I extend my warm congratulations to you,
Sir, and to Bulgaria on your election to the office of President of the
General Assembly. Ireland, as one of the Vice-Presidents of the Assembly,
looks forward to cooperating closely with you as you guide our work at this
session of the Assembly.
In the weeks ahead the Assembly will examine many aspects of current
international life. But today I want to focus on two issues that I believe,
my country believes, my Government believes, require our urgent attention.
First, we must act now to save the millions starving in Somalia; and
secondly, the United Nations must move the questions of justice and
development to the top of its agenda. We have had too many Somalias.

Our Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros-Ghali, is the first African to lead
the Organization, and I wish to begin my short address with that particular
continent.
Last month I spent three or four days in Somalia, and I will shortly
return there with the President of Ireland, Mary Robinson. She has decided to
visit Somalia to show solidarity with the people of that starving land, and to
underline the compelling need for more effective international action.
My visit was a profoundly disturbing experience. Words fail before the
scale of the catastrophe and the depth of the suffering. Yesterday at one
feeding station alone in Baidoa, which I visited during my visit, 532 people
died in one day. Today, many more will die. And tomorrow. Until we act. It
is a scandal. It is a scandal for Somalia's leaders who continue to squabble
and fight while their people continue to starve and die. It is a scandal for
outsiders, for the developed world, for the membership of the United Nations,
who have failed to respond swiftly and effectively.*
Throughout, international non-governmental organizations and
organizations from my own country have taken the lead, and I believe it is now
time for Governments and the international community to follow. I pay a
tribute to their humanitarian work and their determined efforts to confront us
with this appalling crisis. Their generosity and courage should inspire a more
comprehensive and committed response from the international community.
What must be done?
First, we must increase the volume of food and relief supplies reaching
Somalia. Unless 60,000 tons of food can be distributed each month, children,
women and old people will continue to die. There will be more Baidoas.

Secondly, food and medicine must be distributed in conditions of civil
order. Ambassador Sahnoun, the exceptional and very worthy Special
Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, is
vigorously promoting improved security. He deserves our full support. The
deployment of United Nations troops will provide an essential measure of
protection for food distribution. We must all, particularly the regional
organizations and Somalia's neighbours, impress on clan and faction leaders
the need to cooperate fully with the aid effort.
Thirdly, we must work for a process of national reconciliation and for
the formation of a Government with national authority. A political solution
is essential for long-term recovery and to prevent a relapse into the horror
that we now witness daily.
The international community has the resources and the skills to save
Somalia. What is needed is the political will and the organizational drive to
harness those resources and deploy those skills. We have no more urgent task.
For all our honest endeavours, we live in a world beset by inequality, by
gross disparities and imbalances of wealth and resources. So often do nature
and society combine to perpetuate injustice that the sceptic might conclude
that humanity's best efforts are more often than not unequal to the challenge.
Our "Agenda for Peace" must embrace also an agenda for justice and
compassion. This imperative was obscured by the cold war.
It is perhaps understandable that throughout those dangerous years
international attention and political energies were absorbed by questions of
security. But the era of ideological confrontation is, happily, over and at
an end.

We must grasp this opportunity to build a more humane and just
international system, a system that will focus on the welfare of the
individual the need for food and shelter, for human rights, for political
freedom and for equality. We cannot forget that the same Charter that assigns
to the United Nations responsibility for preserving international peace and
security also gives the United Nations major responsibilities for promoting
social and economic development.

The moral responsibility of the international donor community is clear.
None of us finds it easy to allocate extra resources for aid in the current
difficult economic climate, but we have an obligation to provide adequate
humanitarian relief for immediate crises, as well as financial and technical
assistance for longer-term development. For reasons of size and economic
circumstances, the scope for Ireland to donate significant amounts of aid
remains limited. However, I can say that private support in Ireland for
non-governmental organizations involved in development has grown steadily.
Today Ireland has the highest rate of private development assistance, as a
proportion of gross national product, of all countries in the world. The
Irish people have themselves shown their generosity, and the Irish Government
aims to respond by increasing our official development assistance.
But the effort called for is wider than development assistance.
Notwithstanding the end of the cold war and the disappearance of East-West
confrontation, the opportunities for international cooperation are not being
grasped. It is simply unacceptable that most Africans are poorer today than
they were 30 years ago, that in a world that spends a trillion dollars every
year on weapons of the most sophisticated kind we cannot find the resources to
provide bread and clean water for millions of our fellow citizens. What is
missing is a clear political focus and, by definition, a clear, directed
political will.
Already the international community has made a connection between the
environment and development. But there are other areas in which we must look
for new and broader approaches: in the international financial and economic
system; in spending on armaments; and in the way in which our international
organizations work. Economic activity cannot be divorced from political
responsibility.

How welcome it would be if the quality of analysis and the clarity of
direction contained in the Secretary-General's "Agenda for Peace" could be
brought to bear on a new agenda an agenda for justice and development if,
when we meet here again a year from now, we were to have a thorough report,
bearing the authority of the Secretary-General, which would point the way
forward on aid, trade, finance, commodities and debt, a report that would
develop concrete proposals to remedy the organizational deficiencies that so
often thwart our best intentions. I believe that in the years ahead the
success of our Organization will be measured not only by its response to
individual situations of conflict but also by the way in which it deals with
these urgent questions of development.
The end of East-West rivalry has not brought an end to conflict or
threats to peace. On the contrary, many disputes frozen by the cold war have
re-emerged with vicious and deadly impact. We must intensify our cooperation
on international peace and security. The January summit of the Security
Council was a timely initiative, which has led directly to the
Secretary-General's ambitious and thought-provoking document "An Agenda for
Peace". That document assembles a range of important ideas for consolidation
of the peace-keeping activities of the United Nations, as well as for
extension of the role of the United Nations into the new areas of preventive
diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-building.
Ireland has long supported the peace-keeping activities of the United
Nations. Today my country, small though it may be in population and in
resources, participates in 10 of the 12 peace-keeping missions currently in
the field. But, like the Secretary-General, we have felt the need to develop
further the capacity of the United Nations to make and keep the peace. We
therefore endorse the direction of the Secretary-General's thinking.

I welcome in particular the attention given to preventive action. The
earlier the United Nations can identify and act on a threat to the peace, the
better are the chances of averting the outbreak or prospective outbreak of
hostilities. The proposals for fact-finding missions, for improved early
warning and for the preventive deployment of United Nations forces can and
should be implemented now.
We also support the Secretary-General's proposals for the strengthening
of peace-keeping. The activities of the United Nations in this area are
amongst the most innovative achievements of our age. We are prepared to work
actively with the Secretariat and with other member States in coping with the
new demands and problems that have emerged in relation to logistics,
equipment, personnel and finance.
I want to say a brief word about the financing of the United Nations.
Here, I am struck by the Secretary-General's clear and urgent warning about
the poor financial health of the Organization. At the very moment when the
United Nations has begun to assume a more effective role in the interests of
peace, when it is looked to by suffering people everywhere to provide
protection and aid, its work is hampered by financial uncertainty.
Let me put it simply: the Organization cannot function effectively,
cannot meet the demands that we the members make upon it, unless all Member
States pay their assessed contributions in full and on time. We call on all
members to fulfil their financial obligations under the Charter, and we look
to the General Assembly, at its current session, to adopt measures to put the
Organization on a secure financial footing.
I know that reform of the United Nations - and, in particular, of the
Security Council is a sensitive issue that touches the very essence of
post-war international cooperation. But, after almost 50 years it is

reasonable to ask if the structures and methods of work agreed upon then
correspond fully with contemporary realities with the growing, and now
almost universal, membership of the United Nations; with the Organization's
new tasks; and with the great changes that have taken place in economic and
political relations.
The time has come to take up these issues frankly here within the
United Nations itself. We can only profit from such a discussion. Our aim
should be to ensure that the decisions of the Organization are truly
authoritative and representative of the will of the entire international
community.
One of the most significant achievements of this century has been the
development of an ethic, a morality, of human rights. We have set our face
uncompromisingly against violations of human rights - against torture,
slavery, apartheid. It is simply not acceptable that an individual can be
sacrificed to the interests of a State system rendered nameless, an
afterthought as history marches on.
Our modern ethic extends to the realization that human rights are
essential in relations between States as well as in our national political
systems. None of us can turn our backs on systematic violations of human
rights or retain full trust and confidence in those responsible for such
violations. To respect human rights is to respect conscience itself, whose
power for good has been illustrated many times in the course of this century
by a Mahatma Gandhi, by a Martin Luther King, or, in the past few years, by a
Vaclav Havel or a Nelson Mandela, who, from a prison cell - "enduring the
most" changed his country's history.

By upholding the rights of the individual we bring the welfare and
dignity of men and women to the centre of our political preoccupations. This
must be the central message for next year's world conference on human rights,
but I am deeply concerned that it is in danger of being lost sight of in the
preparatory work. In this of all fields, we must escape from an adversarial
approach and hold firmly in view the meaning of our work for the suffering of
the many.
I should like to make a few remarks in connection with disarmament. We
cannot slacken in our determination to make progress on disarmament and arms
control. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the development
of new and sophisticated conventional weapons pose a major threat to
international peace and security and to regional stability.
I welcome the recent agreement in the Conference on Disarmament on the
chemical-weapons Convention. I welcome too the accession of France and China
to the nuclear-non-proliferation Treaty. As we prepare for the 1995 Review
Conference, we appeal to those countries that remain outside the Treaty to
join us in making the non-proliferation regime truly universal. This is a
goal for which Ireland has long striven. The effort to reduce and eliminate
nuclear weapons and to end nuclear testing once and for all must be
redoubled. Nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction can have no
place in our future security relations.
The British Foreign Secretary has already spoken in the name of the
twelve member States of the European Community about the major regional
challenges confronting our world the Middle East, Cambodia, South Africa,
Yugoslavia and other conflicts and I fully endorse his statements in that
regard.

Over the past year, the Irish Government has worked tirelessly for the
resumption of political dialogue which might lead to a lasting and
comprehensive settlement of the problem of Northern Ireland. I am happy to
report that our efforts bore fruit with the recommencement some months ago of
a process of dialogue and negotiation involving the Irish and the British
Governments and the constitutional political parties in Northern Ireland. The
shared objective of this process is
"to achieve a new beginning for relationships within Northern Ireland,
within the island of Ireland and between the peoples of these islands".
The Irish Government will do everything in its power to reach a
settlement which will overcome present divisions and lay the foundations for
lasting peace, stability and reconciliation among the Irish people. We
believe such a settlement can be achieved only on the basis of the equal
legitimacy of the two traditions which exist on our island. The nationalist
and unionist traditions are equally valid. Each must be accorded equal
respect and given meaningful political expression in new political
arrangements.
A valuable acknowledgement of the rights of the two traditions exists
already in the Anglo-Irish Agreement. Over the past seven years, the
Agreement has performed an extremely valuable role as an instrument of
cooperation between the Irish and British Governments on a wide range of
matters relating to Northern Ireland. Issues which have received particular
attention include relations between the security forces and the community in
Northern Ireland; public confidence in the administration of justice; respect
for human rights and the law; the prevention of discrimination wherever it
exists and the development of greater North/South economic cooperation.

The Irish Government has made it clear that we would be prepared to
consider a new and more broadly based agreement or structure if such an
arrangement can be arrived at through direct discussion and negotiation
between all of the parties concerned. The present talks are exploring that
possibility. In our view, arrangements must build upon, rather than detract
from, the crucial contribution made by the Anglo-Irish Agreement to political
progress.
It is our earnest hope that the process of dialogue which is under way at
present, and in which I am personally participating, will lead to agreed
arrangements which represent a fair and honourable accommodation between the
two traditions on the island of Ireland. Nationalists and unionists must both
feel that their political, civil, economic and social rights are fully
protected and that structures are in place which respect and accommodate their
respective aspirations.
All of the participants in the present talks are committed to a
forward-looking and constructive approach. For our part, we in the Irish
Government are prepared to bring all the necessary reserves of good will and
patience to bear in the search for an agreed outcome. The best hope of
ultimate success lies in the insistent desire for peace on the part of the
vast majority of Irish people, in both North and South, and our determination
that the violence and turmoil which has been suffered over the past 23 years
in Northern Ireland and on the island of Ireland shall not be visited upon
future generations.
Those who resort to violence in the pursuit of political aims are the
enemies of the Irish people. They seek an Ireland built not on respect for
the aspirations of each tradition but on bloodshed, hatred and despair. All

the efforts of the Irish Government are directed towards the creation of
conditions which will ensure that the scourge of violence is removed for
ever.
The only true path to peace, justice and stability lies in the healing of
wounds and in reconciliation between the two traditions on a basis of complete
equality. There is much that divides the two traditions but there is even
more that unites us. The common ground between North and South, I have no
doubt, will be significantly expanded by our joint progress over the years
ahead along the road towards European union. By building on our shared values
and objectives, we will bring closer the peaceful and stable future to which
we all aspire.


Allow me to
congratulate you. Sir, on your election as President of our General Assembly.
Your outstanding abilities earned a unanimous vote, which is a tribute both to
your country and to the example it sets in its newly regained freedom.
Speaking from this rostrum last year, I welcomed the extraordinary winds
of freedom which were sweeping oppressive regimes away everywhere in the
world. I recalled the support that my country had always given to peoples'
right to self-determination. I rejoiced at the promises of independence which
arose on the ruins of empires.
The distance covered since then gives us grounds for hope. While in
Europe the barriers around blocs tumbled, in Africa the chains of apartheid
were removed and in Asia Governments contested by their people fell, new
sovereign entities were established. Let us therefore welcome the delegations
of the new Member States that have joined us.
These successes are also successes for our Organization. More than ever,
the principles and rules of our Charter prove their immutable value; more than
ever, let us show our commitment to them.
I should like to turn to Mr. Boutros-Ghali and commend the example he
sets us: the example of his energy, of his entire action focused on the aims
of our Organization and the application of our Charter's principles. He
succeeds someone who has brought honour to our Organization. But rarely will
a Secretary-General have succeeded in overcoming so many crises and challenges
in the first year of his mandate. Let us therefore thank him for his efforts,
his imagination and his determination.

In spite of freedom's victories, peace has not always been the child of
liberation. Rivalries between neighbours, ethnic tensions and border disputes
fan discord and foment insecurity to the point of provoking the return of war
in all its cruelty and savagery. Yugoslavia, Liberia, Somalia: the names
ring sadly in our ears, and the examples are, unfortunately, legion.
Universal peace, our absolute principle, is still only an ambition. It must
become our primary mission.
To ensure that the paths of freedom become paths to peace everywhere,
France proposes three lines of action: peace through the organization of
security that is, peace-keeping operations and collective security and
disarmament measures; peace through the affirmation of justice - that is,
economic and social development to bring about greater fairness and equality
among nations and peoples; peace through solidarity among States which know
how to use their independence to establish beneficial cooperation.

Let us speak first of peace through the organization of security.
The immediate need is to halt the conflicts which are causing bloodshed
in Europe, the border regions of Asia and Africa. They cast a sinister shadow
over the successes of freedom and independence. The United Nations,
strengthened by its new influence, reacted by mounting in the space of a few
months peace-keeping operations on an unprecedented scale. Never before have
so many men from such a large number of countries assembled under our flag,
that of the international community.
Stopping the expansion of a neighbour or faction, protecting populations,
helping to deliver humanitarian aid, providing reassurance and at times
renewing dialogue between the parties involved such are the many sensitive
missions undertaken by the United Nations and our "Blue Helmets".
Though peaceful, these operations are dangerous. It is not a question of
making war; our mission is a mission of peace. The task, always the same yet
always different, must be given all possible support at the local level and
all available means of suitable protection and defence.
There are cases in which we must intervene even though the cease-fire in
question is neither complete nor lasting. There are cases in which, to impose
respect, we must have clear rules of engagement binding on everyone. We need
to define, for specific situations, a right of emergency, comprising measures
for warning and protection. My country has several reasons for wanting this,
as I am sure you will agree. Having become the leading participant in the
peace-keeping forces, with what will soon be 6,000 men under the United
Nations flag in former Yugoslavia, Cambodia, Lebanon, Western Sahara and
El Salvador, France has paid a heavy price. Since the start of the year.

eight of its sons have lost their lives, the last ones murdered in cowardly
fashion. And they have not been the only ones. From this rostrum, I should
like to pay a solemn tribute to all the soldiers of peace who have sacrificed
their lives for the cause we all uphold.
In the face of the increasing number of crises and the human tragedies
resulting from them, our world is searching for new stability. It is adapting
its instruments for peace and solidarity and devising others for the new
times. It is essential that everyone be mobilized, most particularly the
regional organizations. The Western European Union (WEU) and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are in the process of shaping their
future. The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) is
establishing its jurisdiction. In the wake of the Helsinki summit, France is
now proposing to the CSCE member States the adoption of a code of conduct
which would encompass and define the norms governing our collective security.
This idea, which was also set out by Germany, could lead to the adoption of a
treaty on security. France is also continuing and will continue to advocate
establishment of a court of arbitration and conciliation to prevent conflicts.
It is fortunate, moreover, that Chapter VIII of the Charter has at last,
in the space of a few months, taken on its full meaning. I applaud the action
of our Secretary-General, who has recommended precisely that the States
members of regional organizations contribute to peace-keeping operations. His
thinking concurred with that of the CSCE at the Helsinki summit and with that
of France.
Indeed, the United Nations remains the necessary recourse in all these
instances, as the case of former Yugoslavia has shown us only too well. Our

Organization confers universal legitimacy on peace-keeping operations. It is
the United Nations which shoulders, if need be, the overall responsibility.
Hence, what is at stake today is not to relieve the United Nations of its task
but to help it perform it in the most effective manner.
Yes, our peace mission is above all a matter of prevention: preventing
conflicts, or preventing them from worsening and spreading. France therefore
welcomed with keen interest the Secretary-General's proposals in his "Agenda
for Peace". These set forth in outline form a charter for preventive
diplomacy which is urgently needed.
Once the Gulf War was over, the President of the French Republic
underlined the need for new thinking. I am glad to see that this new thinking
is now well under way and that France's proposals are being considered. I am
also pleased that the European Community is offering specific assistance.
I should like to confirm today, from this rostrum, France's commitment to
make available to the Secretary-General, at any time, a contingent of 1,000
men for a peace-keeping operation. I hope that this example will be followed,
for our Organization must be sure that it can react quickly and forcefully as
soon as there is a threat of a conflict or a conflict flares up.
Reinforcement of preventive action should also encourage us to continue
thinking about the reactivation of the United Nations Military Staff
Committee. It is important, in any case, to strengthen the links between the
Member States and the Secretariat Department of Peace-Keeping Operations,
every aspect of whose work is deserving of praise.
Preventive diplomacy, along with the development of peace-keeping
operations, and the greater role for regional organizations: these are two
indispensable pillars of the collective security system the world needs today.

But there is a third one: disarmament.
At their summit meeting on 31 January 1992, the members of the Security
Council recalled that disarmament is one of our Organization's priorities and
how essential it is for all Member States to fulfil the obligations they have
undertaken with respect to arms control and disarmament itself. The progress
achieved in two years has been spectacular: a reduction in stockpiles in
Europe thanks to the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) and
the CFE 1-A; the commitment by the two super-Powers to genuine nuclear
disarmament, which will be spread over a period of many years; and the
convention banning chemical weapons, which for the first time will eliminate
an entire category of weapons of mass destruction. This disarmament effort is
accompanied for the first time by a move for transparency: all treaties are
coupled with stringent verification procedures, and in Europe we have signed
an "open sky" treaty providing for free over-flight. Monitoring is the mother
of all assurances.
But the illegal spread of these same weapons threatens to break the
momentum for peace. The war against proliferation must be stepped up and
waged relentlessly. In this area, as in others. United Nations decisions must
be fully respected. New measures will no doubt be necessary, particularly
given the risk of the uncontrolled proliferation of ballistic missiles. To
avert the danger, let us therefore strengthen international cooperation
without delay.
My country has in the past put forth proposals from this rostrum to stop
the development of an arms race in space. France will shortly propose a
measure to enhance confidence by making it mandatory to give advance notice of

firings of ballistic missiles and rockets carrying satellites or other space
objects. This notification measure, if adopted, would be complemented by the
establishment of an international centre, under United Nations auspices,
responsible for collecting and using the data received.

In deciding to suspend its nuclear tests until the end of 1992, France
has shown that it is ready to help further the disarmament process. The
suspension is temporary and its extension will be subject to reappraisal. Let
us act so as progressively to reduce the number and power of such experiments
in a lasting way. France has also made a contribution to disarmament by
ratifying Additional Protocol No. 1 of the Treaty banning nuclear weapons in
Latin America. In other parts of the world, it supports proposals to
establish denuclearized zones, especially in South Asia, the Middle East, and
Africa. My country is ready to provide guarantees for security, in
conjunction with other nuclear Powers, to countries committed to establishing
such zones.
This year, the General Assembly begins preparing for the conference on
extending the non-proliferation Treaty, to be held in 1995. The indefinite
extension of this Treaty without renegotiation is an important event for
international security. France, which is now a signatory of the
non-proliferation Treaty, realizes that the nuclear Powers have a special
contribution to make to this goal. France is ready to do its part.
Collective security is the guard-rail of peace. Its development on an
equitable basis will be the guarantee for all peoples.
I shall now touch upon the subject of peace through greater justice by
means of economic and social development. France has consistently said that
there can be no lasting peace so long as some peoples are faced with extreme
poverty and famine. There can be no peace so long as we seem to tolerate
unacceptable discrepancies in standards of living. There can be no peace
without hope for justice and for progress towards greater equality.

Responsibility for real progress in this direction above all rests with our
Organization and its Members, who are continuing to focus their efforts in
this direction.
The United Nations family in the broadest sense the World Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, and all the specialized agencies is ready to
assume this responsibility. However, I would like to see the nucleus of the
family, the Secretariat, resume its proper role as a prime mover. What agency
better than the Secretariat can appreciate and evaluate the order of
priorities, provide the impetus, and avoid duplications and waste?
But there can be no sustainable development in a deteriorating
environment. The future of our planet requires ever closer solidarity between
the North and South. Such solidarity should enable us to succeed in bringing
about equitable development with due respect for the natural gifts of the
Earth. The success of Rio is encouraging. But let us begin by respecting our
commitment to devote at least 0.7 per cent of our gross national product to
official development assistance. France will do so. It has already doubled
the amount of its financing to the World Environment Fund and contributed to
the establishment of a 20-billion franc programme agreed upon by the European
Community.
The General Assembly will shortly take up the Secretary-General's report
on the results of the Rio Conference. It will have to decide among other
things on the establishment of a commission for sustainable development that
will be the central mechanism for following up the Conference's decisions.
France, which was one of the first States to back the establishment of such a
commission, hopes that it will convene at an early date, if possible in 1993,

and that it will begin by examining how the pledges at Rio are to be
implemented. Development and the environment remain the two major issues of
the years ahead.
Finally, the social dimension should not be absent from our concerns.
The President of the French Republic, on 31 January 1992, gave his full
support to convening a world summit on social development. Let us not forget
that man must remain central to our concerns. It is for humanity, through the
necessary solidarity among humans, that lasting peace will drive away the
hatred and wars which still cast a pall over its future.
I now turn to the subject of peace through solidarity. An important step
forward has been taken with the progress of humanitarian activities that has
been encouraged and supported by the United Nations. My country, which can
take credit for having been a pioneer in this field, therefore welcomes the
impetus which has thus been given to humanitarian action.
The High Commissioner for Refugees, the Under-Secretary-General for
Humanitarian Action, and United Nations forces are cooperating in providing
assistance to populations exposed to violence, be they in Iraq, Yugoslavia, or
Africa. A new principle of humanitarian law is taking shape which meets the
aspiration of humanity, including the most unfortunate among its members. It
will be to the credit of our Organization, as the end of the century
approaches, to have helped in this decisive and historic progress transcending
the barriers of national jurisdictions and regulations. It was precisely to
make such a point that the President of the French Republic went to Sarajevo
to open the way for the arrival of relief to that martyred city. To lay down
the law in this matter is essential; to act is better still.

France never tires of repeating that human rights are inalienable. So
long as they are not respected, no peace is legitimate. Today still, in too
many places, populations are terrorized and minorities maltreated. The World
Conference on Human Rights will be one of the important events and rendezvous
in 1993. It will be the occasion for us to reaffirm the universality of human
rights and to strengthen the effectiveness of mechanisms to ensure
compliance. Humanitarian action and peace-keeping are necessary functions,
but they are needed in specific circumstances. Sooner or later, peoples will
have to address the necessity of renewing the ties of their solidarity and
rebuilding together a space for exchanges and cooperation. Lasting peace
depends on this. It is clearly inconceivable that the movement for
self-determination, which was so earnestly desired, should be judged guilty
after the fact of the worst regressions.
The example of Yugoslavia is on everybody's mind. Can we tolerate a
return to the most barbaric practices, the very names of which are an insult
to the human race: the massacre of civilians, detention camps without
humanitarian monitoring, "ethnic cleansing"? A solution can only come about
from two distinct measures: on one hand, the establishment of a higher
framework for arbitration and conciliation; on the other, the protection of
minorities. The latter, living within recognized borders, should have the
benefit of guarantees, equitable representation being one and not the least
such guarantee.

Hopes have been raised in places where once everything still seemed to be
impossible. I would like here to pay a tribute to men of good will, including
Prime Minister Panic of Yugoslavia. This is yet another reason to intensify
our efforts and help the Yugoslav peoples out of their tragic impasse. Let us
conceive, let us decide, and then let us impose.
In Cambodia, a long-suffering people has been making its return to the
international community since the Paris Agreements reached under United
Nations auspices. This progress embodies a great deal of hope for the
Cambodian people and for Asia as a whole, and must not be jeopardized as a
result of the refusal of the Khmer Rouge to open up its zone and demobilize
its forces. There is always room for discussion among partners of good will.
No one should use the pretext of his own complaints to try to block a peace
plan which is binding on all the signatories of the Paris Agreements and,
beyond that, upon the entire international community.
After so many years of war in the Middle East, the prospect of a
settlement based on justice and security for all is beginning to emerge thanks
to the courage and clear-sightedness of all the parties. When the time comes,
the international community, through the Security Council, will have to give
its guarantee to a settlement. There is still a long way to go. The European
Community is contributing to this future construction. France is doing its
part in this.
In South Africa, in spite of the terrible traces left by the hateful
system of racial discrimination, the resolve to end apartheid and build a new
open city has at last won the day. I would like to express from this rostrum
today France's concern at the rising violence in South Africa and tell the
leaders of that country: do not destroy the enormous hope you so recently
inspired.

I shall mention only briefly our old Europe, since its trials and
tribulations are widely known, as are its bursts of hope. I can say much,
however, in only a few words. The peoples of Europe wish to speed up their
march toward peace, unity and prosperity. Such is the ambition affirmed by
the signatories of the Maastricht Treaty - to create a genuine union of
democratic States having the redoubled strength that comes from the
combination of cultures, economic means and political resolve, as
Mr. Douglas Hurd said so well when he spoke previously on our behalf. I am
pleased and proud that the French people voted in favour of ratifying the
European unity treaty. My fellow citizens chose the only future of any value,
a future which will build peace on solidarity political, economic, and human.
The European Union will not be inward looking, self-centred, and closed.
On the contrary, the citizens of the European Union will be patriots of the
old continent become the new world. They will have a sense of solidarity
among themselves, be responsive to their brothers on the rest of the
continent, attached to their respective nations yet firm in the face of any
heightened national sentiments which invoke nationalism only the better to
divide humanity and serve designs of domination and exclusion.
The collapse of the wall which separated our continent spurred the
efforts toward union. Today the difficulties of this Europe, separated from
us for too long, then liberated, but weakened and troubled, are yet further
encouragement to us to create this pole of stability on which all Europe will
be able to build its peace and prosperity. That Europe will not be
self-centred. When the time comes, it will welcome its neighbours from
Central and Eastern Europe as brothers. Setting the example and opening the
way are the first steps of true solidarity, that same solidarity which it is
incumbent on our Organization to implement. The Union will undertake to serve

the very ideals of our Charter: "We, the peoples of the United Nations" and
now, we, the peoples of the European Union.
I shall now conclude. It is incumbent on Governments, as it is on
peoples, to set the example. Let us not hide from the fact that peace, like
life, has no price but does have a cost. It is unacceptable for the United
Nations to be foundering in an increasingly severe financial crisis.
Certainly, our Organization has the necessary ambition to express at the
global level that general resolve which Jean-Jacques Rousseau said is more
than the simple addition of individual interests. But the sum total will be
all the greater and all the more universal as the contribution of each and
every one is significant and generous. The United Nations will have value
only in so far as each State, in compliance with the Charter, fulfils its
responsibilities.
There can be no better service nor better example to humanity than to
enable the duty of solidarity to prevail. Let us discharge this duty, first
of all, by honouring our obligations. Peace is not a gift from heaven; it
depends, above all, on human resolve. Thus a new era is opening for nations
as for peoples. Today, as I speak, it is still in a state of confusion.
Tomorrow, it will shine with the fires of justice, peace and solidarity.


Allow me at the
outset. Sir, to congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the
current session of the General Assembly. There is no doubt that your
diplomatic experience will lead our deliberations to a successful conclusion.
Allow me also to take this opportunity to thank and congratulate
His Excellency Ambassador Samir Shihabi and the members of his Bureau for the
exemplary manner in which they steered the work of the forty-sixth session.
We are quite fortunate to have at the head of the United Nations
Organization so highly qualified and skilful a statesman as
Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who has assumed the responsibilities
of this international Organization at a most sensitive and crucial time in
international relations.
Since his recent assumption of his office, his administrative skills and
abilities and the structural reforms he has carried out have shown that he is

a worthy successor to his capable predecessor. We thank him for his devoted
efforts, especially in areas of unrest and tension, and wish him continued
success.
The forty-seventh session of the General Assembly is convened in a
promising climate that augurs well for international relations. The
discernible features of the political scene have been drastically
transformed. Confrontation has disappeared, giving way to great expectations
and aspirations regarding an unshakable belief in the basic rights of man, the
upholding of justice and the social and economic development of peoples in the
context of a new world order.
The prevalent international climate provides us with a rare opportunity
to give priority to human solidarity and cooperation over any other
consideration in order for us to establish that new world order on the secure
foundations of peace, mutual security and respect, and the promotion of the
rule of law in inter-State relations.
The hopes and aspirations focused on the new world order, require, more
than ever, that the Member States work together, analyse the current trends
and channel them, as much as possible, towards the realization of the
expectations this new world order has given rise to, through a number of
effective joint actions of solidarity and cooperation that would be more
effective than mere protestations of good wishes and good intentions.
It is encouraging to note that the universality of the United Nations is
being enhanced day after day. Since the last session of the General Assembly,
thirteen more States have acceded to the membership of the Organization,
namely Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of Moldova, San Marino, Slovenia, Tajikistan,
Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Georgia.

We welcome the admission of these 13 States to our Organization for, in
addition to its significance for the principle of the universality of the
Organization, they will no doubt enrich our debates with valuable insights and
views.
My country welcomes these new Members to the United Nations and wishes
them and their peoples every progress and prosperity.
The Gulf, in view of its God-given strategic, economic and cultural
importance, has always been the focus of the attention of numerous States.
Over the past decade and at the outset of the present one, the region has been
exposed to grave security and environmental dangers, from the eruption of the
Iran-Iraq war to the tragedy of the Iraqi occupation of the sister State of
Kuwait. Thanks to God and to the solidarity of the international community,
we have been able to overcome these tribulations.
However, the remnants of regional disputes and residues of traditional
hatreds have the ability to contribute to the instability of the region.
Hence, we, in the Sultanate of Oman, proceeding from our keen interest in
encouraging the factors of stability in the region, and seeking the security
to which we all aspire, feel that it is high time efforts of all States in the
region, without exception, were devoted to prepare for a new phase of
understanding and fraternity. This will be achieved only through a sincere
examination and analysis of what has happened and sincere efforts to overcome
the effects of the past and heal its many wounds.
At the beginning of this month, the United Arab Emirates announced that
efforts they had exerted vis-a-vis the Islamic Republic of Iran this year have
failed. The aim was to achieve an amicable understanding regarding Oman's

sovereign rights over three islands in the Gulf: Abu Moussa, Greater Tanb and
Smaller Tanb. The Sultanate of Oman is gravely concerned over the prospects
of negative developments in this situation.
Proceeding from our belief in the principles of the Charter of the United
Nations regarding the respect for sovereignty of States, non-interference in
the internal affairs of others and peaceful settlement of disputes, we have
confirmed the rights of the United Arab Emirates in this regard, as did the
other Arab States and now call upon the Islamic Republic of Iran, with whom we
have friendly ties and mutual interests, to settle this dispute by peaceful
means in a manner that would guarantee the rights and common interests of the
States in the Gulf Cooperation Council.
The problem of Palestine has been the major factor underlying the
tragedies and wars witnessed by the peoples of the Middle East region. Peace
and stability in this important and delicate region cannot be achieved without
finding a solution to this problem, which is the crux of the Arab-Israeli
conflict.
My country supports the sincere efforts being made to find a lasting,
just and peaceful solution, which would take into account the interests of all
parties in the region on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967)
and 338 (1973) and the principle of land-for-peace.
Proceeding from this, my country has participated in the International
Peace Conference on the Middle East sponsored by the United States of America
and the Russian Federation. My country has also participated in the
multilateral negotiations of the Conference and the Working Groups thereof,
out of its belief in the importance of supporting direct negotiations, which
are the basis and essence of the Conference as a means of contributing to the

achievement of regional security, cooperation and confidence-building among
States in the region and thereby contributing to the safeguarding of the
interests of all parties.
The recent developments witnessed by the region, in addition to what has
been achieved in the sixth round of the Arab-Israeli talks and the
multilateral negotiations held recently in Washington and Moscow, have created
circumstances that are more favourable than ever for the achievement of a
permanent and just solution that would bring peace to the area. Therefore, we
call upon all parties to exert more efforts and show more patience and
flexibility in order to achieve the permanent and lasting peace to which the
peoples of the region have long aspired.
The Middle East region has witnessed other developments that give rise to
satisfaction and optimism. The Government of Lebanon has taken new positive
steps to extend its sovereignty over the territory of Lebanon by way of
implementing the Taif agreement. In this regard, my country once again
reiterates its call for the implementation of Security Council resolution
425 (1978), which calls for the withdrawal of Israel from the Lebanese
territories that it occupies.
My country, through its membership in the Gulf Cooperation Council,
together with its sisters on the Council, appreciates the outstanding role of
the European community in articulating the orientations of the new world order
in the context of the significant role played by the Community in preserving
stability and security and promoting development in the world.
The two groups, the GCC and the EEC have stressed the need to promote the
peace process in the Middle East, have called upon the international community
to help alleviate the suffering of the Arabs in the occupied territories and

have shown readiness to participate in the reconstruction of Lebanon and
reactivate the Arab-European dialogue in recognition of the close links
between the security of the Middle East and the security of Europe.
After a protracted bitter struggle, the Afghan people, with God's help,
has managed to assume control over its country. The Sultanate of Oman did
recognize the Government of the Mujahideen, and has welcomed the assumption by
the Mujahideen Council to power in Afghanistan. My country is confident that
the new Government in Afghanistan will cope with the new challenges which face
it judiciously and competently. We hope that the international community will
hasten to assist the new Afghan Government to heal the wounds and to close the
book on the past in order to build a future of security, stability and
prosperity for Afghanistan.
The hotbeds of conflict and the regional and domestic disputes based on
race and narrow political outlooks still plague some States and impose an
additional burden on the international Organization. Examples of this is what
is happening in the sister State of Somalia and in the former Yugoslavia.
These racial conflicts and disputes have led to the emergence of a large
number of displaced persons who are subjected to the worst kinds of starvation
and displacement. While we commend the role of the United Nations in
alleviating the suffering of these peoples, whether in Somalia or in the
Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, we note that that role has been limited to
dealing with these problems from a purely humanitarian point of view.

If the United Nations role remains within those limits, such situations
will persist.
Dealing with such tragedies, in our view, requires a much wider role,
more efforts and a drive to force the warring political factions in Somalia to
move towards reconciliation.
We look forward to a more comprehensive and effective role that would put
an end to the fratricidal hostilities that are the source of these tragedies.
Failing this, the people's suffering will continue for a long time and could
threaten peace and security.
Positive indicators in connection with the situation in South Africa bode
well for finding a solution that would be acceptable to all the parties
concerned and that would enable the black majority to participate in
government on a democratic basis. In this regard, we emphasize the importance
of the United Nations role in bringing closer the views of the parties
concerned in South Africa and in helping them to sit at the negotiating table
with the aim of finding solutions that may be acceptable to all.
The international community witnessed, at the end of last year, the most
important historical event in the international arena since the end of the
Second World War, namely the emergence of the republics of the former Soviet
Union as sovereign States, which immediately received the official recognition
of all countries, including my own. As Oman's policy is to build bridges of
friendship with all States of the world, we have recognized those independent
States and proffered the hand of friendship and cooperation to them. Those
republics have proved that the human spirit is invincible, and today, as they

take their first steps on a new road, it is incumbent upon the international
community to support and assist them in the interests of a new world order
based on international stability and security.
Last June, the city of Rio de Janeiro, in Brazil, hosted an unprecedented
international gathering that sought to realize a common dream, a common cause
that knows no boundaries: that of preserving a sound and sustainable
environment in the interests of all mankind. Although they fell short of
expectations, the results of the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (UNCED) have succeeded in endorsing an important principle: that
of the commensurate and just participation of States in the protection of the
environment and the preservation of the ecosystem.
The adoption by the Conference of a set of the 27 principles concerned
with environmentally sound development, in the Rio Declaration, and the
signing by more than 150 States of the Conventions on biological diversity and
climate change represent a step in the right direction towards the
harmonization of development and the environment. My country urges the
international community to support and implement the Conventions and decisions
of the Conference, especially those which relate to helping the developing
countries overcome their environmental problems, by way of consolidating the
spirit of world partnership with the purpose of saving the planet.
In the field of disarmament, we commend the agreement between the United
States of America and the Russian Federation to reduce their strategic weapons
to one third of their present levels. We feel that this agreement should be
an incentive to make more determined efforts to free the world of nuclear and
other weapons of mass destruction and, thereby, achieve the goal of complete
and general disarmament, which is indispensable for world peace and security.

By the same token, the adoption of the global Convention on chemical weapons
is a significant step in the right direction.
The United Nations has clearly achieved impressive successes in dealing
with questions of peace and security. However, peace is not merely the
absence of war, or the simple relaxation of tension between East and West.
Peace cannot be achieved in its more comprehensive sense without a
multilateral transformation of the world economy. The eradication of poverty,
the resolution of problems that stand in the way of progress, such as
indebtedness and the deterioration of commodity prices, the reversing of the
net flow of resources from the South to the North, and the transfer of
technology, should all become part and parcel of the policies aimed at the
maintenance of peace assigned to the United Nations.
The new realities of international relations should be the source of
inspiration to us to reactivate international cooperation in the field of
development. The end of ideological conflicts has increased the importance of
this joint responsibility and the need for joint action. Hence the
opportunity for us all to work together in laying the foundations of the
cooperation and interdependence which we still lack in the fields of
development and international economic cooperation.
The polarizations and armed conflicts which used to be the hallmark of
past decades had prevented the United Nations from achieving its designated
goal: a more secure and peaceful world. However, recent developments have
shown how successful the United Nations can be in dealing with and finding
solutions to chronic and complex issues if its endeavours enjoy the support of
Member States, as is the case, for example, with regard to the Organization's
peace-keeping operations. The number of peace-keeping operations undertaken

by the United Nations over the past four years equals that of all such
operations, during the last four decades of the Organization's history. This
clearly indicates that whenever genuine political will exists on the part of
the parties to any conflict, it becomes possible to find a solution or at
least to accelerate the process of finding a solution that may lead to
reconciliation.
With renewed optimism, my country shares the hope of the international
community that the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly will be able
to deal successfully with residual situations involving negative and
anachronistic elements that are out of step with the thrust of the new world
order, and thus usher in a new phase of cooperation and peaceful coexistence
between all the States and peoples of the world.


Allow me at the outset to convey to you. Sir, my
delegation's sincere congratulations on your unanimous election to the high
post of President of the General Assembly at its forty-seventh session.
We are indebted to Ambassador Samir Shihabi of Saudi Arabia, whose
skilful and indomitable leadership contributed a great deal to the success of
the last session of the General Assembly.
I extend congratulations and best wishes to the representatives of the
new States Members of the United Nations: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of
Moldova, San Marino, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan.
Mongolia commends Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali for his dynamic
performance. He has assumed the responsibilities of his post at a time when
the Organization is regaining its effectiveness, and the objective of its
democratization and restructuring becomes increasingly topical. I wish you
success, Mr. Secretary-General, in your endeavours.
I feel honoured and privilieged to address this Assembly of nations
today, at a time of renewed hope in the world Organization and recommitment to

the underlying purposes and principles of its Charter. I have come to this
session of the General Assembly to tell the world community about Mongolia's
domestic and external policies and its approaches to current international
issues and to express Mongolia's full support for the principles and
activities of the United Nations.
As the wheel of history turns, mankind finds itself on the threshold of
the third millennium. The century that started with a fierce struggle waged
by the workers' movement and was two brutal world wars, a powerful movement
for independence and dramatic scientific and technological breakthroughs is
culminating now with a new wave of human rights, freedom and democracy.
Over the past several decades the world was divided into two antagonisitc
camps that grew into two powerful, confrontational alliances, but now it has
witnessed the end of the cold war. One could hardly find a country in the
world that had not been drawn into this truly global face-off.
By indulging in ideological hostilities and a reckless arms race, mankind
brought itself to the brink of self-destruction and wasted vast resources,
many opportunities and much time, thereby hampering world economic development
and social progress and damaging the environment. On the other hand, the
colonial system collapsed and many Asian, African and Latin American countries
gained independence and strengthened their positions in the international
arena. Mankind has reached into outer space and started taming nuclear
energy. The positive and negative effects of all this have been reflected in
the activities of the United Nations, the mirror of world tendencies and
international relations.
The East-West cold war came to an end as a direct result of the increased
interpendence of nations, the interrelationship between the political.

economic and humanitarian spheres, the bankruptcy of confrontational policies
and the arms race, the changes in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe
and the emergence of new thinking. Thus the 1980s and 1990s mark, in my view,
the beginning of a transitional period shaping a new world order. At this
very juncture, with the disintegration of the bipolar world and the creation
of a multipolar one, we are called upon to determine the principles that will
govern our lives and our forms of cooperation in the next century.
It is vitally important to establish a new and just world order and to
strengthen the ethical and legal bases for guaranteeing the fundamental
principles of inter-State relations.
Mongolia believes that the United Nations should be the focal point of
the develoment and coordination of these processes. We therefore fully share
and support the conclusions reached to that effect at the recent Stockholm
Conference of the Inter-Parliamentary Union. In this context, the year 1992
could be described as a year that has strengthened these positive trends.

The first ever summit meeting of the Unted Nations Security Council was
held this year, demonstrating the growing prestige and increasing role of the
United Nations. Mongolia fully supports the ideas and many specific proposals
concerning preventive diplomacy and ways and means of building confidence,
contained in the report of the Secretary General "An Agenda for Peace"
prepared as a follow-up to the aforementioned Security Council summit
meeting. The report outlines some concrete proposals on the prevention of
disputes and conflicts, on increasing the role of the United Nations in
peacemaking, peace-keeping and post-conflict peace-building, as well as on the
mechanism of ensuring the security of medium-sized and small States by
political means. The importance of these proposals was most vividly
demonstrated by the Persian Gulf crisis and its lessons. Today the strong
cannot defy with impunity the will of the weak. Mongolia is of the view that
the main lesson of this conflict is that the world community proved its
determination no longer to tolerate actions in violation of the provisions of
the Charter of the United Nations.
Pluralism and democracy, advancing in every part of the world, penetrate
the very fabric of international relations and open up broad prospects for
dialogue and cooperation. Progress has been made towards settling some
regional conflicts peacefully and freeing the world from weapons of mass
destruction.
In this connection, I would like to note with appreciation such important
events as the finalization, through consensus, of the draft Convention on the
Prohibition and Elimination of Chemical Weapons; the agreement between the
Presidents of the United States and the Russian Federation on the reduction of
the two countries' strategic nuclear weapons by the year 2003, far over and
beyond the limits stipulated in the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START);

and the accession of the People's Republic of China and of France to the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. We also commend the
near-nuclear countries for commencing efforts to contribute to disarmament.
We would hope to see all other States in possession of nuclear weapons join
the nuclear disarmament talks.
In a nutshell, although it is too early today to give an exhaustive
definition of the new world order, some of its principal features are already
at the stage of maturing.
However, these changes, which have brought about prospects of a new era
in international relations, fail to prevent new outbreaks of tension that
jeopardize world peace and security. The new hotbeds of conflicts are being
caused by inequality, ethnic and religious strife and other complex issues of
long standing. As an example of this, I would refer to the crisis in the
former Yugoslavia, which is deeply troubling the world community these days.
Mongolia deeply regrets the bloodshed taking place between the nations that
used to share one home, and supports the efforts undertaken by the United
Nations, as well as such a regional organization as the European Community, in
order to resolve the crisis. We hope that the decisions reached at the London
Conference will yield positive results.
Mongolia holds the view that it is possible to solve the Yugoslav crisis
peacefully in the manner in which the Cambodian issue is now being settled.
In this connection, we would like to compliment the permanent members of the
United Nations Security Council, the Secretary-General and influential
countries of the region that are taking an active part in the settlement of
the Cambodian problem.
A special feature of today's international relations is the need

appropriately to combine the national interests of a country with those of the
world community. From this point of view, the United Nations activities
depend on the situation in and the policies of its Member States. Therefore,
allow me briefly to describe the state of affairs in Mongolia, one of the
Members of the United Nations, its foreign policy and security interests.
The history book of Mongols consists of diverse and unique chapters: the
rise and fall of the Great Empire; over 200 years under colonial rule; 70
years of Communist experiment. Today, at the turn of the century, we, the
Mongols, have embarked on the road to join the mainstream of civilization.
Over the two-odd years since Mongolia has irrevocably embraced democratic
reforms, it has managed basically to dismantle the old social system. We
support pluralism through the policies and practical activities of the State.
As a result, many political parties have emerged and the conditions for
democracy's steady march onward are being created.
Our State structure, which was formed following the first free elections
of 1990, laid down the foundations for democratic movement, took the initial
steps towards a market economy and promulgated the new Constitution legally
guaranteeing the continuity of democratic reforms. Last June the second
elections were held, resulting in the formation of new State and government
institutions and in the formulation of the next stage of the transitional
period. This has become yet another guarantee of the irreversibility of our
movement towards democracy and a market economy.
However, a general assessment of this past period speaks of a multitude
of problems, both objective and subjective in nature, in resolving political/
social and economic issues of the current period.

The country lacks financial resources. And, as a result, such serious
problems as the inadequate supply of food and consumer goods to the
population, and raw materials, equipment and spare parts for industry, beset
us. The country suffers from acute shortages of housing, medicine and other
vital needs.
The underdeveloped economic infrastructure and the lopsided pattern of
foreign economic relations aggravate our problems. All this leads to the
slump in production, to inflation and a decline in living standards.
Like other developing countries, we are not in a position to cope with
these vicissitudes on our own. Donor countries and international
organizations have shown appreciation of our commitment to democratic reforms
and the enormity of our problems by rendering support and assistance essential
to us. I take this opportunity to express, on behalf of the Mongolian people,
our sincere gratitude to the Governments and people of the United States,
Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Federal Republic of Germany, the
Netherlands, Denmark, the People's Republic of China, the Russian Federation
and others, as well as to the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the
Asian Development Bank and the United Nations Development Programme for their
kind cooperation.

Mongolia, in its relations with other countries, has always upheld such
universal principles of international relations as mutual respect for
independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in each
other's internal affairs, and will continue to do so in the future.
Our foreign policy has undergone a radical change over the past two years
since we committed ourselves to the development of democracy and market
relations, to guaranteeing human rights and fundamental freedoms. Our foreign
policy has been freed from the ideological bias that had prevailed for decades.
For Mongolia, which is situated between two of the permanent members of
the United Nations Security Council, relations with its immediate neighbours
have always been and will remain a fundamental factor in its foreign policy.
Mongolia stands for the development of balanced relations with those two
countries. We are currently reshaping our relations with them to meet the
requirements of genuine equality and mutual benefit and the new realities of
international politics. The withdrawal of Russian troops, in line with the
agreement reached by the two Governments in the wake of the improving climate
for regional understanding and cooperation, is being completed. This is in
full accordance with our new concept of national security.
In order to contribute to disarmament and trust in the region and
world-wide, Mongolia declares its territory a nuclear-weapon-free zone. We
shall work towards having this status internationally guaranteed.
With the disintegration of the former Soviet Union into new independent
States and the incorporation of these into the international community.
Central Asia is once again emerging as a separate geopolitical entity. We
believe that this vast land area, strategically located as a bridge between
Europe and Asia, should be reflected in the regional representational

structure of the United Nations and the land-locked position of its countries
duly taken into account.
I should like to take this opportunity to emphasize that we are against
turning Central Asia into a nuclear testing ground. The Mongolian Government
has repeatedly emphasized the possibility of developing a dialogue on a
regular basis among the States of North-East Asia, an area that is home to
more than one-third of the world's population and has a host of military and
political, trade and economic, ecological and other pressing problems to deal
with. The current climate in this subregion offers a favourable opportunity
to realize such ideas and initiatives. At this point, I should like to note
with appreciation the recent establishment of diplomatic relations between the
People's Republic of China and the Republic of Korea.
Other important features of our time are the increasing political and
economic interdependence of nations and the intensification of regional
integration processes. It should be noted that in the Asia-Pacific region, in
spite of the ethnic, religious and cultural diversity as well as the disparity
in the levels of economic and social development, such institutions as the
Pacific Economic Cooperation Conference (PECC) and Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) have come into being to facilitate the processes mentioned
earlier.
We believe that these forums could be broadened in terms of their
membership with a view to securing the widest possible representation.
Mongolia's intention is to develop trade and economic relations with the
countries of the region on the basis of mutual benefit and to
participate actively in the international division of labour that is taking
shape here.

Last year, Mongolia joined the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries as a
full-fledged member. We understand this Movement to be, inter alia, an
important political factor in the protection of the independence and security
of small States.
The contribution of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, embracing
almost two thirds of the United Nations membership, is highly important in
enabling the United Nations to effectively address the tasks that face it.
The recent 10th Conference of Heads of State or Government of the Non-Aligned
Countries, held in Jakarta, has reiterated its readiness to cooperate with the
United Nations in building a new world order based on law, equality and
justice. We are of the view that this Summit has been crucial in responding
to certain assertions and allaying certain doubts concerning the Movement's
alleged loss of relevance and viability in evolving its principles and
objectives in line with the new realities and in mapping out the Movement's
strategies. In our view, it has also given an impetus to the expansion of
South-South cooperation.
With the cold-war era at an end, a propitious opportunity is now at hand
for the United Nations to work unhindered towards the attainment of its
objectives. The activities of the United Nations during the past two years
provide a convincing example.
Although the political climate on our planet is rapidly changing for the
better, the same cannot be said, unfortunately, of international economic
relations. We are concerned about the lack of noticeable progress in tackling
the pressing issues of the world economy, especially those related to the
development of developing countries and their indebtedness. Mongolia,
therefore, believes that enhancing the United Nations role in developmental

efforts should constitute a major component in the restructuring of the
Organization.
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio
de Janeiro, eloquently testifies to the inextricable link between environment
and sustainable development. What is now required is to launch multilateral
concerted action to implement the Rio Declaration and Agenda 21.
At that United Nations Conference my country proposed the establishment
of an international network of ecological pattern countries and the inclusion
of the territory of Mongolia in it as a special zone under international
protection. In doing so, we proceeded from our understanding that the
preservation of Mongolia's largely unspoiled natural environment is part and
parcel of global, and particularly Central Asian, ecological concerns. Our
country is open to international cooperation in the implementation of
research, protection and restoration programmes. We hope that the Member
States of the United Nations will support our proposal and promote its
realization.

I should like to point out the imperative need to develop and strengthen
the legal basis of inter-State relations, accelerate the codification of
international law and increase the competence of the International Court of
Justice, for the sake of asserting a new international order the world over.
In conclusion, I should like to express my confidence that this session
the United Nations General Assembly will successfully complete its
deliberations.


Allow me to
congratulate you. Sir - the representative of Bulgaria, a State friendly to
ours, and of a people so close to the people of Belarus in its spiritual and
cultural traditions - on your election to the presidency of the General
Assembly at its forty-seventh session. By electing you, representatives have
paid tribute to Bulgaria and have given expression to the respect that you
enjoy in the international community. In the performance of your quite
complex duties you may rely on all possible support from our delegation.
We should like to express our most sincere congratulations to the States
that have become new Members of the United Nations. We regard their entry
into the United Nations with great satisfaction since .the accession of new
States to membership in the Organization enriches the collective thinking of
the international community with the wisdom of each one of them.
Happy indeed is a people that reaps the fruits of centuries of steady
development development in the context of stable statehood and within a
national culture unclouded by oppression. But there is another fate as well
that of going through centuries before re-establishing one's own State,
without allowing the light of one's culture to be extinguished, and finally
achieving the long-awaited goal of sovereignty and independence. This too is
happiness - a particular kind of happiness, a difficult happiness.
It is precisely the words "difficult happiness" that I would use to
express the essence of the present mood and feelings experienced by my
people. Yakub Kolas, one of the titans of the culture and national spirit of
Belarus, in his poem "New Land", wrote with tremendous power concerning the
everlasting dream of a poor peasant in Belarus about land that would belong
only to him, where he would be the master, independent of the caprice of an
alien will.
Belarus, one of the ancient centres of Slavdom, is a new land, a new
country regained by its people. The goals of freedom, of the enjoyment of
full ownership rights in one's own country and of liberation from oppression
in all of its manifestations have nourished the historic will of our people
for centuries and are now beginning to be fully realized.
A year ago, at the last session of the General Assembly, the delegation
of Belarus, in its statement, outlined the programme of its priorities in the
sphere of foreign policy: a series of diplomatic recognitions, the
establishment of a commonwealth of sovereign States in place of the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics, non-nuclear status and neutrality for Belarus.
Today, in a brief review of the year, I should like to note with
satisfaction that a great deal has been achieved. As we foresaw, the
Commonwealth of Independent States born at Viskuli, on the soil of Belarus -
has been established in place of the USSR. More than 100 States of the world
have recognized the Republic of Belarus, and we have established diplomatic
relations with 60 of them. Our State has become a full and equal member of
the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE); it has joined the
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, as well as other international
financial institutions; and it is now the host country for an office of the
United Nations and the United Nations Development Programme.
Tactical nuclear weapons have been completely withdrawn from Belarus.
Having become a party to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and its Lisbon
Protocol, Belarus has also committed itself to the withdrawal of strategic
weapons over a period of seven years. Possibly the process will be completed
even sooner. We have distanced ourselves from participation in military and
military-political alliances and blocs. Everything achieved thus far has
established for our State a primary foundation, a base from which we can
advance further.
There are certain invisible threads that link the present and the past
into a whole the spiritual potential of culture as an element of political
choice, of fateful decisions taken at stages of drastic transition in
history. Having established the necessary basis for its statehood and foreign
policy, Belarus today may be said metaphorically to be standing at a
crossroads of history. The problem of choice, of orientation, is particularly
consonant with the present transitional stage of our life. Which way and how
will Belarus move? What values will feed the roots of its State tree? What
do the near and the distant future hold for our people, which has suffered so
much? I think that hardly anyone would dare to give categorical and
unambiguous answers today to these and many other complex questions. We can
only make certain long-term assumptions and, so far as the prognosis is
concerned, state a number of ideas and principles relating to several spheres
of our activities.
In the economic sphere, our point of reference is the Commonwealth of
Independent States as a form of economic interaction.*
Events have put to shame those sceptics who foretold the imminent and
inevitable disintegration of the Commonwealth. Today it may indeed still
remind us of a weak child, but a child who, in our opinion, is destined to
stand firmly on his own feet. The Commonwealth whatever its membership may
be will endure and stand because under present conditions it is a form of
mutual economic survival. It is a form that has been forced on us but an
inevitable one, without which it would be difficult to count on the formation
of an East European economic market. It should be understood that the
structure which is now being established by its members cannot instantly
become the model of a developed, contemporary market. For 10 to 15 years we
shall continue to stumble along a bumpy road, but gradually we shall move
towards a state of market civilization which will ultimately enable us to
raise seriously the question of integration into the European Community - the
Common Market.
We are convinced that for a relatively long time to come there will be
two economic formations in Europe the European Community and what we might
term the emerging East European economic community which will develop
parallel to each other and gradually move closer together. For Belarus it is
not so much a civilized form of economic divorce as an opportunity for
creating a new quality of life, for getting ready, together with the other
States of the Commonwealth, to become part of an all-European market.
In other words, for us and, we hope, for a number of other States, the
Commonwealth represents not isolation and economic autarky but rather a form
of development, an inner transformation, whose fundamental essence and final
goal is a new Europe. The idea of a common home for Europeans will become a
reality only when the levels of economic development are equalized.
At present we are still struggling to prevent our economic potential from
declining too far. The specific characteristic of Belarus' approach to the
reforms is that the dynamics of the establishment of the new market structures
should and does fully match the fading away of the old economic structures.
Such a harmonious approach enables us to avoid extremes: on the one hand,
rushing forward without good reason and, on the other, rigidly clinging to
what is outmoded. We are convinced that, having overcome its difficulties,
the people of Belarus will realize its age-old dream, in the words of
Yanka Kupala, "to become the equal of other peoples in glory and power".
In the political sphere we shall continue to act in strict conformity
with the constitutional principles of a neutral and non-nuclear State. We
perceive each of these not as a "given", not as a "moment of truth", but as a
goal born in the depths of our national consciousness as we lived our tragic
history.
We view the movement towards neutrality and non-nuclear status as a
process of consolidating the independence and sovereignty of Belarus,
acquiring our own political identity and breaking free of the traps that could
in the future prevent our free and conscious integration into the structures
objectively necessitated by world development.
We realize clearly that the notion of classical neutrality is undergoing
a radical change of content. Perpetual neutrality does not and cannot exist
in a Europe and a world which are interdependent, just as no perpetual-motion
machine exists or can exist in nature. The steps recently taken by European
countries that had been neutral on the basis of tradition or treaties are
evidence of this.
We, the people of Belarus, on the basis of our tragic past, have been and
continue to have a romantic concept of neutrality. This has become simply a
matter of national instinct. There have been so many attempts to annihilate
us, so many attacks upon us, that we still have the feeling that if we become
neutral, our security will be guaranteed.
But Belarus can become truly neutral only when the new Europe is free of
blocs, when the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ceases to exist just
as the Warsaw Pact did in the recent past, when the freedom of movement of
ideas, people, capital, goods and services becomes an everyday reality.
The third trend is democratic institutionalization. There is no doubt
that our main hopes in this area are associated with the adoption of a new
Constitution which will make the process of democratization irreversible. I
believe that this may happen in the coming months in the course of the second
reading of our draft Constitution, which is scheduled for October of this
year. The draft Constitution includes the following fundamental values and
principles: deideologization and political pluralism; primacy of the norms of
international law; the separation of legislative, executive and judicial
power, with reciprocal checks and balances between the three branches of State
organization; the introduction of norms for direct action with respect to
human rights, any potential violation of which would automatically cause the
judicial bodies to intervene; the undertaking of a thorough and complex
judicial reform aimed at reforming the civil code and the code of civil
procedure, the code of labour law, the criminal code and the code of criminal
procedure, and the establishment of trial by jury; the creation of a
constitutional court; and strict observance of the rights of national
minorities on the basis of the recommendations of the 1990 Copenhagen meeting
of CSCE on the human dimension and the 1991 Charter of Paris.
In this area, in keeping with our traditional principles of tolerance in
all spheres, including the religious sphere, we intend to continue to maintain
a high standard even under the conditions of a turbulent Europe. We take
pride in the fact that all through the many centuries of our history, despite
the Pale of Settlement, we have never had such extreme chauvinistic phenomena
as anti-Jewish pogroms or any other similar actions on our national soil. Our
firm principles - a genuine love of peace, respect for others, tolerance,
honouring the right of each ethnic group, regardless of its size, to have its
own national identity and equal civil rights - will be preserved and augmented
by us in contemporary Europe.
This is demonstrated by the present-day situation in a
multi-denominational Belarus, where a religious minority, the Catholics of
Belarus, has been granted the right to celebrate its main religious holidays
as officially established non-working days. If I am not mistaken, this is one
of a very few such examples in Europe.
It is our hope that the unique interfaith balance that has historically
developed in Belarus will be valued and respected by all and will not become
the subject of external manipulations. We in Belarus do not equate the
religious denomination of the citizens of Belarus with the ethnic groups to
which they belong.
To say that we are living in an extraordinary time is nowadays often
merely to mouth a cliche. The time has come, however, to go both beyond mere
declarations that changes have taken place and beyond simple-minded
sentimentality at the sudden disappearance of earlier global tensions. It is
true that the disintegration of the totalitarian system, both as a social and
political system and as a system of States, has led to the actual disappearance
of the central line of tension between the two opposing global military and
ideological groups. One pattern of international relations, which
characterized most of the twentieth century, is being or has been replaced by
another. But this still does not automatically mean the absence of
conflicts. Paradoxically, the new pattern is reminiscent of the one that was
laid down by the Vienna Congress and characterized the Europe of the
nineteenth century, especially its latter half, with its multitude of centres
of power and the abundance of inter-State and intra-State conflicts, often
ethnic in content. No doubt the analogy is not exact, but its points of
resemblance give cause for concern, a concern actively reinforced by the
bloody conflicts in Yugoslavia, Nagorny Karabakh, Georgia and Moldova, all of
which seemed inconceivable to Europe just a few years ago. And after all, we
all recall the catastrophic convulsions with which that international
structure ended at the beginning of the twentieth century.
The political structure adopted thereafter was that of post-Versailles
Europe, which also proved counterproductive. The creation of subregional
groupings, such as the Little Entente, and an amorphous system of
pseudo-collective security eventually demonstrated the complete inability of
the League of Nations to function and failed to save the world from the
conflagration of the Second World War.
The situation today is similar in many respects. It is thought that
unless urgent measures are taken, Europe will totally fail to approach
complete prosperity and tranquillity. Internal tensions on the continent are
increasing. A broader interpretation of CSCE is drawing it into new crises in
the European-Asian area and making it more difficult to achieve any concrete
results at the initial stage of emerging conflicts. Is it possible that we
have not learned anything from the sad experiences of the past? It is true
that the nuclear threat is receding, but the number of victims of
conventional-arms conflicts is nevertheless terrifying.
I am far from being a prophet of doom. Moreover, achieving our common
strategic goal - the creation of a unified European home is a thoroughly
realistic and attainable one. But we must not forget that the complications
we face on the path I have just outlined are also real. We must see them
clearly and overcome them in order to move forward through joint efforts
towards our chosen goal.
The main advantages of the new world order over that of the last century,
in our view, lie in mankind's accumulated bitter experience, which we must
prevent from recurring, and in the existence of a functioning and universally
respected Organization of States whose task it is to ensure international
peace and security.
It is important, however, to enable the United Nations, through our joint
efforts, to play an active, practical role in preventing conflicts and
"extinguishing" those that nevertheless arise.
At the present time it is both necessary and possible to strengthen the
role of the United Nations in monitoring the compliance of States with their
commitments under existing international covenants and conventions in the
sphere of human rights. The issue of radically strengthening the role of the
United Nations in this respect may become one of the items on the agenda of
the World Conference on Human Rights, to be held at Vienna next year.
It is essential to prevent the world from being split into groups on the
basis of different degrees of well-being. Closed "oases of prosperity" cannot
exist forever; they make the world unstable. Today, as never before, it is
necessary to mount a multifaceted attack on world-wide economic problems.
The removal of the threat of nuclear war and the growing burdens
technology imposes on the global environment, which have reached and even
exceeded the limit, have made clear the gravity of the problems that beset the
environment. In this sphere too, the international community must choose not
confrontation but cooperation in order to preserve the Earth's ecosystem.
Without idealizing the results of the Rio de Janeiro Conference, Belarus
shares the view that this is only the beginning of a long and difficult road.
Here, in addition to everything else, it should be borne in mind that on the
moral scale of values, the modest offerings of the poor are often much more
precious than the donations of the rich.
Belarus supports the idea of convening in 1995 the year marking the
fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations - a special session of the General
Assembly during which another summit meeting in the interests of the Earth
would be held, for the first comprehensive review of the implementation of
"Agenda 21", the agenda for the twenty-first century, and at which the
Earth-95 Charter, which may be developed on the basis of the 1992 Rio
Declaration, would be discussed.
We regard the unique summit meeting of the United Nations Security
Council, held on 31 January of this year, as a milestone in preparing the
United Nations for its role, which is totally new in its effectiveness. We
highly commend the Secretary-General's report "An Agenda for Peace", and we
are prepared to take part actively and as constructively as possible in
discussing the recommendations put forward in that report.
I can, however, declare even today our favourable attitude towards
enhancing the activities of the United Nations in carrying out peace-keeping
operations and, in general, in settling conflicts, many of which stem from
inter-ethnic disputes. In particular, we are prepared to participate actively
in the search for peaceful ways to resolve the Nagorny Karabakh conflict. We
have agreed to hold an international conference at Minsk on this issue, and
despite all our economic difficulties, we have done everything possible to
enable it to begin its work.
On the whole, Belarus' reserves of stability, both internally and on our
borders, its traditions of cultural and national tolerance, its aspirations to
the strict observance of human rights and its geopolitical position give it,
in our opinion, the potential to play an active role as a peace-keeping
mediator or coordinator in a number of situations, particularly in regions of
the former USSR but also in a broader context. We are ready to make use of
that potential in the interests of peace, cooperation and genuine respect for
human rights. As we see it, the realization of this potential will be helped
by another dimension in Belarus' foreign policy: our aspiration to balanced
consistency, constructiveness and predictability of action.
Speaking from this rostrum as the representative of a country that was
stricken by the worst nuclear accident in human history and of a State going
through an extremely difficult stage in its transition from one type of
economy to another, I must express today our anxiety concerning two aspects of
the General Assembly's activities.
The Republic of Belarus is troubled by the delay in the implementation of
the General Assembly resolution on strengthening international cooperation and
coordinating efforts to study, mitigate and minimize the consequences of the
Chernobyl disaster - or, to be more precise, by the Assembly's almost total
inactivity with regard to implementing that resolution. The ineffectiveness
of the United Nations, about which much has already been said from this
rostrum, can be vividly illustrated inter alia by this example, which is
particularly close and painful to us. We have learned from our own experience
that resolutions in this particular case resolution 45/190, which was
adopted by consensus and, I should point out, sponsored by 129 States - may be
adopted, but the results of such seemingly active measures are minimal. The
years that have elapsed since the disaster convince us that today we are
essentially at the mercy of a capricious fate and must rely first of all on
our own capabilities, on people of goodwill and on various international
charitable and religious organizations, to which we are immeasurably grateful
for their moral support and their assistance.
Even the small secretariat that was established to oversee the
implementation of that resolution is silently watching events from far-away
Vienna, clearly not intending to relocate to one of the three capitals of the
affected countries, closer to the scene. Apparently this is a much simpler
and calmer way of proceeding. And what good would it do to try to take the
Chernobyl issue outside of the United Nations, the United Nations General
Assembly and the Economic and Social Council?
It is evident that policy relating to Chernobyl is becoming hostage to
the current weaknesses and the inherent characteristics of the United
Nations. Need we explain why, in the light of this situation, the prestige of
such a universal Organization as the United Nations may be waning in the minds
of many people in Belarus?
A number of United Nations administrative and budgetary policies also
need to be seriously revised. First and foremost, the scale of assessments of
the States Members of the United Nations deserves criticism.
Regrettably, in the course of its recent work the Committee on
Contributions recommended to the General Assembly that the share contributed
by the Republic of Belarus to the United Nations budget should be sharply and
substantially increased. The state of our economy, especially during the
transitional period, gives no grounds for such an increase. We wish to
declare our profound disagreement with such an unjustified approach, and we
insist that the amount of our Republic's contribution to the Organization's
budget should be reconsidered. Furthermore, we are prepared to assume
financial obligations, but, first and foremost, we are prepared to do so only
in respect of financial obligations as from the time of the juridical
disappearance of the USSR, that is to say, from December 1991.
The poetic metaphor of a crossroads, which is so dominant for Belarus
today, involves another important symbolic feature, that of departing and
leaving something behind. As it passes through the present difficult
crossroads, Belarus leaves behind forever the obsolete ballast of implausible
stereotypes that were imposed upon us, bound us hand and foot and prevented us
from being free and happy. We look forward with confidence to the new
horizons now opening, we are ready to work indefatigably for our homeland, to
make the life of the people of Belarus prosperous and secure, and we shall
continue to make our contribution to the world community's constructive
efforts.
We are making our choice. We have made it already.