this field and must itself take whatever
action it deems necessary to prompt the conversion
from arms production to more peaceful pursuits.
Disarmament is too important an issue to be left to the
major military Powers. The international community as
a whole must therefore exert continuing pressure on the
process to achieve the desired results.
At the same time, we must intensify the
Organization's role in bringing peace to those countries
and regions of the world where conflict or the threat of
conflict persists. Upheavals in the Great Lakes region
of Africa and the tenuous situation in places such as
Afghanistan and Bosnia and Herzegovina still defy
resolution.
In the Middle East, the peace process seems to
have atrophied. The Palestinian problem and the Arab-
Israeli conflict continue to hamper the progress of that
entire area. In Cyprus, where tensions are restrained
only by the continued presence of United Nations
troops, the danger of violence is ever present. On the
Korean Peninsula, peaceful reunification is still an
elusive goal. The international community has no
choice but to do whatever it can to help the parties
involved in conflict everywhere to work peacefully
towards an amicable settlement of their particular
disputes.
The world wants peace and development. It also
wants the United Nations to help in the achievement of
these goals. Governments have a duty to heed these
sentiments and to increase their support of the
Organization.
The United Nations itself must in turn reach out to
benefit from the valuable reservoir of goodwill which
exists towards it among the peoples of the world.
Public information is key to securing widespread
support for its activities and to expanding its role in
international affairs. We therefore urge that the
dissemination capacity of the Department of Public
Information be enhanced in developed countries, where
awareness of the Organization's potential is less than it
should be.
18

As we approach the major milestone marking the
start of the third millennium, we must have a clear vision
of what we want the United Nations to be and of what
we want it to do. Only with such clarity can we be sure
that the reform process will result in a change for the
better. It is therefore my delegation's hope that this
general debate will engender a common sense of purpose
among its Members and a willingness on their part to
press forward in the revitalization of an Organization
which is so necessary to both our survival and our
development.


Before delivering the message of the Government of
Rwanda to the General Assembly, allow me to follow the
Heads of State and fellow Ministers who have spoken from
this rostrum and express to the President our very sincere
congratulations on his outstanding election. We also pay a
well-deserved tribute to his eminent predecessor, who
displayed devotion, skill and readiness to serve during the
last session.
Our warmest and fraternal congratulations also go to
the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, for whom this
session of the General Assembly is his first in that office.
At the fiftieth anniversary session of the United
Nations we took the opportunity to express loudly and
clearly our views with regard to the essential reforms to be
carried out within the United Nations. We welcome the
proposals made by the Secretary-General, and we assure
him of our support and cooperation. We also made
proposals on Security Council reform. We will continue to
make our contribution and lend our support to the collective
efforts aimed at ensuring greater democracy in the Council.
The Government of Rwanda also wishes to take this
opportunity to express its great satisfaction at the
appointment of Mrs. Mary Robinson as United Nations
High Commissioner for Human Rights. We assure both her
and the Secretary-General of our assistance and
cooperation.
At this session the Government of Rwanda wishes to
make its modest contribution to our consideration of some
matters of concern both to Africa and to the entire
international community. These primarily relate to the
difficulties encountered in the process of bringing to life a
new Africa and problems related to the prevention,
management and resolution of conflicts in Africa. We shall
also offer some thoughts on how our peoples may enjoy a
relatively smooth passage into the next millennium. We will
conclude with an appeal for international solidarity for
Rwanda and the Rwandan people.
The hope of the peoples of Africa and the third
world is first of all for an understanding of their real
problems, and today that understanding must be a priority.
Much of the international community supports the new
political order in Africa and the new African leadership
and leaders who wish to create new realities for a new
Africa. We had the opportunity and pleasure, at the
special meeting of the Security Council on Africa held on
25 September under the presidency of the Secretary of
State of the United States, of hearing comments in
support of the new African leadership. We stand firmly
together. The others, those who do not trust in Africa and
the Africans, who attempt to hinder our continent’s efforts
to free itself from neocolonialism and dictatorships, who
are today trying to discredit and undermine our leaders at
any cost, they are the ones we will obviously be forced to
deal with when we come to them.
I should like now to speak of the problems of
conflict prevention and conflict resolution in Africa and
other third world countries. Again, we extend our
warmest thanks to the Security Council for having taken
the positive initiative of convening a ministerial-level
meeting on Africa on 25 September.
Our contribution, beyond general considerations and
some specific cases, will focus primarily on identifying
the underlying causes of conflicts in Africa, conflicts
which in turn create the economic and political recessions
of which we in our continent — and elsewhere in certain
third world countries as well — are aware on almost a
daily basis.
Africa and the third world in general are suffering
from various ills, principal among which are ignorance,
poverty, bad political leadership, coups d’état and foreign
intervention. Those are the ills that have eaten away at
Africa, continue to eat away at it and are the sources of
every conflict on our continent.
Ignorance, it is said, is the root of all evils. Poverty
is the cause of all misfortune. What United Nations
programme will combat ignorance and poverty in Africa
and the countries of the third world, and when will these
two terrible ills that ravage our continent be cured?
Bad political leadership in Africa has led many
countries to ruin and even led to the first genocide on the
African continent, which occurred in Rwanda from April
to July 1994. The United Nations was present with a
military force of 2,500 men, who packed up and left,
abandoning the Rwandan people to the mercy of the
26

Interahamwe militiamen of the erstwhile single party and
armed forces of the day. The planning and carrying out of
the genocide was the ignoble act of a bad political
leadership that viewed the ignorance and poverty of the
peoples of Rwanda — and, consequently, of the peoples of
Africa and the third world — as a political asset to
consolidate and perpetuate its dictatorship in power or to
usurp power.
We hope that the United Nations will support the new
political order in Africa and its new leadership, and that it
will oppose any manoeuvre aimed at using United Nations
structures to nip in the bud the new political order that is
emerging on our continent.
The conflicts of which we are all aware in Africa
today are the bitter fruit of the famous so-called Africa of
the Generals that emerged in the mid-1960s. Those coups
d’état sapped Africa with all their attendant tragedies, of
which all here are only too keenly aware. What are our
strategies for fighting coups d’état in Africa today? What
are the strategies of the United Nations for eradicating this
scourge, whose effects are realized by its creators only
when they themselves fall victim to it?
All of the coups d’état in Africa since 1965, whose
rotten fruits we are harvesting today, were fomented by
certain Western capitals in their own interests and to the
detriment of the African people. Today, unfortunately,
foreign manipulation is continuing in Africa, creating a new
cycle of coups d’état in Africa.
We urge the United Nations resolutely to attack the
five scourges I have just named, which still infect Africa
and are the source of all the conflicts on our continent.
These problems exist and we are familiar with them. Let us
not make them taboo — let us talk about them within this
prestigious building; let us talk about them in the Security
Council. That, perhaps, would mark the beginning of
improved conflict prevention and resolution in Africa.
We cannot close this chapter on African conflicts
without referring specifically to some that worry us more
than others. I am referring in particular to the Central
African Republic, where we feel the United Nations should
be on its toes and assist a country in which the keepers of
the old order and their opportunistic acolytes are using
violence against an elected Government. I am also referring
to Congo (Brazzaville), where precisely the same scenario
as in the Central African Republic is being played out on
a scale far larger than in the latter country.
In our humble opinion, the United Nations should
also send a clear and unambiguous message to the
Comorians of the island of Anjouan that the Comoros is
a State Member of the United Nations and that its unity
and integrity are not negotiable. We ask the parties
concerned to work with the Organization of African Unity
(OAU) to find an appropriate solution to their problem.
Western Sahara strikes a strong note of hope in the
area of decolonization. We welcome and encourage the
due implementation of the agreements that have just been
signed between the Saharan Arab Democratic Republic
and the Kingdom of Morocco to promote the process of
self-determination and independence for the Saharan
people.
In Somalia, the Government of the Rwandese
Republic urges all the parties to the conflict to promote
dialogue under the aegis of the OAU and the
Intergovernmental Authority on Development.
Two years from the advent of the new millennium,
we all have the ultimate duty of leading our peoples to
the year 2000 without setback or fear of the unknown,
unlike the people of the year 997 as they approached the
eve of the second millennium.
The twentieth century, leading into the awaited third
millennium, has deeded to us the two most horrendous
genocides in the history of humanity: the genocide of the
Jews during the Second World War and the genocide of
the Rwandans in 1994. Will we cross the threshold of the
third millennium with the same racist graffiti covering the
walls of our cities and airport corridors? Will those with
uneasy consciences continue forever to play dumb with
regard to the Rwandan genocide, the very first in the
history of our continent? Will religious fundamentalism
thrive at the cost of human lives?
Extreme selfishness, despair, suicide, racism, crime,
terrorism, drugs, paedophilia, battered women, rape: Are
we going to bring all this luggage with us into the third
millennium? What are we doing now? What are our
strategies to eradicate all these evils? Resignation?
Fatalism? Will the third millennium hold anything to
shock us?
We all claim to govern on behalf of our respective
peoples. What actions are we undertaking today to ensure
that they advance calmly, smoothly, without panic or
anxiety into the year 2000? If we do nothing, how will
we explain it to them on the eve of 1 January 2000 or on
27

the first day of the year 2000? Will we use the language of
cynicism, pain, realism, politics, diplomacy or ritual — in
just enough to get them off our backs and hustle them
along into the year 2000 as into a lifeboat?
What strategies do the United Nations and its
agencies, present throughout Africa and other countries of
the third world, have to help the Governments and peoples
that must confront the anxieties of passing from one
century to another, one millennium to another? In my
country, Rwanda, I see no sign of any such strategy, while
the country is gripped by the many traumas born from the
tearing, or rather the shredding, of the social fabric by the
genocide of 1994. When the traumas of genocide are
complemented by millennial anxieties, what is to become
of such a people if it is not helped by increased
international solidarity?
I have seen no or almost no sign of such solidarity in
all my travels, no hint of such a project. Apparently, no one
is concerned. And yet, we are only 26 months from 1
January 2000. Why such indifference from countries and
from the United Nations? Should not our concerns be those
of the peoples on whose behalf we govern? We should be
one step ahead and thereby allay them.
Before closing, I wish to appeal to the General
Assembly that the United Nations adopt a mini-Marshall
Plan for the moral and physical rehabilitation and
reconstruction of the first African country to have fallen
victim to the catastrophe of genocide: Rwanda. This mini-
Marshall Plan for the rehabilitation and reconstruction of
post-genocide Rwanda was drafted by Ambassador
Sahnoun, Special Representative for the Great Lakes region
of the Secretaries-General of the United Nations and the
OAU, at the request of the Rwandan Government of
National Unity.
We also make a ringing appeal to the United Nations
and the entire international community to provide Rwanda
with substantial assistance, as it has received since
November 1996 more than 1.4 million repatriated
persons — one fifth of its population — who had fled to
the former Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of the
Congo, Tanzania and Burundi. Following this mass return
of refugees, famine has today struck heavily in over four of
our provinces. For the victims of this famine, we request
emergency food relief and development assistance for every
sector of national life — agriculture, health, education, the
social and socio-economic reintegration of the repatriated,
the survivors of genocide, justice and the rehabilitation and
reconstruction of basic infrastructures, including those for
water, electricity and roads.
As for the social and socio-economic reintegration of
the repatriated, since November 1996 the Rwandan
Government has been sending into the field teams led by
two Ministers for each province and composed of other
ministers, members of Parliament and high-level
administrators. These field missions aim at supporting the
local administrative authorities in their tasks of receiving
and reintegrating the repatriates. The exercise has gone
well and is still being successfully pursued.
At the communal and municipal level, we have also
created reception committees composed of local
authorities and members of the United Nations
Commission on Human Rights.
Unfortunately, some troublemakers have filtered in
with the 1.4 million refugees who have recently returned
to Rwanda. Since February 1997, these fugitives have
been committing murders among the civilian population.
They have primarily targeted the survivors of genocide,
in order to do away with anyone who might be a witness
in a court of law, and local authorities who are devoted
to the cause of national unity and reconciliation.
The Rwandan Government has taken the necessary
measures to ensure the safety of the people in the north
of the country, which has been the site of these murders.
Again, results in this area have also been quite
satisfactory.
In fact, a month ago I organized a meeting of the
entire diplomatic and consular community at Ruhengeri,
one of the provinces in the north of the country. After
that meeting the diplomats had the opportunity to visit
any areas of Ruhengeri they chose.
Likewise, before I came to New York for the
General Assembly, Mr. Pasteur Bizimungu, President of
the Republic of Rwanda, headed a meeting of ministers
at Gisenyi, one of the country’s three northern provinces.
After the meeting the President of the Republic and the
members of the Government went into the field for three
days. They visited and spoke with people from all sectors
of the population, including peasants on communes and
in municipalities and students and State officials who had
been repatriated and who were participating in orientation
seminars on the positive aspects of national unity,
tolerance, reconciliation, respect for human life and
28

solidarity. They also spoke with local authorities who are
working to train our people.
The Government of Rwanda needs support for this
exercise. It needs the assistance of the international
community.
Before concluding, we would like to say from this
lofty rostrum that we welcome the progress made towards
resolving the misunderstanding on the question of the
International Commission of Inquiry sent to the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, as the Minister for
Foreign Affairs of the Democratic Republic of the Congo
announced at his press conference yesterday afternoon.
The Rwandan Government therefore encourages
those specifically involved in this matter — namely, the
Secretary-General of the United Nations, the United
Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the
Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo —
to work together to put an end to this problem. They have
our confidence and support.
In order to support the efforts of the Secretary-
General, the High Commissioner for Refugees and the
Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo,
and to enlighten better the international community about
the refugee problem in eastern Zaire, the Rwandan
Government calls on the United Nations to publish and
circulate as a document of the Security Council the report
of the International Commission of Inquiry on the
trafficking in and distribution of weapons in refugee
camps in eastern Zaire.
The United Nations International Commission of
Inquiry was established under Security Council resolution
1013 (1995) of 7 September 1995. The Commission
submitted its report, duly signed by its members, one year
later, on 28 October 1996. The embargo on this report,
which has hindered its publication, should be lifted
immediately in order to facilitate everyone’s efforts.