 It gives me great pleasure to extend to you our heartfelt congratulations, Sir, on your election as President of the forty-first session of the General Assembly. We are confident that your ability and diplomatic skill will enable you to conduct the business of the General Assembly in a very able manner and that will be a great help to all of us in achieving the positive results that we aspire to at this session. It is a source of particular pleasure that the representative of a friendly country, Bangladesh, with which my country, Jordan, has the closest relations of brotherhood, friendship, co-operation, assume that important international post.
I should also like to extend my thanks and appreciation to your predecessor, Mr. Jaime de Pinies, who conducted the proceedings of the fortieth session of the General Assembly with extreme skill. His ability to deal with thorny international problems, thanks to his wide knowledge and creative democratic spirit, coupled with firmness and decisiveness, led to the outstanding success of that session. This was only to be expected of such a seasoned diplomat, steeped in multilateral diplomacy and with wide experience in United Nations affairs and activities.
I also wish at the beginning of my statement to convey on behalf of the Government of Jordan our great appreciation and gratitude to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for his sincere and tireless efforts to enhance the role of the United Nations and help solve conflicts and crises which threaten the security of peoples and deplete the energies of countries. We shall give his proposals and observations on various issues the attention they fully deserve.

We share the Secretary-General's great concern to ensure effectiveness of the United Nations and its adherence to its ideals and principles, as well as his sincere desire that its role be enhanced, so that it may remain not only a forum for discussion and the expression of views and positions, but also a means of achieving consensus, and possibly agreements on the serious challenges that face mankind. The fortieth anniversary of the United Nations last year, was an opportunity to evaluate the progress of this vital Organization. In the course of the celebrations emphasis was laid on the importance of action to solve outstanding international problems in a spirit of co-operation and harmony and on the common concern not to allow international crises to get out of hand and escape collective control. It is our view that the crisis in the United Nations and the proliferation of its resolutions are caused essentially by the worsening international situation and the chronic regional conflicts that remain unsolved.
We should not start from a false premise. The real problem facing us is not the proliferation of united Nations resolutions or the expansion of its organs, important and urgent as dealing with such aspects may be. It is the proliferation of the problems besetting the nations of the world and the fact that they remain unsolved. Therefore the sound premise is not the impact of international conflicts on the United Nations but rather the need to settle such conflicts using the machinery in an effective way. The settlement of these conflicts would absolve the United Nations of blame.
We must deal with the Arab-Israeli conflict and the situations in southern Africa, Kampuchea, Lebanon and Central America as threats to international peace and security which sap the resources of the peoples of those regions, rather than treat them as mere items on the United Nations agenda. The situation in the Middle East was dealt with in 1967 by a single resolution, namely, Security Council resolution 242 (1967), which Israel has refused to implement to this day. The United Nations has been unable to force Israel to comply with that resolution. In fact, Israel has escalated its practices and consolidated its occupation, thus forcing the United Nations to keep on reaffirming its resolutions.
The United Nations crisis is part of a world crisis, which is a reflection rather than a cause of the worsening situation of international peace and security. Therefore, the way to start dealing with the United Nations crisis is to implement United Nations resolutions, not to rob them of all force and vigor.
The usefulness and efficiency of the United Nations as a framework for co-operation among States was demonstrated once again when, in spite of the financial crisis imposed on it, it was able to organize the special session on the critical economic situation in Africa. That session was testimony to the need for collective action and multilateral co-operation. It also showed the importance and effectiveness of multilateral action when the will is there.
We see in that a ray of hope that progress can be made towards a collective solution to the economic and political problems in other regions of the world. The United Nations can contribute to the settlement of explosive regional conflicts in the Middle East, southern Africa, Cyprus, Afghanistan and other areas. The Secretary-General is making strenuous and sincere efforts to that end. We support his efforts and call upon others to support and respond positively to them. The United Nations machinery can also be activated to deal with the question of disarmament and the control of nuclear weapons.
The eighth summit conference of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries held at Harare has recently dealt with these questions. The countries of the third world emphasized the importance of enhancing the role of the United Nations and the need to tackle the problems that face us in a spirit of co-operation, trust, realism and frankness.
While we continue to believe in the vital need for the existence of the United Nations, we feel, unfortunately, that there is a campaign being waged against this Organization. Although I do not want to go into the details of this campaign, I feel it is essentially unjust and prejudiced. The United Nations can be as strong and effective or as marginal and unimportant as we, the Member States, want it to be. I believe that one of the reasons for its weakness is to be found in the selectivity practised and the double standards observed by some in applying the principles of the Charter, in particular those calling for self-determination, non-use of force in international relations and the peaceful settlement of disputes.
With regard to the financial crisis facing the United Nations, I feel that we can work together to find appropriate and practical solutions. We can be guided by the views suggested so far and by the outcome of our deliberations and consultations in this regard. I believe, however, that our aim in solving this current financial crisis, which we do not underestimate, should be to strengthen the role and effectiveness of the Organization rather than cast doubt on it or weaken it. For if it were to disappear, an international situation would arise in which force will take precedence over law.
In the context of our commitment to the United Nations and our belief in its importance and effectiveness, we consider it necessary to provide it with adequate means to fulfill its role with regard to the Arab-Israeli conflict. So far, its role has largely been confined to that of an observer or of a non-active participant. The outcome of the struggle between right and might has been the
freezing of the United Nations role with regard to the Arab-Israeli conflict. In a situation in which the majority would not agree to set aside the principles of the Charter which reject aggression and domination while the minority refuses to permit the application of the provisions of the Charter against the aggressor. Therefore, the role of the international Organization has been confined to affirming the principles without being able to take any practical action in this conflict. There are those who benefit from this state of no-peace, no-war. Therein prevails a situation where the only winners have been those who refuse to give up anything and who would not accept less than everything. The only loser has been the Palestinian Arab people, who continue to languish under occupation.
In this situation, where occupation is being consolidated, and the historical and inalienable rights of the Arab people have remained confined to theoretical reaffirmation, we in Jordan decided to do our utmost to change the situation so that the Arab rights in Palestine may be translated into practical reality, and the principles and resolutions of the United Nations condemning aggression, prohibiting foreign occupation and calling for self-determination may be translated into direct political action, through the formulation of practical solutions to the Palestine problem and the Arab-Israeli conflict.
We have always been convinced that the mere affirmation of principles, the taking of postures and the issuance of declarations without practical efforts towards the achievement of what we aspire to often constitute a course of action that is no less dangerous than the outright occupation. There has developed a regional situation characterized by demographic and geographical changes in the occupied Arab territories; a state of international laxity and a feeling of inability to take any serious action against the creeping annexation of occupied Arab territories. This has been accompanied by a state of international polarization and rivalry between the super-Powers to control the region's destiny

and resources. The situation of the Palestinian Arab people, languishing under occupation, has worsened to an unprecedented degree that gives rise to grave concern.
For all these important considerations concerning the future of the Palestinian Arab people and the preservation of their national identity and of the Arab and Islamic rights in Palestine, Jordan has worked for a comprehensive, just and durable peace settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the Palestine question, which is the core of the conflict, through an international conference attended by all parties, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Such a conference should be held under the auspices of the united Nations on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) .
We feel that convening such a conference would provide the appropriate framework for negotiation on the basis of international law and the principles of the Charter. We consider that it would be a forum that could not be exploited as an arena either for debate or for polemics. It would rather be a solemn international framework for responsible negotiation and effective action to reach the desired settlement, one in which the parties would be held responsible for their actions before the whole world, and subjected to the scrutiny of the international community. We feel that the outcome of such a settlement should ensure Israeli withdrawal from all occupied Arab territories, guarantee the historic and legitimate rights of the Palestinian people in their ancestral homeland, and guarantee the right of all States and peoples of the region, including Israel, to live in security and peace within internationally recognized boundaries.
Our position has a firm foundation. First and foremost there is our belief in the inevitability of peace, and our national commitment to the Palestinian people,
with whom we are linked through a common historical background and the bonds of a common aim and destiny.
In view of this special and distinctive relationship, we are the first to realize the true and sincere desire of the Palestinian people, languishing under occupation, to achieve a just and honorable peace. We therefore oppose the attempts that are being made to confine them to a cycle of violence, rejection and extremism whereby their enemies, that is the enemies of the Palestinian people, may be able to exclude and ignore them, and, even worse, to trample upon their rights under the pretext of combating violence and terrorism.
That is why we have worked, together with our Palestinian brethren, towards the implementation of the Arab peace plan, which enjoys the support of an overwhelming majority, by creating practical machinery for the implementation of this plan. To this end, we signed an agreement with the Palestine Liberation Organization on 11 February 1985, the bases and principles of which continue to constitute the starting-point of our orientation in relation to the Palestine question. It essentially guarantees the participation of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the legitimate and sole representative of the Palestinian people, in peace-making and peace-keeping, if our efforts have met with obstacles placed by some, this should not provide an excuse for the international community to shirk its historical responsibility towards the Palestinian people and the achievement of peace. We should not allow Israel to use this as a pretext to deny the Palestinian people their legitimate rights and continue its policy of keeping the land, and hence impose, if possible, its version of peace, armed with unlimited political, military and economic support from the United States.
The United Nations took on a special responsibility for the Palestine question when in 1947 it adopted the resolution to partition Palestine. The problem became even worse when the international Organization found itself unable to implement its 1948 resolution on the right of the Palestinian refugees to repatriation or compensation. It again found itself powerless when Israel occupied all of the Palestinian territory in 1967. It was unable to implement a comprehensive peace settlement based on the principle of non-admissibility of the acquisition of territory by force and to achieve peace in return for withdrawal. We cannot disregard the responsibility of the five permanent members of the Security Council in regard to this problem and the Arab-Israeli conflict which it caused. In 1947 the views of those States converged on partitioning Palestine - despite rivalries and struggles between them. In 1967 their views again converged on a fundamental concept - the concept of territory for peace - upon which to build a just and comprehensive peace, based on the principle of the non-admissibility of the acquisition of territory by war. That was the principle at the basis of Security Council resolution 242 (1967) - reaffirmed by Security Council resolution 338 (1973), which called for the implementation of resolution 242 (1967) by negotiations between the parties under appropriate auspices.
The appropriate framework is provided by the General Assembly, the highest international authority, in which all the peoples of the world are represented and which is supported by everyone. This is reflected in the call for the convening of the International Peace Conference on the Middle East. We hope that the Security Council will support that call before it is too late, so that all the parties concerned may negotiate for peace. All those who oppose the convening of the international conference must understand that by their opposition they are only prolonging the Arab-Israeli conflict and, consequently, the suffering and anguish of the peoples of the Middle East, and are exposing the whole region to instability.
The emergence of some response on the part of those who have taken positions in opposition to the convening of the conference confirms the fact that the position we took from the beginning is the right one and that the international conference, as proposed, remains the ideal way to achieve a just, lasting and comprehensive settlement of the Palestine question and the Arab-Israeli conflict.
We in Jordan have never hesitated to condemn and denounce terrorism, regardless of its source or nature. We do not agree that attacks against the lives of innocent people in places of worship or while they are traveling can be condoned as being in accordance with international principles or civilized human behavior. We do, however, draw a distinction between such shameful acts and the legitimate national struggle waged by oppressed and colonized peoples and their liberation movements; the latter are approved by the principles of international law and in United Nations resolutions.
On the other hand, we feel that attempting to place the stress on terrorist acts, which have recently escalated, instead of working to put an end to the Israeli occupation of Arab territory and achieving peace, can only contribute to increasing the tension already prevalent in the region. The attempt to reduce the Arab-Israeli conflict - with the aggression and occupation of Arab territory that it involves - to a mere problem of international terrorism can logically have only one result: creating new justification for more violence and more terrorism. One of the results of such a trend on the part of some quarters is that terrorism has become an aspect of the absence of peace and the continuation of the current deadlock; and some wish to use this as a pretext for ruling out a political settlement and dissociating themselves from attempts to achieve peace. That can only provide extremist and rejectionist parties with an excuse to exploit situations and encourage terrorism to serve their own schemes.
In the Arab Gulf area, the Iraq-Iran war has entered its seventh year, and we still witness international impotence and indifference in regard to Iran's intransigence and obduracy. In spite of the unanimous recognition of the necessity to put an end to that war, the realization that it is futile and that there can be no justification for continuing it, and the possibility that it will spread, Iran continues to reject all appeals for the cessation of this devastating war. Iran has lately coupled its rejection of the various appeals for peace with a dangerous escalation of the war. In contrast to this, Iraq has made a positive response to all the peace initiatives aimed at ending the war. The President of Iraq, Mr. Saddam Hussein, put forward in August 1986 constructive proposals for ending the war with Iran.
In welcoming this move towards peace by Iraq - which is extending its hand to peace from a position of strength - we call upon Iran to reciprocate by making a similar positive move in order that an honorable and just solution acceptable to both parties may be achieved, a solution which would spare the two countries and their peoples further killing, destruction and depletion of resources.
The continuation of that war not only constitutes a danger to the welfare and safety of the Iraqi and Iranian peoples, but also threatens regional and international security. Furthermore, it constitutes defiance of the United Nations and contributes to weakening it. In that regard, we must condemn all attempts designed to prolong and fuel this war, in particular by supporting and backing the intransigent party that refuses to end it.
In sister Lebanon, the plight of the Lebanese people has lasted for over 10 years. It has been worsened by Israel's expansionist policy and its repeated acts of aggression - in particular, its illegal presence in southern Lebanon, which threatens Lebanon's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity. Israel is using the area as a stepping stone for continued interference in the internal affairs of Lebanon and the whole region. We hope that Lebanon will be able very
soon to restore its sovereignty and independence as a result of the complete withdrawal from Lebanese territory of all Israeli forces, thereby making it possible for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) to discharge its mandate under Security Council resolution 425 (1978).
Our concern with the deteriorating situation in the Middle East in no way prevents us from paying attention to the deteriorating situations in other regions of the world, be they in Africa, Central America, Asia or the Mediterranean.
We stand firmly at the side of our brothers in the African continent against the racist and colonialist policies of South Africa, manifested in the apartheid regime and the occupation of Namibia. We oppose such policies firmly and strongly and support all the measures recommended and adopted by the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the United Nations to put an end to the obnoxious apartheid regime in South Africa and to achieve independence for Namibia in accordance with the United Nations plan on this subject. We are also in favor of supporting the African front-line States materially and politically in their confrontation with the expansionist policy of South Africa.
We also support the efforts of the Contadora Group to bring to an end the conflict and tension in Central America, so that the peoples and States of the region may devote themselves to the economic and social development of which they are in dire need.
The principles which govern Jordan's foreign policy of support for the right of peoples to self-determination, resistance to foreign occupation, rejection of the use of force in international conflicts, and adherence to the peaceful settlement of disputes, are the constants of our position towards all urgent regional conflicts, in Kampuchea, Afghanistan and elsewhere.
Prom this standpoint, we welcome the efforts of the two Koreas towards the reunification of their territory by peaceful means and dialog, in accordance with the three principles enunciated in the joint communique of the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, dated 4 July 1973. We welcome their joining the international community. We also support the efforts of the Secretary-General to solve the question of Cyprus,
With regard to the situation in Afghanistan, we hope that the efforts of the Secretary-General, which are aimed at achieving a speedy settlement of the problem, will succeed and ensure the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghan territory, the return of Afghan refugees and emigrants, and the safeguarding of the independence and territorial integrity of this friendly country.
Finally, in this complex and unstable international situation characterized by fluctuations in the relations between the super-Powers, oscillating between from detente and cold war, with the consequent potential for a world confrontation that would threaten all mankind, in addition to a weakening of belief in the principle of multilateralism, and the danger this engenders for the future of the United Nations, which personifies the hope of mankind for a more secure life free from
want and poverty. In view of the worsening of the world economic situation and the tense regional situation in the Middle East - where there is such a bleak international and regional climate that dangerous phenomena are emerging, such as the attempts of the forces of extremism and aggression to dominate the area and the efforts of some to live at the expense of others, rather than coexist with them -in view of all this, Jordan maintains its balanced action and objective and creative thinking, advocating coexistence with all, rather than some living at the expense of others. It is determined to make its voice heard and to listen to others, whether friend or foe, and in the face of all adversities is ready to accept sacrifices in the service of its principles and consistent position.
We do so, armed with a balanced, moderate and objective vision regarding the problems that face us in our region and in the world at large. We work hand in hand with the forces of good, in solidarity with the champions of peace and united with our Palestinian brothers and family to whom we are linked by a distinctive historical relationship.
This is the message of Jordan. I place it before the Assembly, the representatives of the world's States and peoples. It is a message of a peaceful policy based on right and justice and the desire to live and let live. It is a peaceful balanced initiative that should be lasting to achieve peace in a country where it has been absent and render justice to a people to which it has been denied for several decades, namely, the Palestinian people, and eliminate the challenge posed to a nation that will not allow itself to be treated unjustly or treat others
unjustly, namely, the Arab nation. Peace and security for all, not peace and security for some at the expense of others.


In Sweden last week we honored the memory of Dag Hammarskjold, who, 25 years ago, gave his life in the service of the United nations. Those manifestations were a tribute to an extraordinary life-work as well as an expression of the Swedish people's support for the United Nations. Olof Palae strongly emphasized this support at the fortieth anniversary session of the General Assembly last autumn. He said:
°We are all aware of the problems of the Organization and can look back at both failures and successes. But the experience of 40 years has not weakened our dedication to the purposes and principles la id down in the Charter. And, More important, we look at our world today and remain convinced that the United Nations is only at the beginning of its history." (A/40/PV. 43, p. 64) Olof Palme was right. The United Nations is an indispensable forum for co-operation between States in an increasingly interdependent world. We, the Members of the United Nations, have pledged ourselves to observe a certain code of conduct. We have at our disposal well-tried negotiating machinery and an invaluable meeting place. Only if we make the right use of these assets and live up to our commitments under the United Nations Charter can we hope to create a more peaceful and just world.
We shall shortly commence consideration of how the United Nations is to overcome the current crisis, which threatens its very existence. The solutions cannot be primarily technical; ultimately, they must be based cm stronger political support for the world Organization and its purposes. Nothing would strengthen the credibility and effectiveness of the United Nations more than concrete progress in the many burning and unresolved questions on the agenda.
Every day we receive new reports on the ever increasing brutal violence in South Africa. Since the imposition of the state of emergency on 16 June thousands of people have been imprisoned, many of them children and young people. Hundreds have been killed. South Africa continues its military attacks against the neighboring States and its support to armed groups in some of these countries. South Africa also disrupts the supply of goods to the front-line States and is threatening to impose other coercive economic measures. Namibia is still occupied and its people denied their independence.
For decades we have appealed to the South African Government to make fundamental changes in its policy; always in vain. South Africa claims to be a democratic society, but a democratic society cannot be built on a system of racial discrimination. South Africa claims to be a civilized society, but in a civilized society people's homes are not razed to the ground. South Africa claims to be a society with Christian values, but in such a society children are not shot in the back by the police and security forces.
The Swedish Government considers that the situation in southern Africa constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security. Time is now rapidly running out for the peaceful abolition of the apartheid system. It is high time that the United Nations Security Council took the necessary action. The Security Council must make the South African Government realize that change is now necessary. Apartheid must be abolished and replaced by a democratic society with universal suffrage.
What is required is effective sanctions.- with	content; scope and support
as to lead to positive and rapid change in South Africa. Such a decision by the Security Council will give a clear signal that the international community is now prepared to proceed to concrete action. The permanent members of the Security Council now have a historic opportunity finally to take a decisive step forward.
Sanctions against South Africa will, regrettably, negatively affect its neighboring States. They are already in a distressing economic situation, but they are prepared to accept further sacrifices in order to get rid of the abhorrent apartheid system once and for all. All who have con denned apartheid in words have a moral obligation to assist those countries in their precarious situation. The United Nations has an important role to play in that regard.
A decision on sanctions must, therefore, be followed up by a plan csf assistance to the front-line States. The Nordic countries are prepared to work for sued) a plan, in close co-operation with the countries concerned.
Sweden has for many years given considerable assistance to the front-line States and the liberation movements, and decisions on additional support can be taken at short notice.
In the Middle East the United Nations has a special responsibility to seek to achieve peace. A dangerous deadlock prevails today in the peace efforts. Sweden welcomes different attempts to break that deadlock. The aim should be to bring about direct peace negotiations - if possible, within the framework of an international conference. All parties to the conflict must be given the opportunity to participate. It is important that the Palestinians be represented in such negotiations by those who have their support. In Sweden's view, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) enjoys such support.
Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 333 (1973) should be the basis for
a negotiated settlement. Israel must leave the territories occupied in 1967. The Arab parties to the conflict must recognize Israel's right to exist within secure borders. The Palestinian people must at last achieve self-determination. They have the right, if they wish, to form a State of their own on the West Bank and in the Gaza strip.
An overwhelming majority of Member States has repeatedly condemned the Soviet Union's armed intervention in Afghanistan, which constitutes a serious violation of international law. The Soviet troops must be withdrawn. Gross violations of human rights are committed daily. Four million people - almost a third of Afghanistan's population - have been forced to leave their homes and take refuge in neighboring countries. The Swedish Government supports the Secretary-General's efforts to seek a peaceful resolution of the conflict, which must be based on the right of the Afghan people to self-determination.
The war between Iran and Iraq is now in its seventh year. It has led to immense losses cf human life on both sides. The Swedish Government views with concern the renewed use of chemical weapons and the increased number of attacks on international shipping in the area and on civilian population centers. Every effort must be made to bring an end to the suffering and to achieve a peaceful solution to the conflict.
The Kampuchea conflict is still unresolved. The state of war and Vietnam's occupation are causing much human suffering and creating new needs for humanitarian assistance, both inside Kampuchea and outside its borders. The people cf Kampuchea must be given the opportunity to determine their own future. That requires that the Vietnamese troops be withdrawn and that the parties to the conflict reach a negotiated settlement which will lead to peace in the area.
The conflicts in Central America have their roots in economic, social and political injustices over many years. Military assistance to and within the region
 must cease, regardless of its origin. The efforts of the Contadora Group to reach a negotiated settlement merit every support. A resolution of the conflicts must be based cm respect for the principles of international law, such as sovereignty and territorial integrity. The United States assistance to the armed groups waging war against the lawful Government in Nicaragua has been declared a violation of international law by, among others, the International Court of Justice, and it is obstructing the efforts to bring about peace.
As regards regional conflicts, it is important that the Security Council make use of the powers vested in it in the Charter. There is considerable room for expanding the role of the United Nations. The increased involvement of the Secretary-General in the efforts to resolve several difficult conflicts is indeed a promising development. The Security Council should intensify its co-operation with the Secretary-General in those efforts.
More than 50,000 Swedes have to date served in the United Nations peace-keeping operations. Those missions are an important part of the work of the United Nations. The latest report of the Secretary-General and the recent Security Council debate have demonstrated that one of those operations - the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) - finds itself in a particularly precarious and critical situation. We support the efforts of the Secretary-General, and welcome the fact that those difficult issues are now the subject of thorough consideration, not least in view of our recent decision to increase Swedish participation in the Force.
Sweden attaches great importance to the observances of certain fundamental principles as regards the peace-keeping operations. There must exist realistic possibilities of carrying out the tasks in accordance with the mandate. The operations should be carried out in co-operation with the parties most directly concerned, they must be of a temporary nature and contribute to resolving the conflicts.
Furthermore, I stress especially the need for the support of the Security Council and a reasonable sharing of the expenses.
The Swedish Cover meant, as the host country, welcomes the successful outcome of the Stockholm Conference on Confidence and Security Building Measures and Disarmament in Earope. The agreement which was reached is a step forward in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe process, which is so important for Europe. It aims at increasing confidence and thereby reducing the risks of war in Europe. The agreement is also an expression of an improved international climate. It means that the 35 Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe countries can initiate their work in Vienna in a positive atmosphere and proceed in their efforts to increase security and improve co-operation in Europe. I am convinced that it will also be an inspiration for increased efforts to reach agreement in other important negotiations. This is the occasion to reverse developments and achieve concrete agreements on arms limitation and disarmament. The opportunity must not be lost.
Almost a year ago President Reagan and General-Secretary Gorbachev stated that a nuclear war could not be won and must never be fought.
The arms negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union have not yet led to any visible results. On the contrary, the build-up of their strategic nuclear arsenals continues. Existing treaties are in danger.
The Government of Sweden nevertheless hopes that the realization by those two leaders of the impossibility of nuclear war will soon lead to radical reductions in the nuclear arsenals of both States and to the prevention of an arms race in outer space. At a future summit meeting the two leaders must show that they are serious in their declarations.
Nuclear disarmament is not the concern of the nuclear Powers alone. A nuclear war would affect everyone. The security of the non-nuclear States too is at stake. Therefore they have a right to make their voices heard on these issues, which are vital to them. Disarmament activities within the United Nations are thus of the utmost importance.
The right of participation of non-nuclear-weapon States is one of the leading ideas behind the five-continent peace initiative. In the Mexico Declaration of last month, the six Reads of State or Government who stand behind this initiative addressed an appeal to the leaders of the two nuclear Powers to agree on a mutual moratorium on nuclear explosions. The Declaration contains a concrete offer of assistance in providing adequate verification arrangements. Political, not technical, problems are obstructing progress. The Swedish Government urges the United States and the Soviet Union to start negotiations on a comprehensive test-ban treaty as soon as possible.
The arms race is not only a threat to the survival of human civilization. Both nuclear and conventional armaments are also an immense waste of scarce human and material resources. Those resources should instead be used for economic and social development in a world in which hundreds of millions live in starvation and malnutrition. Halting the arms race is also a question of solidarity with the peoples of the third world.
Twenty years ago the General Assembly adopted the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The ideals and the concept of human rights that form the basis of the two human rights Covenants have made it possible to uphold and defend human rights and to condemn their violation. We must not fail those ideals.
International terrorism has claimed the lives of many innocent people. All States must shoulder their res pons ib ility in the fight against terrorism. International co-operation in this struggle should be intensified, not least within the United Nations and its various organs. Within the framework of international law and by the use of peaceful means, the struggle against terrorism must be vigorously pursued.
Also, efforts to combat the serious drug problem must be strengthened. Sweden welcomes and will actively participate in next year's United Nations conference on that important question.
It is disturbing that no decisive progress has been made in recent years within the framework of the North-South dialog. Parallel with the developing countries' own efforts, the developing and industrial countries must together tackle serious economic problems.
Next year the seventh session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) will provide an opportunity to achieve concrete progress on substantive issues of importance in North-South relations. Sweden considers it essential that the new trade negotiations within the framework of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) should give the developing countries improved access to the markets of the industrial countries. That would also contribute to a solution of debt problems.
The special session of the General Assembly on the critical economic situation in Africa was successful. We welcome the demonstration by the African countries that they are prepared to undertake necessary changes in their development policies. The Program of action adopted at the special session new remains to be implemented. All donor countries must, in different ways, assist the crisis-stricken countries. Sweden at present allocates more than 60 per cent of its bilateral development assistance, or $420 million, to sub-Saharan Africa. Sweden is also prepared to continue to participate in internationally co-ordinated action to relieve the debt burden of the African countries, and has set aside funds for that purpose.
Development assistance through various United Nations agencies is of great importance for many people in their daily lives. This applies, for example, to education, to health care and to food. The activities of the United Nations Children's Fund, which is celebrating its fortieth anniversary, demonstrate that multilateral co-operation can both save lives and contribute to long-term development.
Sweden will continue to give substantial contributions to the multilateral development assistance organizations, such as the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the United Nations Children's Fund (UN ICE F) , the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) and the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). However, if results "are to be achieved it is necessary that all industrial countries, not least the largest ones, support those organizations in line with their economic capabilities. We must not weaken the agencies fee co-operation, agencies we have built up over the years. On the contrary, they must be strengthened.
Environmental degradation is a threat to the future survival of humanity. Short-term gains have been obtained by countries at the expense of their natural resources and those of other countries, and through the degradation of mankind's common heritage of air, water and soil. To remedy environmental problems, active international co-operation is required, based on real solidarity among the nations of the world.
In this connection the question of nuclear safety is of great concern to the international community. We note with satisfaction the speedy conclusion, after the Chernobyl catastrophe, of negotiations on two draft conventions within the International Atomic Energy Agency (LaEA).
Next year the report of the Wbrld Commission on Environment and Development will be submitted to the General Assembly. It will give Member States the opportunity to re-examine the direction of long-term international environmental co-operation.
Last year we celebrated the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations, world leaders expressed their support for the world Organization and its activities. There is a great discrepancy between those expressions of solidarity with the United Nations and the fact that the Organization now finds itself in an acute financial crisis. How is it that some Member States express their support for the activities of the United Nations while, at the same time, in violation of existing obligations, refuse to pay for them fully and loyally? How is it that so many Member States are in arrears with their assessed contributions?
The amounts in question are modest. They cannot reasonably be a great financial burden to any country. The reason for this is rather short-term political considerations and a lack of solidarity with the United Nations.
We all have a self-interest in safeguarding the United Nations and upholding respect for its Charter. This must apply also to the principle, embodied in Article 17 of the Charter, of collective responsibility for the expenses of the Organization, it should be taken for granted that all Member states fully live up to this clear-cut obligation.
We must now find solutions that ensure a sound financial basis for the United Nations. At the same time, it must be possible for the United Nations to adapt to changed circumstances and conditions through reforms. The Member States must be able to feel fully confident that the United Nations is using its resources in an effective way.
No one denies that there is room for reforms within the United Nations and in its activities. The high-level Group to review the administrative and financial functioning of the Organization has submitted a set of recommendations for changes and improvements. These recommendations constitute a good basis for work on reforms.
As chief administrative officer, the Secretary-General bears the main responsibility for the efficient use of the United Nations resources. The critical situation demands that rationalization and savings be implemented with determination. At the same time, efficient Secretariat management and planning require a stable financial basis.
The present scale of assessments makes the United Nations too vulnerable and dependent on individual large contributers. When a major contributor, drastically and in violation of existing obligations, cuts its contributions - in the way that is now about to take place - the basis for the work of the entire Organization is undermined. If assessments were distributed more evenly among all Members, we would be able to reduce this vulnerability in the future. We would also emphasize more clearly that the United Nations is an organization for all States.
Developments have confirmed our conviction that such a reform should eventually be implemented and included in a comprehensive solution of the problems facing the United Nations.
This autumn's session will put us to the test. If our efforts are crowned with success, we shall be able to give a reassuring answer to some of the questions that are troubling people all over the world and filling them with dread of the
future.
In Sweden we are delighted to see that interest in and concern for international affairs is growing strongly, not least among the young. Children and young people pose very straight and therefore the most urgent questions. I shall quote two of many questions that a group of 10-year-olds in a school in the north of Sweden asked me last week to forward to the United Nations and its Members. These children were working on practical peace and development projects.
The first question was-. "Why do so many children die of starvation in developing countries when at the same time so much money is wasted on weapons?". Certainly, their question and alarm are justified. Every minute, around the clock, year in and year out, 30 children die for lack of food and vaccines. And every minute, around the clock, year in and year out, between one and two million dollars are spent for military purposes. Forty thousand infants in the developing
countries die every day unnecessarily.
The second question put by the children was: "What is the United Nations
doing to help the children and young people who are persecuted, imprisoned and killed in South Africa?". That is a question that worries young Swedes today and rouses them to indignation. I assume that the United Nations will already be able to give a concrete and positive answer to it this autumn.
To quote Olof Palme yet again: "Apartheid shall be relegated to the place
where it belongs - the dustbin of history".


At the outset. Sir, I extend to you once again the felicitations of my delegation on your assumption of the presidency of the forty-first session of the General Assembly, it is a matter of immense pleasure for me and the rest of my delegation that a distinguished diplomat from a close and friendly neighbor country has been elected to that high office. You bring to your position rich and varied experience. We are confident that you will guide the deliberations of this Assembly with distinction.
I also take this opportunity to express our appreciation to your predecessor, Mr. Jaime de Pinie's, for his skillful leadership during the deliberations of the fortieth session of the General Assembly.
I should like to convey our greetings to the Secretary-General, whom we are happy to see once again actively discharging his many onerous responsibilities. I hope that our Organization will continue to have the benefit of his experience and guidance for many years to come.
In the past year the United Nations - indeed the entire multilateral system -
has been subjected to severe strain and challenge. I am glad that, as he states in his report on the work of the Organization, the Secretary-General has found notable unanimity in the recognition of the continuing validity of the principles of the United Nations Charter and the need to strengthen title United Nations so that it may better meet the needs of the future. India is a founder BSeaber and its allegiance to the Organization and commitment to the principles of the Charter remain firm and unswerving.
As all of us are aware, the United Nations came into being in the wake of unparalleled death and destruction. The founding of the United Nations reflected the hopes and aspirations of humankind, which saw the need for a more rational world order. That vision is even more relevant today.
The international situation remains tense. The nuclear arms race and its extension into outer space, conflicts around the world and the world economic crisis endanger peace and international security. Nuclear weapons no longer threaten only States and nations, they threaten the very survival of man. In her address at the seventh summit of non-aligned Heads of State or Government, in New Delhi in March 1983, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi warned that
"Never before has our earth faced so much death and danger. The destructive power contained in nuclear stockpiles can kill human life, indeed all life, many times over and might well prevent its reappearance for ages to come."  What is at stake is civilization itself.
Last year, at the Geneva summit, the leaders of the Soviet Union and the United States declared that a nuclear war cannot be won and must not be fought. We call upon those two nations, which bear the major responsibility with regard to disarmament, to reinvigorate their dialog and take the logical follow-up steps to that assertion. We are glad that after a period of anxiety the two countries
appear to have resumed their efforts to make progress in this vital field. Their decisions will have consequences not only for their own peoples but for humanity as a whole. We trust that at their next meeting President Reagan aid General Secretary Gorbachev will reach important and meaningful agreements.
Other nuclear-weapon States must not shirk their responsibility either. A decision on their part in favor of nuclear disarmament could only have a positive effect. They should no longer take shelter behind the position that they will disarm only if the two super-Powers do.
Tl-e desire for peace is universal. There is increasing articulation of that feeling around the world, including in nuclear-weapon States, in legislatures and deliberative bodies, in universities and peace movements, aroong scientists and professionals - indeed, among all citizens.
Early this month, Heads of State or Government assembled at Harare for the eighth summit of non-aligned nations appealed to the two most powerful nuclear-weapon States to arrest the trend towards confrontation and conflict. Earlier, the leaders participating in the six-nation, five-continent peace initiative urged an immediate moratorium on nuclear tests and offered a concrete Program of verification. A large number of Governments have welcomed this; many Parliaments have expressed enthusiasm and support. We welcome the positive response of the Soviet Union to the appeal by the Six in the Mexico Declaration by extending its unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing for a third time, now until January 1987. We hope the United States will respond positively.
The United Nations has a unique role to play in all issues of disarmament. Regrettably, the negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament have failed to bring about any positive steps on the vital issues of a nuclear test ban, the cessation of the nuclear arras race, nuclear disarmament and the prevention of nuclear war. It is thus more urgently necessary for the General Assembly to put forward new ideas and mobilize support for disarmament measures. Many issues that were before the United Nations at the time of its inception continue to linger on its agenda. Our pride in the freedom achieved by formerly dependent peoples is abridged by the failure to remove the last vestiges of colonialism in Africa and the still unfulfilled promise of a homeland for the Palestinian people.
Last week we focused on Namibia at a special session of the General Assembly. Namibia, which is solely the responsibility of the United Nations, mirrors a situation where every value enshrined in the Charter stands challenged. ECforts towards freedom there have been continually frustrated by those who had concurred in the plan for independence of Namibia charted in Security Council resolution 435 (1978). This is the bitter twist of irony. Necessary consequent action by the Security Council has received support from all Members except those that have direct commercial stakes in the area and that also have the power to annul the collective will with their veto. It is not Namibia that is isolated; it is those who have sought to isolate Namibia that are.
In South Africa apartheid survives and is the root cause of violence and instability in the region. Every initiative for a peaceful resolution has been rejected by the Pretoria regime. Since the last session of the General Assembly a major effort was made by the Commonwealth to bring about a dialog between the minority who rule and the majority who are ruled in South Africa. An Eminent Persons Group comprising distinguished personalities from seven Commonwealth countries visited South Africa for this purpose. However, the authorities in Pretoria live in a world all their own. Every meaningful proposal was spurned. The international community has no option but to impose comprehensive and mandatory sanctions against South Africa in accordance with Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter as the only peaceful means to compel the South African regime to dismantle apartheid. The alternative would be too ghastly to contemplate.
South Africa cannot withstand the tide of history. The abhorrent system of apartheid will collapse. In the words of Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi:
"Racism cannot last. People's aspirations cannot be uncaged in a prison. Nelson Mandela and his people will be free"-
The presence of' great Powers continues to increase in the Indian Ocean. Formation of command structures and other forms of outside military presence and pressures negate the decision of the General Assembly to declare the Indian Ocean as a zone of peace. The convening of the Conference on the Indian Ocean at Colombo has been inordinately delayed because of the unhelpful attitude adopted by some. The Non-Aligned Movement has suggested 1988 as a finite target at which we must aim, and we hope the early convening of the Conference no longer remains an illusion.
We remain deeply concerned over the situation in west Asia. The people of Palestine continue to languish without a homeland of their own. Israel's arrogant defiance of the will of the international community, the consolidation of its stranglehold over the occupied territories: all constitute sad chapters in a seemingly endless tragedy.
We call for the complete and unconditional withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem. We support the exercise of the right by the people of Palestine, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), to self-determination and the establishment of an independent sovereign State in Palestine. The right of all States in the region to live in peace within secure and recognized borders, including the independent State of Palestine, must be assured.
We would like to underscore once again the importance of the early convening of the International Conference on the Middle East in accordance with General Assembly resolution 38/58 Cj that would constitute a major contribution by the United Nations towards the achievement of a comprehensive, just and lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The continuing conflict between Iran and Iraq causes us deep concern and anguish. Both these nations are heirs to great and proud civilizations. Both are
endowed with the riches of nature and talented peoples. Yet for six long years death and destruction have prevented the channeling of their resources to productive activities. As a country which has friendly ties with both, we have had and shall continue to have close consultations with them to bring this tragic conflict to an end.
Of late, we have seen a disturbing trend of violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States by powerful nations. Nicaragua has the right to follow its national policies without outside intimidation or interference. All differences must be settled through negotiations. We have extended our full support to the Contadora process. Whether in Central America and the Caribbean or in the Mediterranean, the security and independence of non-aligned countries must be respected. No nation has the right to take the law into its own hands. Policies of domination must give way to greater understanding and respect for the aspirations of the States.
Cyprus remains divided, with part of its territory under foreign occupation. We reiterate our solidarity with its people and reaffirm our support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a non-aligned and unified Republic. We have noted the efforts made by the Secretary-General to bring about a satisfactory resolution of this issue.
In relation to Afghanistan and South-West Asia, I reiterate that the situation can be resolved only through an overall political settlement based on the principles set out in the New Delhi Declaration. We support the efforts of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General.
The differences in South-East Asia call for a political solution. There can be no military solution, what is needed is a balanced approach that takes into account security and other considerations of all the countries in the region and
eliminates outside interference. We urge all States in the region to undertake a dialog to resolve the differences and establish durable peace.
The menace of terrorism is spreading. Assassinations, hijackings, bombings have meant the death of hundreds of men, women and children and have resulted in the loss of innocent lives, the mindless destruction of property and the jeopardizing of fundamental freedoms. I wish to reiterate the total opposition of my delegation to all acts of terrorism, whether committed by individuals, groups or States. All countries must co-operate in fighting this common scourge within the framework of internationally accepted norms.
At the same time, we support the struggle of people under colonial and racist regimes and all forms of foreign domination and occupation and of the national liberation movements against their oppressors. Their struggle is legitimate and must not be confused with terrorism.
The process of regional co-operation in South Asia, with which you, Mr. President, have such a close personal involvement, culminated in the formation of the South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation (SAARC). The seven nations of the region, which face similar problems, are determined to nurture and foster this process of regional co-operation. SAARC will provide a vehicle for this purpose. India will have the privilege to serve as host to the second summit of SAARC leaders this November.
Tensions and instability can arise also from the unsatisfactory state of the world economy. The economic situation continues to cause concern and is fraught with uncertainties which carry grave implications for the future,, Expansion of world output and trade has slowed considerably, and developing countries in particular continue to be confronted with exceptionally difficult circumstances. Mechanisms of international co-operation which might have helped to mitigate their problems have been rendered largely ineffective. The international economic system remains inherently iniquitous.
The developing countries have been urged to undertake drastic adjustments in the face of an unhelpful' international economic environment. Their efforts are hampered by intensified protectionist barriers, sharply declining prices of commodity exports and an increasingly intolerable debt burden. The severity of adjustment measures demanded of them has not only affected development prospects but has in many cases led to social and political tensions and unrest. Such adjustment to an adverse environment, which the developing countries have had no hand in shaping, really means accommodation by them to the policies and national interests of developed countries. There is thus a real danger that outside pressures may lead to an infringement of the economic sovereignty and be inimical to the political stability of developing countries. While it is obviously necessary for the developing countries to implement economic policies which will restore momentum to their economic growth, they must resolutely reject so-called solutions which would have the effect of undermining stable, democratic political structures.
Along with the economic slow-down that has characterized the first half of this decade, there has been a marked change in the attitude of the developed countries, to the detriment of the interests of the developing countries. This attitude can be described as apathy with regard to the fundamental problems of poverty and development. It is, therefore, necessary to restate the basic consensus that has guided the international community in the post-war period; namely, that the development problem is a common concern of mankind and requires the co-operation of rich and poor nations alike. A retreat from that consensus and from the responsibilities associated with it will lead to an even deeper economic crisis. Enlightened co-operation in our interdependent world is no longer a luxury of choice but a necessity.
The uncertainties of today can be turned into the opportunities of tomorrow. This would, however, require breathing new life into mechanisms and modalities of economic co-operation. On their part, the developing countries are ready in the most pragmatic and constructive spirit to resume such a dialog. In this context, we have noted with interest the proposal of the Secretary-General to convene a ministerial-level meeting of the Economic and Social Council to reach an agreement on the issues which need to be addressed most urgently. We are willing to explore all avenues which could lead to a resumption of meaningful dialog and co-operation in the areas of vital economic concern.
The major economic imbalances which exist in the world economy also reflect the choices before us. If traditional approaches are continued, the vast surpluses and the corresponding deficits which are accumulating in some parts of the world could have a dangerous destabilizing effect. Alternatively, with bold and imaginative measures, they could be used to expand the productive capacity and the potentially vast markets of the developing countries, which could lead to a quantum increase in trade and growth rates around the globe. Low inflation rates and the benefits which industrial countries derive from the low commodity and energy prices should make it easier for them to undertake such measures. It is our firm belief that sustained growth in the world economy for the benefit of all would not be possible without a reactivation of the development momentum of developing countries. It is not sufficient merely to promote growth in the developed countries. Any significant improvement in the material conditions of life - which is the fundamental purpose of development - cannot come about entirely through the trickle-down effect of growth in industrial countries. We have to face the development issue squarely and evolve co-operative action to deal with it.
The major imbalances in the world economy, the mounting burdens of external debt, the intensifying protectionism and the falling commodity prices reflect deeper structural deficiencies in the international economic order which need to be urgently addressed. In this regard, we support the proposal made by the Group of 24 in Washington to constitute a representative committee of ministers to examine further the different proposals for monetary improvement and reform. Such an examination could be an important preparatory process leading towards the convening of an international conference on money and finance for development. The forthcoming meeting of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) would also provide an important opportunity to consider in an integrated and comprehensive manner the interrelated areas of money, finance, trade and development; and we would urge all countries to co-operate fully in reaching an early agreement on the agenda and other issues related to it. It is particularly important that the role and mandate of UNCTAD in dealing with trade and development policies should be pursued and further strengthened.
In Punta del Este last week agreement was reached on the launching of a new round of multilateral trade negotiations to be called the Uruguay Round. We hope that these negotiations will result in the removal of protectionist barriers against the export products of developing countries.
One of the most critical issues as regards the development problem in the years ahead was highlighted by the 1986 report of the United Nations Committee on Development Planning, namely, that developing countries face a serious financing
gap over the next decade and that, without the restoration of development finance, prospects for growth would remain negligible and unable to satisfy even minimum aspirations for employment creation and higher living standards. We fully support the proposal of the eminent persons comprising the Committee on Development Planning for the doubling of development finance to provide an additional $25 billion per year, which they have contended is the minimum necessary condition for restoring moderate sustained growth in the developing world.
The General Assembly has decided to put on its agenda a separate item entitled -External debt crisis and development". This is an appropriate recognition of the severity of the debt and development crisis. Ke believe that in our search for a solution to this important issue measures to prevent the recurrence and spread of this problem should form an important element.
The developing countries and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries remain deeply concerned about the critical economic situation in Africa. Within their capacities, the developing countries, including India, are doing their utmost to help the African countries overcome the critical situation. On earlier occasions ny delegation has outlined the concrete steps that we have taken. These are being continued and further expanded, in the context of the United Nations Program of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1990, adopted by the General Assembly at its thirteenth special session, we shall continue to do our utmost to support the efforts of the African countries in areas where the skills and capabilities that we have acquired in our development experience have particular relevance.
We are concerned that the current financial crisis facing the United Nations remains acute, despite the efforts made by many Member States to expedite their payments. Thus, the United Nations faces a situation in which it will not be able to carry out the work Program mandated by its legislative bodies. The crisis is above all a political crisis, arising from disregard for obligations flowing from the Charter and from lack of agreement among Member States on how to finance the Organization and its activities. We hope that wisdom will prevail and that a consensus will be achieved.
At the same time, it is also necessary to pay due heed to economies which can be achieved without undermining the Organization itself. In that context, we express our appreciation of the work done by the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts to Review the Efficiency of the Administrative and Financial Functioning of the United Nations. The United Nations must continue to play its vital role in the maintenance of international peace and security and in the promotion of development and international cooperation. We pledge our full oo-operation to that end.
In his very first cress to the General Assembly Jawaharlal Nehru warned that it was becoming increasingly apparent that if we did not move with speed towards a world order, we should be left with order in the world. Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar in his first report to the General Assembly similarly warned of the approach of a "new international anarchy". Nearly 40 years separate us from Jawaharlal Nehru's warning; only four years from the caution addressed to us by the Secretary General.But their strength and relevance endure. A stable world order my be one which is founded on ethics and international morality. Political stratagems divorced from morality may hold out the promise of short-term advantage, but they cannot provide the basis of any ensuring settlement. The durable world order to which we aspire must be based on justice, equity and mutual advantage. That is the goal to which the United Nations and all countries individually must dedicate themselves.


I should in ray first words, Sir, express pleasure at your election to the presidency of the forty-first session of the United Nations General Assembly. May I therefore, on behalf of the Government and the people of Barbados, extend our warmest congratulations on the fitting honor conferred upon you.
Our countries, Bangladesh and Barbados, have much in common: a fraternity in the Commonwealth and our aspirations as new and developing States. Bangladesh's firm resolve in the face of great odds is a sterling example of sovereign integrity.
I should also like to express my pleasure at the return to office of the Secretary-General, whose restoration to health and his customary vigor is most welcome.
It is also fitting for me now to pay tribute to your distinguished predecessor, Ambassador Don Jaime de Pinies of the Kingdom of Spain, for the high level of proficiency with which he managed the deliberations of the momentous fortieth session, from which many noteworthy decisions emerged.
Peace remains the cornerstone of the foreign policy of Barbados: peace in the Caribbean, peace in this hemisphere, peace in the world. Two decades ago the first - and now again - Prime Minister of the newly sovereign State of Barbados, the Right honorable Errol Barrow, standing at this rostrum proclaimed to all the foreign policy of our country in words which I feel compelled to repeat:
"We are exponents of the diplomacy of peace aid prosperity. We will be friends of all,, satellites of none."
The Government and the people of Barbados remain unimpressed by the enticements of hegemony, un-seduced by the bias of ideology end undaunted by any coercion from any quarter.
Barbadians have learned from their history as an island community that there is a special challenge which nature presents to those on small islands.
Prom our island outpost in the waters of the Caribbean we see much that is at enmity with peace - famine and poverty, disease, injustice, oppression and terror. These war with peace because they are the enemies of growth and development.
The most imminent menace to peace in our times is the arsenal of destruction which is deployed over the globe. We watch bemused as the ritual of destruction is rendered before us in th?, litany of acronyms that are both cryptic and cruel: SAM, MIRV, SDI and, quite fittingly, MAD.
Indeed we watch as what is now so glibly called an arms race is destroying all around us the norms essential for international fraternity. We watch as mortal danger and fear settle over the heads of the less powerful and the weak. And we watch as the earth's atmosphere, mysterious and good, is steadily and systematically despoiled. So the signs around us are ominous.
But I do not believe that our doom is inevitable. What I do believe is that the noble experiment which this Organization reflects was not attempted in' vain. The members of this body need to ponder in earnest the ideals of its Charter and do what is necessary to free the world from the menace that draws near. This is the responsibility which should be assumed by those States which sat in San Francisco and declared their commitment to a new order in the world.
In the field of regional co-operation the States of Europe, with their history of bloodshed, have led the way with initiatives in this particular endeavor
r. The steady growth of European regionalism must suggest to the world that enmity need not be perpetual and that swords may indeed be beaten into ploughshares.
We salute too the efforts, painful though they be, which African States have made towards the unity of their continent, and I am confident that the Organization of African Unity (OAU) will ride over all those obstacles which such efforts
encounter and become in time the strong voice of Pan-African integrity and pride.
Equal praise is due to the members of the Association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN), whose initiatives have already produced some easing of tensions in a region from which conflict has seldom been absent.
We also welcome the timely movement in the Pacific States to place firmer bonds around their common interests.
In this hemisphere, Barbados, by virtue of its association with the Organization of American States (OAS), has acquired an enlarged perspective of our regional potential as neighbors once thought distant have become the staunchest of allies.
Of particular significance, however, is the regional integration achieved by Caribbean States over the last decade. The Caribbean Community, or CARICOM, had its beginnings in the Treaty of Chaguaramas, which was signed in 1973. It now comprises 13 States, from the Bahamas in the north and from Belize in the north-west to Guyana in the south. In a dozen years of maturity the people of the Caribbean have grown increasingly assured that their development will come not from the over-zealous exercise of nationalism but from the patient and contiguous pursuit of inter-territorial co-operation.
I have made references to regionalism to suggest that the solution to what we now regard as the modern problems of man may well have its source in regional movements. Regionalism, we believe, can be a potential counterweight to the politics of superiority which holds that weak States should be silent and should be manipulated at will. It can engender renewed interdependence among States and beat back the retreat from multilateralism which we are witnessing these days.
The context in which the people of Barbados address the question of human rights is empirical and not theoretical. We have no authority in our country except that which is lawfully constituted. Those who administer the legal system
are not the same persons as those who make the laws.No citizen can be punished or deprived of his freedom except he transgressed a known law, and because of this there are no prisoners of conscience in our country, there is no detention without
trial and no exemption from the rule of law.
Constitutional authority in our country is exercised only by those upon whom it is lawfully conferred in free elections in which citizens, either individually or in political associations, choose their Governments. Opposition to government is not only possible in the ordinary sense but is safeguarded in the Constitution, which recognizes the right of a citizen to be believe what he wishes and to assemble with other citizens to criticize and oppose Governments so long as this is
done within the bounds of law and common decency.
Other freedoms are institutionalized - freedom to hold, possess and bequeath private property, to worship one God or none at all, and to organize. Now I cannot say that this system is superior to all others. I merely assert that it is inferior to none.
When, therefore, my delegation raises its voice in this Assembly to promote or defend human rights, it is not because we wish to interfere with other people's privacy or to dictate how they should live, but because we are persuaded that such a dispensation is the firmest foundation for the preservation of peace. My delegation therefore regards the rapid extension of human rights to all peoples not now enjoying them as an activity to which the whole wide world must rapidly turn. The regime in Pretoria - contemptuous, arrogant - has systematically deprived South Africa's majority of the means they require to achieve human dignity. The outrage felt by Barbados at this has already been voiced throughout the corridors of this Organization.
The real danger in this situation is that those States that fumble aid hesitate in their policies towards Pretoria may themselves - I believe quite unconsciously - have been smitten by a mild attack of racism. I say unconsciously because anxiety to achieve a good end is often tainted by traces of self-righteousness. So those that resist the application of full sanctions against Pretoria express their concern that black babies will starve. I do not sneer at that sentiment, because what they fear is quite possible. It is therefore necessary for me to address this issue with some seriousness.
In the first place, if the situation is such that the application of harsh measures against Pretoria can harm only blacks and not whites, and if this is a reason for hesitating to apply pressure, then apartheid is being endorsed as an unconquerable system, and unwillingness to tackle it is yet another concession to the theory and practice of white supremacy. Therefore, the reason given is blatantly racist.
Secondly, if it is true that a determined assault upon that regime will be particularly detrimental to the interests of the blades, should not the nature and scope of the assault be so planned that the regime and its closest supporters share some of the perils facing the blades?
I should like to imagine an entirely different scenario. Suppose there were in that country a situation in which 4 million blacks ruled 24 million whites in the same way as in the reverse situation we see today, would we hear that sanctions would hurt white babies? Would there be a policy of constructive engagement with the black minority regime? I wonder - I dare hardly suggest it, but I wonder -would there not be world-wide pressure to destroy such a black regime by incessant disruptions of the black—controlled economy, by a trade embargo, by sabotage and by concentrated and concerted intelligence activity? And - here is the litmus test -would such a regime be allowed to imprison the white nationalist leader for 25 years on the unproved ground that he was a Communist? That is not all. If the black regime promised to reform apartheid and to share power with the whites, would there not be a contemptuous roar of disgust and scorn from some States represented in this Assembly?
I really do not need to apologize for any feeling of discomfort I might have stirred, for the scenario I have just depicted would not, simply because the colors are reversed, change this delegation's attitude to racism. Racism in any form, practiced by anyone, is odious and detestable.
More than 100 new States have come into being since 1945. Nearly all of them are inhabited by dark-skinned humans, simply because the white populations of the globe had, for various historical reasons, not only organized themselves into sovereign States in previous centuries but in most cases included within the confines of their States territories and peoples from other continents. Thus, it was left to the twentieth century to witness the upsurge of nationalism and the channeling of that nationalism into the creation of new States across the continents.
However, the regime in Pretoria is not part of that historical phenomenon. It is, rather, a mutation of the historical process, for it is the successful effort by a white minority, whose right to live in South Africa cannot be questioned, to have escaped British colonialism while fully inheriting its legacy. The regime is therefore an international outlaw.
A South African black cannot vote. He cannot decide where he will live. He cannot choose where he will work. He cannot dive into a swimming pool before he looks at a sign, He exercises no choice in the education of his children. He cannot move from one place to another without a pass book. It is this odious system that blacks can no longer endure in their own country. To destroy it, they are willing to surrender their lives, for even if dying is their only passport to freedom, they intend to be free. My delegation pays a tribute to the courage of those States which have chosen not to hide behind the sufferings of the African majority. We also pay a tribute to the Congress of the United States, which only yesterday, in recollection of its own country's early revolutionary traditions, rescued the honor of the American people from the fetid embrace of the racist regime. Likewise, my delegation pays a tribute to the steadfastness of the front-line States. The peoples of Botswana, Zimbabwe, Swaziland, Lesotho, Zambia, Tanzania, Angola and Mozambique must be regarded as full allies in this struggle. Those States must be strengthened by the provision of markets for their goods and by the establishment of such machinery as would strengthen their economic and strategic interests.
Nowhere is South Africa's contempt more noticeable than in its treatment of the people of Namibia. It is now nearly 70 years since the League of Nations entrusted to the Union of South Africa responsibility for preparing Namibia for political independence. But, not content with its subjugation of black South Africans, the architects of apartheid have stealthily embarked on the annexation of Namibia. In blatant betrayal of international trust, they have openly defied the efforts of the United Nations to rescue Namibia and t- y claim with audacity that the issue of Namibia is now an internal matter for the Government of South Africa.
The Government of Barbados has declared its support for the efforts being undertaken by the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) and it calls on the international community to pressure South Africa into ending this disgraceful hijacking of the Namibian people.
The principal ingredient of peace in the Middle East is the courage to accept two realities which contentious rhetoric cannot conceal. One such reality is that Israel exists. As such, it has the right to live and to live with others in peaceful security in a world of peoples. But the Palestinian people present us with our second reality. They too exist, and they too have an undoubted right to their own home, and they too ate entitled to exercise their legitimate rights in that national territory.
My delegation believes that, in an atmosphere of good will and moderation, the edifice of peace in the Middle Bast can be completed. There is an understanding that the destruction of either party is not a prerequisite to peace, and there are signs, now emerging, which appear to indicate a willingness on the part of both sides to talk with each other, if a formula can be found for adjusting the problems of representation. This is a time for boldness and all the delegations to this forty-first session of the General Assembly should press forward towards it. I pledge the support of my delegation to this end.
My delegation also condemns the deterioration in international conduct and wishes to see terrorism halted in the shortest possible time. We are persuaded that no political objective is worthy of support if, in furtherance of it, it becomes necessary to put innocent lives at risk. Such actions, whether resorted to by States, organizations or individuals, are crimes and, as such, are punishable under the laws of most countries.
In a year of peace, such as this one is proclaimed to be, it cannot be irrelevant for the international community to a-i>eal for restraint and moderation in all political disputes so that differences may, wherever possible, be reconciled by discussion and consensus in preference to the use of violence as a means of solving political disputes.
My delegation believes that durable solutions to the problems of the world economy can be found only through a partnership between developed and developing States.
Unless developing countries are able to sell their goods and products at remunerative prices, they will be hard pressed to pay their international debts; and no amount of rescheduling of debts, no amount of new lending to consolidate all debts and no amount of the reduction of interest rates will address the fundamental causes of the debt crisis facing them. Such measures have their place, but only in the short term to relieve pressure on developing states.
My Government therefore believes that the long-term solution to the debt crisis depends on the reactivation of a vibrant international trading system. In this connection we are pleased at the recent decision, reached in Punta del Este, on the start of the new round of global trade negotiations. It is our hope that the new round will be able to agree on concrete measures to bring about the standstill and roll-back of protectionist measures and will address all outstanding aspects of the international trading system.
The report of the Group of High-level Inter-Governmental Experts, which reviewed the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations, has generated a level of attention and concern unprecedented in recent times. And with good reason. Because what is at stake is the very existence of this Organization and the way in which it functions. So amid all of the deliberation, consultation and negotiation, two things seemed to be accepted by all of us: first, that it is important for all of us to settle this matter quickly and quietly; secondly, that whatever happens, the United Nations will never be the same again.
My delegation believes that the report represents an excellent foundation on which to develop a series of reforms with a view to cutting the fat, tightening the belt, firming the muscle and generally improving the health of the Organization. Beyond that, a package of reform, based on that foundation, might even lead to an
improved process of decision-making that would satisfy the interests of all Member States, complying with the concept of universality and generally uphold the
principles embodied in the Charter.
It is unnecessary to say that any serious attempt at improving the operation of the united Nations should concentrate only on the working of the Secretariat. Member States must be prepared to accept some of the blame or credit, as the case may be, for the present situation. Non-payments, late payments and withholdings can in no way be attributed to the Secretariat. The political and other pressures that influence the selection of staff could hardly be countermanded by the Secretary-General who is himself appointed by Member States. The lack of co-ordination in the system could hardly have been achieved without the concurrence of Member States which are by and large represented in all the specialized agencies. Let us not tackle the mote before we have dealt with the beam.
The situation in Central America is cause for disquiet in our region. Barbados wishes once again to record its support for the Contadora process and the work of the Lima Support Group. We call on all parties to dismantle all obstacles to the peacefully negotiated settlement of outstanding disputes.
We observe with satisfaction the extension of the democratic process within the region and we trust that its continuance will lead to the consolidation of genuine good-neighborliness and hemispheric solidarity.
Our concern extends as well to other troubled areas of the world: to Afghanistan and the violence being done to its ancient civilization; to Kampuchea, where innocent civilians daily pay the price for an ideological conflict; to the Koreas, where the demonstrated desire for reconciliation and unity is being frustrated by a boundary; to the Persian Gulf, where a fratricidal war has taken a toll which defies calculation. We trust that good reason will eventually prevail in the efforts now under way to end tensions in all of these areas. And we are calling for direct negotiations between the relevant parties, since we are convinced that those directly involved are best equipped to find the solutions to their specific problems.
The manufacture and consumption of illegal drugs have now reached the proportions of an international crisis. Under lethal attack are the lives of hundreds of millions of young people and the civil order of every known society.
Small island societies, like ours in the Caribbean, are particularly vulnerable to this fast-spreading menace since we are dependent upon a successful tourist industry and are ill-equipped to counter the sophisticated methods now being used by traffickers who ply this nefarious trade.
The Government of Barbados thoroughly condemns this sinister enterprise and pledges its full support to the United Nations efforts to arrest the flow of illegal drugs. Barbados is also willing to co-operate with all States in the exchange of information and the institution of such measures aimed at the mutual protection of our societies. This annual general debate is in my view most important, for it provides a splendid opportunity for those who desire, as strict guardians of the Charter of the united Nations, to give an account of their stewardship and to become firm craftsmen of world peace.
I have shared with this Assembly some of the experiences Barbados has had in its practice of government and some of its perspectives in its survey of existing world problems. Our presence here also offers us an opportunity to deepen our faith in the Charter of this body? to meet with colleagues and explore avenues for productive co-operation among our several countries.
In 1987 Barbadians celebrate the twenty-first anniversary of their political independence. In 1987 we also celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the social revolution that initiated our orientation to nationhood. In 1988 we observe the 150th anniversary of the final phase of the ending of slavery in the British Empire. In 1989 we shall rejoice in the 350th anniversary of the founding of our Parliament, which except for periodic elections has met continually since 1639. These events we regard as important milestones on our way to national development; and my delegation pledges to the Assembly that our country will continue to welcome to our shores all those for whom human dignity, tranquility and order are the outstanding characteristics of our human family.