The sequence of events which recently shook the world is clear evidence that ultimately the process of democratic change cannot be reversed. The democratic concepts and values that are now sweeping the world are recognized as the most important unifying forces on this planet and the only reliable basis for justice, equality, prosperity and peaceful coexistence. Indeed, it is the universal acceptance of the dynamics of the process of democratisation that justifies the current wave of expressions of expectations for a better future.
In this context we wish to share with members the lessons learned in our short history as an independent nation and to highlight, as a responsible member of the family of nations, what contributions the people of Suriname are making to the new hopes of the international community.
After a sad and unexpected interruption of the democratic process in my country, which had gained new momentum in 1987, the people of Suriname have again - through a free expression of their will in general elections this year - demonstrated their unswerving belief in democracy. In a peaceful manner and with dignity our people have repeated their determination to remain in the ranks of those who have pledged to make every necessary sacrifice to put an end to the era of authoritarian and totalitarian rule.
The people of Suriname have experienced the value and impact of international solidarity. In organising our renewed expressions of freedom and democracy we have received inestimable encouragement and political support. On this memorable occasion we wish to express our appreciation and sincere gratitude to all individuals, organizations - among others the Organisation of American States and the European Community - and sympathetic Governments and peoples that supported us during our long and arduous reorientation to democracy. I wish to repeat here that we shall always remember all fellow-countrymen who gave their lives in our guest for freedom, justice and democracy, or who lost their lives in the performance of their duties.
We have built a bridge to the new world and have helped to tear down the barriers that have hampered international communication and retarded progress, for we have learned that the democratic road is the most effective means to remove physical borders and to establish a world in which genuine interdependence will dominate over narrow-minded chauvinism; where confrontation will make way for tolerance and dialogue; and where cultural and social differences will not discourage cooperation to overcome ethnicity and senseless rivalry.
Thus through the unconquerable determination of the Surinamese people to choose constitutional democracy, we expressed an important goal of our foreign policy, namely to improve and deepen relations with other nations. It is in this context that we attach great importance to internal and external provisions for the promotion and protection of democracy in each country of every continent. Within the shortest possible time, therefore, the Constitution will be amended, making it a better reflection of the will and aspirations of our people with regard to the supreme role of the civil authority.
But a democratic society must be safeguarded; it requires, among other things, a sound economic base and the support of other democratic nations. We must, therefore, consider all suggestions made to organise regional mechanisms which would assist vulnerable emerging democratic countries in defending democracy whenever the need arises, with due adherence to the principle of self-determination.
To adapt our economy to changing international realities, and thus secure the basis for sound economic growth and safeguard the principle of social justice, my Government is committed to realizing a multidimensional adjustment and recovery programme. The solution to the dilemma that arises from the conflicting priorities of adjustment and stability, necessitates a prudent approach, while international support is indispensable. To this end my Government will shortly enter into dialogue with friendly nations inside and outside our region.
Mr. President, my delegation is pleased to see you, a representative of Saudi Arabia, a country with which Suriname enjoys friendly relations and cultural ties, presiding over the proceedings of the General Assembly. You bring to this office a wealth of diplomatic experience and skill. We wish you every success in the performance of your task and offer our unswerving support at all times. My delegation would like to convey its gratitude to your predecessor, Mr. Guido de Marco, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs of Malta, for the excellent manner in which he guided the affairs of the forty-fifth session. During his tenure of office the Organization engaged in a process aimed at enhancing the role of the United Nations in international affairs and decision-making and took one of the momentous decisions in its history. We also express appreciation to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for the excellent manner in which he too carried out his task in the recent turbulent period.
The admission of new nations is completely in conformity with the cherished goal of universality which is enshrined in the Charter of our Organization.
The membership of the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea will certainly contribute to a peaceful solution of the Korean question and my delegation wholeheartedly welcomes them as full Members of the United Nations.
The Government and people of Suriname also congratulate and welcome the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the Federal State of Micronesia and we rejoice at the admittance of the Baltic States - Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania - into the United Nations. Their presence among us today as Members of this Organization is a reflection of sweeping changes that are taking place in today's world. The Government of Suriname looks forward to cooperation with all the new Members. We wish to reconfirm that we will continue to base our relations with other nations on the Charters of the United Nations and the Organisation of American States and on the principles of the Movement of Non-Aligned States.
Long historical bonds have forged special relationships between Suriname and many other countries. Moreover, there exist special cultural ties with some countries, among them the Netherlands. This relationship is nurtured and strengthened by the relatively large group of Dutch citizens who originate from Suriname, and by the Agreement for Development Cooperation, signed between the Republic of Suriname and the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
I expect that my Government, which was chosen by general, free and fair elections, will receive the fullest support and cooperation in realizing its national goals.
Suriname hopes and expects to find a favourable attitude with the Netherlands and among all friendly nations, both within and outside our region. With regard to the Netherlands, the Government of Suriname has declared its preparedness to have further talks in the near future on the possible deepening and extension of relations between the two countries.
Now that the traditional causes of international tension and instability have been removed, practically every country is challenged by a phenomenon so pervasive that it defies national boundaries, so persistent that the fight against it devours many national treasuries and, indeed, so devastating that it threatens to destroy the very essence of civilized man. It is no wonder, therefore, that Suriname, too, is among the victims of the evil and illicit trafficking and use of drugs. No one country alone can win the war against the scourge - certainly not small countries with a vulnerable economic base. Decisive and coordinated actions are called for, both at the regional and at the global level.
We have begun, within the limits of our resources, to take action in this regard at the national level. My Government will strengthen our institutional framework and seek the most effective manner in which to contribute to the war against drugs. We have already signed treaties with neighbouring countries for effective cooperation but we are convinced that, with the restoration of democracy in Suriname, we have met one of the basic requirements for expanded and intensified international cooperation.
The signing of the strategic arms reduction agreement by the United States and the Soviet Union constitutes a major step in achieving general and complete disarmament and will certainly contribute to a more stable and peaceful world. The process of arms reduction and disarmament, including the reduction and elimination of nuclear weapons and weapons of mass destruction, should be pursued vigorously. Serious consideration should be given to utilizing the substantial resources released as a result of detente, in a more constructive manner.
We note with much satisfaction that the processes of change in Eastern Europe have retained their dynamics. These processes, which are taking place with great difficulty, have our full support and sympathy. We are glad that the threat to the democratic forces in the USSR by means of a coup d'etat, was of but short duration. We commend the Soviet people for their courage, which was undoubtedly the decisive factor.
We had sincerely hoped that after the rapprochement of the super-Powers, the world in general, and Europe in particular, would have entered an era of peace and security. The ethnic confrontation taking place in Eastern Europe, however, fills us with deepest anxiety. We call upon the parties involved to seek a solution for their differences by means of dialogue and not by force of arms.
One of the fundamental causes of instability in the Middle East is the unresolved Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian issue. My Government notes with appreciation the efforts made by the Government of the United States to promote the convening of a peace conference. We hold the view that a just and comprehensive solution is not possible without taking into account the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). We support the right to security of all States of the region, including the State of Israel.
The positive changes taking place in South Africa are a source of hope and my Government welcomes the repeal of the main legislative principles of the apartheid system. However, pressure should be maintained until a democratic constitution has been established and all conditions as stipulated by the United Nations Declaration on South Africa have been met.
The development strategies of the 1970s and 1980s showed both their merits and their defects. Significant economic and social progress was made, particularly with respect to improving living conditions. However, millions of people in the world continue to live in poverty and ignorance, endure hunger, suffer from diseases, and die at an early age. The pressure of population growth over the next 10 years as well as the social side-effects of global restructuring will most certainly add to the existing problems of the developing countries. This paints a gloomy picture and in today's increasingly interdependent world, developed and developing countries have to address the needs of the people in a spirit of shared responsibility.
The challenge of combating backwardness, alleviating poverty and redressing social inequalities should be tackled through global cooperation. In this respect it should be noted that, fortunately, the emphasis at present is focused on human development and areas like primary education, preventive health care and housing.
International cooperation for development has now reached another phase. We have learned from experience, and in this respect a new approach is being taken by the developing countries. This was reflected in the adoption of the agreed objectives of the Fourth International Development Strategy and in the Declaration on International Economic Cooperation.
But it is disappointing that thus far little progress has been made to achieve the objectives agreed upon during the negotiations of the relevant United Nations initiatives. Problems such as the external debt, reverse transfer of resources from developing to industrialized countries, and new forms of protectionism still constitute serious constraints in the development process. It should be noted, however, that despite these setbacks, the concept of development has given way to new perceptions which advocate greater cooperation for development and are geared towards shouldering of more responsibilities by the developing countries.
We support the views expressed in the report of the South Commission that the developing countries should rely increasingly on their own resources and efforts for economic development, without isolating themselves from the North. Therefore, we should promote South-South cooperation and encourage all efforts to strengthen our collective self-reliance as a matter of priority.
My Government underlines the South Commission's six-point global programme of immediate action and urges that in the near future serious consideration be given to convening a global summit meeting to discuss the objectives stated in the South report with the leaders of the North.
Since the establishment of the United Nations, it has had to cope with many challenges, uncertainties and frustrations, but has also experienced success and achievements in many fields. Recent events have focused attention once more on the role and functioning of the Organisation. The Gulf war has demonstrated that the United Nations is able to take decisive action to repel aggression and restore international peace and security. We hold the view that in future the effectiveness of the Organisation could be augmented even more. To that end, the Security Council should act with the same vigour and unanimity, whenever international peace and security are in jeopardy, that it demonstrated during the Gulf war.
In this respect, my Government concurs with the view, recently underlined by the Secretary-General, that there should be a proper balance between the powers, prerogatives and responsibilities of the five permanent members of the Security Council and those of the 10 non-permanent, members and between the Security Council and the General Assembly.
In the first part of this year the General Assembly devoted considerable attention to finding ways and means to improve the functioning of the intergovernmental machinery in the economic and social fields of our Organization. My Government is of the opinion that the current process of reform should be continued, with the aim of enhancing the principle of democracy in the decision-making process of the United Nations. As the Group of 77 his stressed time and again, clarity and openness must be preserved and Strengthened; only then will the United Nations system be able to become more responsive and accountable to all Member States. We are moving towards the year 1992, which will be a year of special significance for the world. It will give us the opportunity to reflect on the time-span of 500 years of development which has passed since the first encounter of two continents. The year 1992 will also mark the beginning of new challenges and opportunities for present and future generations. Europe is setting course for a fully integrated economic system. At the same time, other regions too are moving towards strengthening their economic integration.
However, the unifying process in Western Europe has been accompanied by concern on the part of the developing countries, particularly the African. Caribbean and Pacific (APC) countries, which have developed a close economic exchange with Europe throughout the years. The fear that this process will cause severe suffering for these countries is related to the fact that they cannot risk any further imbalances in their current economic situation. Due consideration should be given to their established legitimate interests.
A United Europe after 1992 might indeed widen the gap between North and South, but it could also deepen the awareness of the countries of the world, both rich and poor, of their ever-increasing interdependence, which should strengthen their sense of mutual responsibility. In this respect, we express our sincere hope that the Uruguay Round, which will offer a solid basis for constructive cooperation in the field of multilateral trade negotiations, will be brought to a successful end.
We should approach in the same spirit the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, scheduled to be held in Rio de Janiero, Brazil, which will be a critical landmark in the history of the world. As the underlying causes of the environmental deterioration are being identified and the preparedness to combat them has become a priority on the international agenda, the need to take effective measures to achieve sustainable development is a matter of great urgency. The transfer of new and additional resources to finance environmental programmes in the developing countries, as well as environmentally sound and efficient technologies, is imperative. Suriname is looking forward to this important undertaking of the United Nations next year, which should offer the world a new framework for rights and obligations to be shared by mankind in the interest of the future of the entire world.
We have noted that the universal mood for democratic change is irrevocable and basic to any degree of economic progress and social justice. Failure to utilise this momentum to solve the most serious problems that afflict mankind and continue to dominate our agenda will take us to another age of despair. But the new respect and expanded role that our Organization has gained justifies our confidence and optimism. The Republic of Suriname is ready to take its share of the burden and make its contribution to steady and lasting progress in the world.


At the outset I wish to convey to Ambassador Shihabi my warmest congratulations on his election as President of the General Assembly at its forty-sixth session, and to wish him every success in carrying out his high and responsible duties. It is a source of satisfaction that an experienced diplomat of such high calibre and distinguished qualities has been elected to this prestigious post. The fact that the President comes from Saudi Arabia, a country so close to the hearts of all Muslims, has a special significance for us.
I should like also to express our appreciation for the valuable services of his predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Guido da Marco of Malta, in successfully guiding the affairs of the forty-fifth session of the General Assembly.
The Republic of Afghanistan sincerely congratulates the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Korea, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia on joining the community of nations. It should be pointed out that our country was among the first officially to recognize the independence of the Republics of Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia.
My visit to Haw York and my presence in this Hall are not in pursuance of the established tradition of utilizing this world rostrum to promote and publicize Government and State policies. I appear here in the name not only of a Government but also of a nation, a nation which for 13 years has been burning in the flames of war. That war has posed a grave danger to the spiritual and physical existence of our nation.
During those fateful 13 years my country, Afghanistan, has been dragged into the abyss of a conflict so wild and merciless that it has sent one tenth of its valorous and patriotic people to annihilation and another one third into a miserable life of exile. This conflict has plundered Afghanistan's cultural values and heritage and wasted its material wealth to the value of the labour and money invested over the past 50 years in social and economic development. Above all, the fabric of our society and our national unity, the products of thousands of years of coexistence between inseparable elements of our people and of their common struggle to safeguard the independent national identity of the Afghans, have been subjected to a dangerous game.
Why has a nation that lived by the toil of its hands and the sweat of its brow - a nation that bowed to none but its Creator and harboured animosity towards none - suffered such a terrible destiny? Who is responsible for all the sufferings of the Afghan people? What are the reasons behind all those miseries? He must accept that responses to these questions vary. Some consider that awful poverty, the socio-economic policies of previous Governments and Afghanistan's unbalanced reliance on one of the world's blocs are the main factors. Others blame the sensitive strategic and geopolitical location of Afghanistan and the cut-throat competition of the cold-war Powers and their regional allies for the expansion of their spheres of influence. The degree to which these and other factors influenced the situation may vary. But what is certain is that the fingers of accusation and blame point in more than one direction.

The main question now is this: is it now the time for us to bring each of the relevant factors before the tribunal of history and to sit in judgement, measuring and apportioning the extent of their respective roles and responsibilities? Alas, not yet.
How can one deny that the bulk of the documents and evidence related to external and internal developments concerning Afghanistan since April 1978 are still being kept confidential? How can one claim that the Afghans and the world public have full knowledge of all the facts as they were, not as they were portrayed? Are we in a position impartially and fairly to evaluate and analyse the events and their implications or to judge whether the continuation of the present situation makes it inevitable that new factors will emerge to protract the bloodshed?
I sincerely believe that under the present circumstances no one can say the final word on the actual reasons for and causes of the bloody adventure in our country, and that no one has the moral right to delay an early end to the crisis on that pretext.
Considering the interests of the Afghans and the dominant world trends, narrow-minded and revanchist notions and attitudes must be set aside. Instead, we must find a solution that will promote the salvation and the good of the Afghans and further the interests of regional and world peace and stability. There can be no doubt that this must be a peaceful political solution in conformity with humanism and the ethics of civilized man, with Afghan traditions and with Islamic teachings and tenets. The use of force and the settlement of problems through war have become rejected and abhorrent. Notwithstanding the pain and wounds of the afflicted body and soul of the
patient people of Afghanistan, there Is no reason to doubt the futility of attempts to gain military superiority.
Furthermore, some of the important reasons for the emergence and aggravation of the Afghan problem either have ceased to exist or have been downgraded. The principles and foundations of cold-war-era international relations have been drastically altered, and the bloodstained arenas of East-West rivalry have become more and more limited. Two years have now passed since Soviet troops left our country: there have been considerable transformations in Afghanistan's State policies, functions and legal, political and economic structures. Similarly, there have been palpable changes in the composition of the parties to the conflict and in the policies of their allies. Afghans - each of whom has lost at least one dear one - have grown fed up with the destructive and fratricidal war. Nor is the world prepared any longer to provide money and weapons for Afghans to kill Afghans. Those changes, which result from the new way of thinking at the world level and from the policy of national reconciliation within our country, have provided conditions conducive to ending our people's pain and hardship.
My Government assumed the heavy responsibility of administration and received the vote of confidence of the Parliament at one of the most sensitive and critical junctures of our country's history. However, I have not hidden the fact that the main mission of my Government, as a government of national accord, is to help facilitate the task of transition towards the establishment of an elected new government in conformity with the aspirations of the vast majority of the Afghan people. Therefore, it is not accidental that two thirds of the present cabinet members are influential, non-partisan personalities and experienced technocrats trained in the West.
I must state clearly that in the present conditions of our country only an insane person can cultivate the feelings of ambition and lust for power. But what has compelled me and my colleagues to shoulder the heavy and exhausting burden of government is our recognition of the awesome responsibility which lies before us and all other patriotic Afghans for the destiny of our downtrodden people.
We know that in the present circumstances no government has the right to claim that it enjoys the support of all Afghans. But this fact can in no way deny us the right to serve all segments of our people. We consider this not only as our right but also as our humanitarian obligation and our patriotic and Islamic duty. We have earnestly taken it upon ourselves to serve as an instrument of conciliation and compromise among the Afghan warring factions of the Government. Hence, we have adopted policies which place the supreme national interests of Afghanistan above all partisan, ideological, tribal, linguistic and religious considerations. We believe that peace has become the highest aspiration and the most urgent need of our people. Therefore, we consider it our honourable and immediate duty to strive for the fulfilment of that aspiration. But we can accomplish this mission successfully only if there is a real will and determination to bring about the cessation of war and the establishment of peace on the part of all effective forces of Afghan society. Such a determination could convincingly be demonstrated only by the practical readiness for the commencement of negotiations among the main parties concerned. In defiance of Afghan and world public opinion, unfortunately, some circles still harbour unrealistic hopes of achieving military supremacy, hopes which impede the commencement of intra-Afghan dialogue that could serve as a key for solving other problems.
How can one claim to be a proponent of peaceful, political settlement and, at the same time, refrain from holding negotiations with the main parties? Afghans throughout history have preserved the innocent name of Afghans and have lived honourably as a united whole, fraternally and with independence of judgement. Afghans have a common home; in order to salvage it from the scourge of war, they should unite and find a sound formula. If we Afghans in the peace process, we shall commit a mistake as grave as those who wish to negate the role of Afghans inside the country. The defeat of repeated military efforts is indicative of certain hard and objective realities which should be recognized and properly understood.
There is no doubt that the supreme interests of the nation will provide a solid and firm basis for conciliation and harmony among the conflicting realities. We fully understand that the years of confrontation and the ensuing suffering have created a wide gulf of mistrust and hard feelings among the sides. But the present and future interests of the country and of its people make it absolutely necessary to put aside feelings of vengeance and revenge. To attempt to settle scores and embark on a vendetta would result in a vicious circle. Mutual courage, graciousness and forgiveness are required to reduce the deep sorrow of yester-years in anticipation of the happiness and tranquillity of the morrow and to heal the psychological and physical injuries of our devout people with the balm of national accord and unity.
The Government of the Republic of Afghanistan has made serious and sincere efforts to eliminate the reasons and causes of disagreements and to endeavour to bring ever closer the positions of the sides.
The following statement was made in continuation of several proposals offered by Kabul on a political settlement on the seventy-second anniversary of the country's independence:
"We are in favour of direct, face-to-face and unconditional talks with opponents of the State of the Republic of Afghanistan, because setting prior conditions would result in delaying the talks. The process of negotiations with a number of opposition groups continues at different levels, while other opponents still have reasons which prevent them from holding direct negotiations. We propose that talks between the representatives of the Republic of Afghanistan and the opposition groups take place in the presence of neutral third parties. In other words, the Republic of Afghanistan is prepared to negotiate with the opposition groups through the mediation of the United Nations or of the countries interested in the Afghan problem."
The Afghan president, in reaction to the United States-Soviet joint declaration last week, proposed as a first step the enforcement of a cease-fire throughout Afghanistan and the commencement of talks between the State and the Council of the Internal Mijahideen Commander, leader of the parties and groups based in Peshawar and Tehran, the former king and his followers, and Afghan intellectuals living in Europe and America.
Afghanistan is a traditional society. In Afghanistan people hold their aged and elderly in high esteem. In the present conditions when the flames of war are ablaze in the country, our people expect their elders, wherever they may be - among them His Majesty Mohammed Zaher Shah, the former king of our country - to take an active part in extinguishing this fire. We know that all Afghan personalities abroad are also concerned about their country, but as a proverb goes in the Pashtu language, "The ground burns where the fire is set". The country and its people are awaiting them. Silence and indifference in the present situation would be an unforgivable sin.
From this authoritative world rostrum, I wish to communicate to the Assembly and to the people of the world the silent cry of the millions of tired and war-ridden Afghans whose lives have become a dreadful nightmare. The international community, and in particular the permanent members of the Security Council, should recognize their moral responsibilities in the face of the disaster in Afghanistan by making use of the mechanism provided in the Charter of the United Nations and lay the groundwork for negotiations and a political settlement. Silence and indifference in the face of this tragedy of blood, tears and fire would reflect a lack of conscience and an abandonment of moral responsibility. Such inaction should not continue.
Here I wish to express the appreciation and gratitude of the people and Government of Afghanistan for the serious and untiring efforts of His Excellency Javier Perez de Cuellar, Secretary-General of the United Nations and his personal representative, Mr. Benon Sevan, in helping to achieve a peaceful political settlement of the Afghan problem.
The Secretary-General's statement, which contained the five main elements of a political settlement of the Afghan problem, represents the international consensus and was supported by the Republic of Afghanistan and all interested countries. These documents guarantee the preservation of national sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, the right of the Afghan people freely to choose the political and socio-economic system of their country and other values on which all Afghans are in agreement. The Secretary-General's statement takes into account the nature of the Afghan conflict and contains elements of a comprehensive, practicable, just and honourable settlement for all the warring parties. These qualifications make it possible to achieve a national accord around the Secretary-General's statement, an understanding that has emerged among the concerned external parties. One of the salient elements of the statement is that, at the end of the transition period and peace process, the basic need of car people, namely, security, stability, democracy and development will be ensured.
I urge this great assembly of nations to utilize its moral authority and prestige to call upon all the Afghan parties and the governments concerned to take steps towards implementing the Secretary-General's statement and to begin negotiations to that end without any further delay. I strongly believe that in the warmth of the national unity of the Afghans and world solidarity, the ice of misunderstanding and hard feeling will break and, by virtue of their traditions of thousands of years, the Afghans will find peaceful ways and means of settling their problems and will embark on rebuilding their ruined country. Our sisters and brothers who are away from their homes and hearths will return to their relatives and friends; all Afghans will join hands and adopt a socio-political order that will regulate their interactions with the government of the State in accordance with their own wishes.
I believe that if we put aside' the personal interests of a few in the Afghan plain, and curb the illegitimate influence and hidden intentions of certain circles in some countries, the remaining differences are not so substantial as not to admit o£ a solution.
The joint declaration of the United States Secretary of State Mr. James Baker and the Soviet Foreign Minister Mr. Boris Pankin at the end of their talks on Afghanistan in Moscow is in fact a gigantic step towards removing one of the barriers in the way to ensuring peace in our country. We strongly hope that this constructive position on the part of the two guarantors of the Geneva accords will receive the practical support and cooperation of other involved countries.
We also hope that the recent visit of the Secretary-General to Teheran and Riyadh and his discussions with the leaders of Iran. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and with the two Mujahideen leaders, namely. Hasrat Saheb Sebghatullah Mujaddidi and Jenab Pir Saheb Sayed Ahmad Gailani may bring an added impetus to the peace efforts and prepare the ground for negotiations on the launching of a transition process. In the course of my visit to the Secretary-General, we discussed all practical and logical options and possibilities towards that end.
Afghans have repeatedly proved that they will not hesitate to sacrifice their personal interests for the sake of the supreme interests of their country; but they will not allow others to take advantage of the present-day problems of the Afghans in order to impose their hidden intentions upon them. Afghans, whether inside or outside their country, are extremely sensitive about their national interests and will not accept any interference in, or infringements upon, their internal affairs.
We hope and expect that the United Nations will take some new initiatives for political settlement and devise, through consultations between Afghans, a vengeance and vendetta, in line with the Secretary-General's statement.
We are not speaking here about the so-called rights of minorities. Residents of Afghanistan are Afghans and Muslims. In fact, the question of minorities, as perceived in the political literature of other countries, is irrelevant in the case of Afghanistan; what should lie at the centre of our thoughts and actions is the need to ensure and safeguard the human rights of all citizens of Afghanistan regardless of their previous affiliations and deeds.
The transition mechanism must guarantee this matter in a comprehensive and reliable manner. I urge all peace-loving nations of the world that, while continuing their endeavours towards a peaceful end to the Afghan conflict, they should also provide generous assistance to our people with a view to eradicating the sad and grim consequences of the war from the life of the present generation throughout the country.
Our people long for peace, but they also need food, medicine, fuel and other basic items. Our country is rich in natural resources and its people are hard-working, but the monster of war has limited the possibility of their proper utilisation. Once peace is restored, there is no doubt that large-scale resources will be diverted from the war budget towards meeting the needs of the people and exploiting our natural wealth to ensure their prosperity. However, we cannot and, surely, must not wait for peace to come to solve some of those problems, such as the severe shortage of fuel and food supplies.
Afghans are patriotic, religious, theistic, brave, proud and peace-loving people. They wish to strengthen friendly ties and all-out cooperation with their neighbours and all countries of the world on the basis of the recognized principles of international law. In so far as they devotedly safeguard their national interests and honour, they also pay tribute to the rights and legitimate interests of other nations. They want to live in peace among themselves and with all nations of the world and to be the enemy of none and the friend of all.
Our country is in favour of having good relations with Pakistan, as a co-religionist, neighbouring country. We are always prepared to negotiate with Pakistan about ways and means to invigorate our friendship and bilateral cooperation. I fully believe that this very aim is in conformity with the interests of the two nations and the whole region.
We have historic common ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The common language, culture, customs and our common religion have strongly linked us to each other. We have wide-ranging opportunities to expand mutual cooperation. We recognize Iran as a big country with influence over the changes taking place in the region. We wish to promote and develop our friendship and our mutually beneficial cooperation with Iran.
We also regard the People's Republic of China as a major neighbouring country; in the past and in the present, China, as a friend of the people of Afghanistan, has greatly contributed to our country's economic projects, such as the Parwan irrigation project, the Bagrami textile mill in Kabul, the 300-bed hospital in Kandahar and so forth. Today, past limitations in Sino-Afghan relations have been done away with. Our journalists, sportsmen and private entrepreneurs travel to China, and a noticeable improvement is evident in the two countries' relations, which is according to the wishes of the two nations.
We are sure of our ever-growing traditionally friendly relations and
economic cooperation with the Soviet Union and the Republic of India, which have always assisted the Republic of Afghanistan in its efforts to achieve peace in the country.
The people of Afghanistan attach special importance to their relations with Saudi Arabia, as a big Islamic country where the Muslim sanctuary is located. The house of the Lord and the holy shrines of Mohammed, the great prophet of Islam, and of the Caliphs have drawn our Muslim people to that land for hundreds of years. We wish that our Saudi brothers would not only respond favorably to our call for a normalization of relations with Afghanistan but would also make use of their moral influence and significant role in order to restore peace in Afghanistan.
The peoples of Afghanistan and Turkey are traditional friends to one another. We hold in high esteem the memory of our genuine cooperation with Turkey through tens of educational, cultural, medical and defence projects. The Government of Afghanistan will make use of every opportunity to expand and further develop friendship and cooperation between the two countries.
Our ties with Syria have always been friendly, and the efforts of the Governments of the two countries to extend bilateral cooperation are convincingly increasing.
Kuwait, which has recently put a tormenting page in history behind it, has always been a friend of our country. We are seeking necessary avenues to promote out mutually beneficial cooperation with Kuwait.
Long ties of friendship and cooperation closely link the peoples of Afghanistan and Egypt. I believe that our endeavours to strengthen and develop the traditional relations between the two countries will achieve a desirable outcome.
Afghanistan strives equally strongly to develop good relations and mutually beneficial cooperation with other Arab and Islamic countries, relying upon the principles of the international law.
Normal and friendly relations with the United States of America are in our national interests and are very important to our people. The many manifestations of our multilateral economic, scientific and cultural cooperation with the United States include such projects as Helmand valley, the Kabul-Kandahar highway, Kabul university establishments, the academic affiliation system and the training of hundreds of Afghans in specialised fields in United States educational institutions. These are well appreciated in our country and evince the solid and friendly relations between our peoples. We hope the United States Administration will take the hand of cordial friendship that we have extended and will move towards the normalisation of relations with Afghanistan.
Switzerland, to which our country has been compared by some tourists and historians, has had a special interest in the destiny of the people of Afghanistan. The latest instance of this was the innovative visit of Mr. Kiaus Jacobi, State Secretary for Foreign Affairs of that country, to Kabul and the surrounding region. This visit was aimed at helping to establish understanding and peace between the conflicting parties. We are sincerely grateful to Switzerland for this bold act.
We also desire ever broader relations with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Austria and other West European countries, as well as Canada and the United States. Each of these countries has assumed a noteworthy role in the socio-economic development of Afghanistan, which is recalled by our people with deep gratitude.
Even during the very hard years of war, we maintained commercial relations with Japan, the Republic of Korea and other countries of South-East Asia and the Far East. The restoration of peace establishes more propitious circumstances for the association of Afghanistan with the economic foundations of this region. In line with its economic policy, the Republic of Afghanistan reiterates its demand for membership in the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation and is prepared to set up suitable economic associations with neighbouring countries.
Attracting foreign investment constitutes an integral part of my Government's economic policy. Afghanistan stands ready to provide legally guaranteed facilities for foreign investments from countries throughout the world, without discrimination, in such varied fields as banking, air and land transportation, industry, construction, communications, the exploration and extraction of mines, the establishment of agricultural and livestock farms, irrigation systems, energy-generating complexes, and so on.
As one of the founders of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the Republic of Afghanistan wishes further to promote and strengthen its friendly relations with the members of the Movement and OIC, and will strive to achieve their common ideals. Together with other countries, we will make our contribution to increasing and upgrading the role of the United Nations in settling global issues and safeguarding world peace, as well as implementing the objectives of the United Nations Charter to the benefit of all mankind.
Afghanistan is a peace-loving, non-aligned and neutral country and does not intend to pose any threat to, or commit any aggression against, any other country. We emphasize that Afghanistan is genuinely and earnestly striving for good relations with all countries. States and Governments on the basis of mutual respect and interests, and to live in peace and tranquillity with all nations of the world.
This is our sincere message to all Afghans and from all Afghans to the entire world. The Afghan nation has gained worthiness, respect and honour for its struggle for peace and justice. Any feelings of solidarity and sympathy towards this free-born and independent nation should be applied towards ending its agonies and not to perpetuating and heightening its miseries and pains.
I ask the representatives of free and independent nations to extend their cooperation and earnest solidarity in assistance, and I pray God Almighty to grant happiness to the Afghans and peace and prosperity to all humanity.


Mr. President, let me begin by expressing my congratulations on your election to our highest office. I wish you every success and pledge the sincere support of my delegation.
I am pleased to take this opportunity to welcome the Republic of Korea, the People's Republic of Korea, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Marshall Islands as new Members of the United Nations.
I am also delighted to be able to welcome the three Baltic States, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, as new Members of our world Organisation. After having suffered half a century of military occupation and enforced annexation, the present status of the Baltic States as fully recognized members of the world community is more than timely. Relations between Iceland and these European neighbours have intensified over the past few years and we look forward to increased cooperation with their Governments in this and other multilateral forums.
It is only a natural reflection of the current times that our attention and thoughts dwell upon the process of change in our immediate political environment and upon the challenges ahead. Seldom if ever has history recorded such a radical and rapid transformation of International politics and inter-State relations as we have recently witnessed in Europe. Rarely have global tasks and the need for collective effort been so formidable.
Great change entails both opportunities and risks. The opportunities inherent in the transformation of Central and Eastern Europe have, in fact, ended the cold war.
Events in Europe have progressed to such an extent that we have reason to believe that the advance of democracy will not be reversed. The failed coup in the Soviet Union last month demonstrated the tenacity of democratic aspirations. Political and military intimidation was successfully resisted by the people of Russia and their democratically elected President Boris Yeltsin a courageous leader who rose to the occasion. Our hopes were reinforced that tanks and concrete walls would no longer be a determining factor in European politics. Instead, the principles of democracy, self- determination and the rule of law would prevail.
Yet, we cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that the process of democratisation and economic reform in Central and Eastern Europe is still fraught with danger arising from a number of factors; particularly the paralysing economic problems and ethnic conflicts. The extreme vulnerability of the new democracies is evident to all. They have to contend with political and social unrest stemming from economic difficulties, ethnic conflict and, in some cases, extreme nationalism.
President Vaclav Havel of the Czech and Slovak Republic has pointed out that the democratisation of Central and Eastern Europe and their transition to market economies are "affected by more Impediments than was originally expected and that the unholy legacy these countries have to deal with goes deeper and has wider ramifications than anyone could imagine".
History records numerable instances of the interconnection between war and major change. The decline and fall of empires have frequently resulted in bloodshed. We need to be mindful of the risks posed by change.
The situation in Yugoslavia is indicative of these risks. It also serves as a reminder that ethnic conflicts can no longer be regarded as the sole responsibility of individual States. Such conflicts can have wider implications and could constitute a threat to international peace and security. In Yugoslavia the fundamental lesson of the transformation in Europe has obviously not been understood. A political order based on coercion and oppression cannot be upheld contrary to the will of the people. The simple fact is that if the peoples of Yugoslavia are not willing to hold the country together, it will not stay together. The international community may have to accept this fact and heed the call for recognition of Croatia and Slovenia.
Future stability and security on the European continent depend on the continued success of the democratic process, as well as on the alleviation of economic and ethnic problems. The task is complex and its order of magnitude is profound. It will require great efforts by the peoples of central and Eastern Europe. However, external political, economic and technological assistance will also be essential, We will no longer protect our own interests through passivity or inaction: to hesitate at this juncture would be self-defeating. Communism in central and Eastern Europe belongs to the past. Whatever remains of this ideology will wither away sooner rather than later.
The present situation is reminiscent of the years after the Second World War. The discouraging task of building from the ruins of war had a certain similarity to the need for reconstruction in central and Eastern Europe following years of oppression and economic centralisation: there was the same mood of despondency and frustration. Post-war reconstruction was successful because of that unique endeavour in the history of international relations, the Marshall Plan - a rare act of statesmanship. This magnanimous deed provided exhausted European economies with the resources needed for self-reliance. The psychological support provided to the peoples of Europe was equally valuable. The countries of central and eastern Europe are in need of both now: a new Marshall Plan is called for.
I do not mean to imply that recent developments in Europe should be predominant in our deliberations to the exclusion of all other concerns. Never the less, we cannot ignore the positive global implications of a reduced danger of catastrophic war. Only if Europe remains stable and peaceful can the resources absorbed by the cold war be recouped. This will be the principal prerequisite for more concerted action in international affairs. The satisfactory conclusion of the cold war enabled the United Nations to react swiftly and decisively to the brutal Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
The imperative need for an effective global and collective security system became painfully apparent during the Second World War. Subsequently, our world Organisation was established. During the intervening five decades, our perception of security has widened and our awareness of the various interdependencies has deepened. As important as the defence dimension of security may be, there are also political, economic, social and, increasingly, ecological aspects of the concept. Security and peace cannot be achieved, or sustained in the long term, without human rights, economic development and environmental stability.
A global and collective security system, if it is to be applied efficiently to dealing with serious threats to our common environment, will succeed only through increased international cooperation. We must seize the opportunity presented by the prevailing international political climate and focus our attention and energy on constructing a global and collective security system. In doing so, we can finally realize the world order of international law and cooperation envisaged by the authors of the Charter of the United Nations.
The Nordic countries have already initiated the formulation of their common approach to this opportunity. Eventually, all the Members of this Organization will have to agree on an appropriate channel for our deliberations and decisions. A group led by the former Chancellor of Germany, Willy Brandt, has laid significant groundwork by forwarding suggestions and proposals on organizational reforms in the United Nations. The Government of Iceland supports the group's proposal for the establishment of an independent international commission on global governance to prepare for a world summit to respond to this challenge.
The present opportunity to revitalise the United Nations is a true peace dividend. One way to seize this opportunity would be to act quickly to solidify measures taken under the auspices of this Organisation to establish a stable world order of the oceans. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was signed in Jamaica nine years ago. One hundred and fifty-nine States signed the Convention and thereby expressed their agreement with its objectives and purposes. Forty-nine States have ratified or acceded to the Convention; it can now be foreseen that the Convention may enter into force within the next two years.
Iceland has ratified the Convention; we believe that its provisions constitute a broadly acceptable regime for the rational exploitation of the world's marine resources. It has established rules for a wide range of uses for the seas, thereby reducing the potential for conflict between interested States. I might add that, in the field of environmental protection, the Brundtland Commission concluded that the most significant initial action that States could take in the interests of the oceans' threatened life-support system was to ratify the Convention.
We are of course aware that a number of industrialized countries remain concerned about the rules in the Convention on the exploitation of the deep seabed. We must here act quickly to preserve the bonds that were forged between developing nations and the industrialized world at the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. It is our submission that some of the difficulties may have related to differences in ideology in the past, but these differences art fait disappearing from the international scene.
The Government of Iceland is encouraged by efforts under way to ensure that the Convention will be implemented in a viable manner. We applaud the initiative of the Secretary-General, and call on all States to support these efforts, which would be to the benefit of the entire international community.
Next year, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development will convene in Rio de Janeiro. The Government of Iceland has high expectations for the outcome of the Conference, which is dedicated to our common future.
International cooperation in environmental matters must be based on the right of all human beings to a safe environment. We must all of us accept the obligation to conserve natural resources and maintain biological diversity, and the affluent amongst us should not turn a blind eye to the justified need of humankind for natural resources to be utilised on the basis of the principle of optimum sustainable yield. These principles should be incorporated into a concise legal instrument, drawing from the experience of formulating the Convention on the Law of the Sea.
The Government of Iceland is distressed to note that attempts have been made to introduce into the Rio process proposals on the management of whales. These proposals place the emphasis on ambiguous ethical considerations, and thus raise a false environmental issue and run counter to the principle of sustainable development. This problem is compounded when States consider introducing trade restrictions in response to differences in environmental policies.
The Government of Iceland feels that the Rio Conference should lay down a substantive action plan addressing all major areas affecting the relationship between the environment and the economy. In particular, there must be immediate action to restrict and monitor all dumping and discharges of radioactive materials, heavy metals and persistent organic substances in the oceans or in sub-seabed repositories. We are particularly concerned about the persistent danger of radioactive contamination of the oceans: the threat emanates from various sources, not least from nuclear installations bordering on ocean areas. It is simply not acceptable that States should plan hazardous facilities in circumstances where the slightest accident could have calamitous effects on neighbouring States.
The risk also emanates from nuclear reactors at sea. The Government of Iceland will continue to work for international recognition of the potential dangers posed by accidents involving sea-borne nuclear reactors. Inevitably, environmental factors play a major role in Iceland's policy on naval arms control and confidence-building. Furthermore, the Government of Iceland believes that the international management and conservation of the living resources of the high seas deserve greater attention from the world community. In the words of the Declaration for a New Global Agenda:
"The goal of the cold war was to get others to change their values and behaviour, but winning the battle to save the planet depends on changing our own values and behaviour."
That is the message of "Vinland Revisited", a joint Norwegian-Icelandic venture, meant not only to commemorate the bringing together of Europe and America a thousand years ago, but, more important, to look ahead and ask ourselves how the spirit of discovery in modern times could be aimed at shaping mankind's common future on our planet. Let us remember that we have no more new continents to exploit or expand to. We have no choice but to accept our common obligation to preserve our natural habitat, the only planet that we have.
The interaction between the state of the environment and the progress of development is increasingly clear. We can considerably boost support for development, while contributing to global environmental protection, through increased international economic cooperation.
During the past decade the economic situation in the majority of developing countries has deteriorated. The protectionism of some of the industrialised countries is undeniably one of the primary reasons for this trend. In fact, developing countries suffer more through protectionism than they gain through development assistance. Consequently, the industrialised countries could make a major contribution to development by liberalising trade and opening up their markets to the products of the developing countries.
As a country overwhelmingly dependant on one natural resource and export commodity, Iceland well understands the situation faced by many developing countries. Indeed, very few countries are as dependent on foreign trade as my country. The problems caused by protectionism are in fact not confined to relations between industrialised countries and developing countries they also emerge in relations between the industrialised countries themselves. As a member of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), Iceland has been actively involved in negotiations with its European neighbours and has often come up against the same type of short-sighted policies as have prevented access by developing countries to the markets of Europe. The policy of the European Communities of linking trade and access to resources is totally inappropriate and unacceptable. It is a stumbling block in the path of further European integration.
Efforts to invigorate the economies of the countries of central and eastern Europe are an additional incentive for liberalised trade, as they may absorb resources otherwise available to programmes for the assistance of developing countries. We are unlikely to find better means to rectify this situation than by liberalising trade policies. This need not be a prolonged process. We have already reached the final stages of the Uruguay Round of negotiations within the framework of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. These negotiations are of paramount importance for the future stability of the international community. He must now exercise the political will to lead them to a successful conclusion.
In my opening remarks I referred to the historic transformation of central and Eastern Europe. I believe it is not over-Eurocentric to state that recent events in Europe have been of global political and economic importance. But, more than this, they demonstrate to the whole world that the human spirit is indomitable. The triumph of democracy, which in itself entails respect for human rights, constitutes a clear message to the oppressed everywhere: that theirs is not a hopeless cause, since even the mightiest totalitarian means of oppression did not suffice in the end to quell, subdue or restrain dissent or opposition. Or, in the words of that great, stubborn humanist, President Landsbergis of Lithuania, "The independence and inherent dignity of the human spirit shall prevail".


May I offer my warmest congratulations to Ambassador Shihabi on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly. His great skills guarantee the positive results expected of this session. In addition, we are especially pleased to see the representative of a country with which Greece maintains traditional bonds of friendship presiding over the General Assembly.
May I also pay tribute to his predecessor, Mr. Guido de Marco, for the effective manner in which he discharged his functions as President of the General Assembly at its forty-fifth session.
I should also like to join previous speakers in praising the Secretary-General for the tireless efforts he has made in the 10 years he has devoted to the service of our Organization. For a decade, during which the world not only faced great challenges but also underwent historic changes, he has so ably guided the United Nations that today it can perform its duties more effectively.
I should also like to welcome the seven new Members - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea - which have joined this world Organisation, bringing it closer to full universality.
Moreover, I take this opportunity to welcome the restoration to the Republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania of their rightful independence and sovereignty. I wish them success in overcoming the difficulties they are facing today, as they struggle to reorganize their political and economic structures to benefit their people.
Earlier this week, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, in his capacity as President of the Council of the European Communities, delivered a statement on behalf of its member States. My Government fully subscribes to the contents of that statement.
Greece is firmly committed to and fully supports the endeavours towards European integration. We believe that the economic and political union that we are currently negotiating in Europe will enhance progress and prosperity not only on the European continent but also in all countries with which the Community engages in trade. The Europe we are envisaging will not only constitute the cornerstone of democracy, stability and peace; it will also be in the forefront in the fight against terrorism and drugs, an area to which my country has been attaching utmost importance.
Since I spoke from this rostrum one year ago, dramatic events have taken place and historic changes have occurred in many parts of the world. The questions that are foremost in my mind are the following: Is the world today a better place than it was one year ago? Have we worked collectively as United Nations to make the world a better place than it was when we last met in the General Assembly? And what are the results of the actions we have undertaken to that end?
The answers are complex. Developments in the last 12 months have not been uniform. Nevertheless, I believe it is safe to say that more people today are in a position to take charge of their respective countries and to improve their lives than was the case one year ago.
The main success of the last year has been the consolidation of the twin principles of democracy and freedom in placed where they had already triumphed the previous year, and their irresistible expansion where tyranny held sway only a few months ago. More men and women have joined the community of free peoples. We welcome them, we pay tribute to their struggle and we honour those who had to sacrifice their lives in the battle for freedom, democracy and human rights.
He Greeks take special pride in witnessing the flowering of democracy throughout the world, for this autumn we begin to celebrate the birth of democracy 2,500 years ago in Greece. Long before that, mankind had indeed learned that society could not function without order. But it was also believed that order could not be maintained without despotism. It was the Greeks who discovered that you could have a symbiosis of order and freedom by giving a share of political power to every citizen and making everyone equal before the law. Allow me, therefore, to claim that no one is more pleased than the Greek people that democracy is flourishing now as it never has before.
In fact, the wave of democratisation created by reform and free elections in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe gives us hope that a current of reform will spread across the world, and that it will do so in a peaceful way. In this regard, we welcome the restoration of constitutional order in the Soviet Union, and we hope that the process towards democracy and a market economy initiated by President Gorbachev and enhanced by the action of the democratic forces in the Soviet Union will gather new momentum.
The important efforts undertaken by the Soviet leadership to transform Soviet society must be supported, especially by the most developed nations. This assistance will help the Soviet Union to overcome the serious economic difficulties it la facing today, and will lessen social tensions related to its transition to a free market economy.
We note with concern that the internal situation in the Soviet Union has not yet stabilised enough to allow institutions to function effectively. Ha hope that the Republics will succeed in formulating a new legal framework, on a voluntary basis, to aid the progress of political and economic reform.
We have started building the post-cold-war order. Its architecture is still being created. But its foundation and its main pillars are already clear: they can be none other than the principles of democracy, freedom, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law.
Social change through peaceful means is a development associated with the end of the cold war and the resulting relaxation of tensions in the international arena. In an interdependent world, the distinctions between the purely internal affairs of a nation and such international concerns as peace and security is becoming increasingly irrelevant. Safeguarding human rights has become an essential part of international relations. The expression of concern about human rights violations can no longer be considered interference in the internal affairs of States. This was recently reaffirmed in the Declaration on Human Sights adopted by the Council of Europe last June in Luxembourg. The transition to democratic forms of government is also becoming a concern that is not confined to individual nations or States.
I wish to pledge the support of the Greek Government to every effort the United Nations will be called upon to make for the promotion of democracy and human rights throughout the world. All peoples setting out on the path to democracy through peaceful means can count on the support of the Greek people who have given the world the concept and the very word "democracy".
To support the ideals of democracy, the Western world must also systematically promote and encourage economic development. Many speakers have already indicated optimum ways in which economic aid and technological assistance can be provided by the richer to the poorer countries of the world. Let me only stress that goodwill and sympathy are not enough. We must, at all costs, never allow the old ideological division of East and West to be substituted by a new division of poverty between North and South.
Indeed, in only nine years, 6 billion people will share the Earth with a continuing high rate of population growth, increasing environmental hazards and widespread poverty. The severe economic shocks produced by political developments of the last two and a half years have seriously affected global growth. The Gulf crisis has taken a heavy economic, social and environmental toll on the region. The migrant workers and civilian populations were particularly affected. The interplay between politics, poverty, armed conflict and ineffective policies has intensified, posing new challenges to humanitarian institutions and to world leaders. A global approach is needed to economic, social and environmental problems.
The greatest challenge of the next decade will thus be to strengthen the United Nations system so that it can play a much greater role in providing increased economic opportunities for the developing countries, in improving the global environment and human development, and in addressing emergency situations such as international migration, drugs and AIDS.
Finally, the immediate objective should be to restore growth which would not irreparably destroy the air, the rivers, the forests, the oceans or any other part of nature. The World Conference on Environment and Development, to be held next year in Rio, has raised high hopes in all countries that a consensus will emerge which will strike a balance between environment and development.
In building the future, we must also pursue disarmament, an area in which Europe has provided the first actual proving-ground. We have supported every effort to achieve a reduction of conventional armed forces in Europe and we hope that these measures will constitute an enlightening example to other continents. My country has applauded with the rest of the world, the signing, three months ago, of the strategic arms reduction Treaty (START) which will reduce Soviet and American strategic nuclear arsenals by 30 per cent. Finally, Greece is ready to support any measure and effort aimed at strengthening the control, reduction and elimination of weapons of mass destruction.
Several times in the past, the Balkans have been torn apart by divisions and differences, creating the term "Balkanization". Yet, those convulsions have had much wider repercussions beyond the geographical boundaries of the Balkans. In the course of the last few months, a new, potentially dangerous confrontation threatens to reinstate the turbulent history of the Balkans. The crisis in Yugoslavia, partly due to the country's multi-ethnic composition, is threatening peace and stability in the region and beyond.
From the very beginning of the crisis, Greece tried - both through the European Community and other venues - to ensure a peaceful outcome of the crisis. We hope that the peace conference, convened under the European Community's initiative in The Hague, and Lord Carrington's wise guidance, will soon result in a permanent solution. Otherwise, the dangers of a spill over effect of violence will increase dramatically.
Greece is obviously ready to accept any solution which the Yugoslav parties agree to by peaceful means and through dialogue. In this regard we hope that Security Council resolution 713 (1991) will further enhance the efforts undertaken by the European Community to put an end to the bloodshed and bring about a solution to the Yugoslav crisis by agreed procedures.
Greece is especially pleased that a close neighbour, Albania, is among the countries whose peoples have managed, in the year since the last General Assembly, to break the shackles of totalitarianism and set their country on the road to democracy and freedom.
The dire economic conditions in Albania have sent tens of thousands of refugees to Greece, Italy and other countries. We urge the developed nations of the world to coma to the aid of the Albanian people, and we urge the Albanian Government to move quickly with determination, in order to promote economic reforms especially full property rights - so that its people will be able to support themselves in their own country in the near future. We naturally feel a special concern for the hundreds of thousands of ethnic Greeks in the country and want to see them recover their full political, economic and cultural rights. We seek for them the same rights and privileges that the Albanian Government is asking for ethnic Albanians living outside its borders - no more, no less.
A few months ago, when faced in the Gulf with the most acute crisis of the post-cold-war era, the Governments of the world decided to react through the United Nations to the aggression against Kuwait. Articles of the United Nations Charter, which had been dormant since their inception during the cold-war years, started to come to life as the nations of the world, united in their determination to act collectively and resolutely against aggression, began to use these Articles for the collective restoration of international peace and security. In an unprecedented unity of purpose, the coalition of the international community against the aggressor succeeded in reversing the occupation of Kuwait. The determination and joint action of the Members of the United Nations have thus marked the beginning of a new peace-keeping role for this Organisation.
Closer to our country, the Middle East continues to be the most explosive region in the world. How unfortunate that the area that has nourished some of the most important civilisations in history and is the birthplace of three major religions, should now sound in the minds of many as a synonym for violence. The most important element of the Middle East problem is indeed the Arab-Israeli conflict. Two of the most ancient peoples in the world, with outstanding contributions to the common heritage of mankind, are pitted against each other. My Government, whose position on the issue is well known and need not be repeated, earnestly hopes that the day will soon come when the prophecy is fulfilled "they shall beat their swords into ploughshares"  Greece remains committed to a serious and fruitful dialogue with Turkey with a view to overcoming the causes of friction which have created dangerous tensions in the past. This commitment was reiterated «t the recent meeting in Paris between Prime Minister Mitsotakis and his Turkish counterpart, Mr. Yilmax. They agreed to set up working groups to draft an agreement on friendship, cooperation and good-neighbourliness to be signed in Ankara on the occasion of a future visit by the Greek Prime Minister to the Turkish capital. This agreement is designed to create a new climate of confidence between the two nations. In this respect Greece wishes to reiterate its own commitment to the principles of international law and to the peaceful way of settling differences, including recourse to the International Court of Justice.
However, I should add that attempts to improve relations between Greece and Turkey will be adversely affected by the problem of Cyprus if this problem remains unsolved despite the efforts of the Secretary-General to help bring about a just and viable solution in keeping with the relevant resolutions of the United Nations and the high-level agreements of 1977 and 1979.
Cyprus is the only long-standing problem in Europe to remain unresolved. All over Europe dividing lines and walls have been swept aside and foreign troops withdrawn. But in Cyprus the division of the island imposed by force of arms 17 years ago continues. Turkish troops still occupy more than a third of that unfortunate country despite the repeated resolutions of this Assembly as well as those of the Security Council.
As a result nearly 200,000 Greek Cypriots are still refugees in their own country; looting and destruction of the island's cultural heritage is still going on; the influx of settlers from Turkey continues unabated, if not encouraged, by the recent abolition of passports for travel between Turkey and the Turkish Cypriot pseudo-State of northern Cyprus. Some 1,600 missing people still remain unaccounted for. This is a completely unacceptable situation that must not be allowed to continue.
A very encouraging development has been the involvement of parties trying to support the Secretary-General's efforts. Last February the President of the European Community launched an initiative to promote a solution of the Cyprus problem in conformity with United Nations resolutions. That initiative was welcomed by Greece and Cyprus, but Immediately rejected by Turkey.
Equally heartening is the United States more active involvement in the Cyprus issue which began with President Bush's visits to Greece and Turkey last July. His determination on 2 August asking for a United Nations sponsored meeting in September if adequate progress was made in the meantime nurtured new hopes that the stalemate could be broken.
All hopes were unfortunately deflated at the recent meeting between the Prime Ministers of Greece and Turkey in Paris when all previous positive developments were put on hold. Mr. Yilmaz, retracting the Turkish oral commitments previously made to United Nations and United States officials, denied having granted any concessions or. the Cyprus issue and attributed the responsibility for any "misunderstanding" to inaccurate information provided by the representatives of the Secretary-General.
I must reiterate that the key to any solution of the Cyprus issue lies with Ankara. It is imperative that this long-standing problem should at last find its proper and just solution. It must include the strict application of international law, the protection of human rights and the scrupulous implementation of all United Nations resolutions on Cyprus.
In concluding, I would like to reaffirm my country's commitment to the United Nations and to the spirit of international cooperation and solidarity it embodies. In the past two years we Greeks have upgraded our participation in the work of the Organisation by becoming troop contributors to the new peace-keeping operations launched by the United Nations. We join forces with other nations of the world and pledge to spare no effort in the quest for world peace and stability.
It is the earnest hope of all the Greek people that, when we address this Assembly next year, at the climax of our year-long celebration of the birth of democracy, there will be unity and communal understanding in Cyprus, peace in the Balkans and the Middle East, and freedom in those corners of the world that remain darkened by despotism. Democracy has taken 25 centuries to spread to all corners of the world, but its total triumph is certain, as it is the past political system ever devised by the mind of man, a gift for all seasons and all nations.


First of all. Sir, please accept my warmest congratulations on your election to this high office. We are fully confident that you will carry out the responsibility of your office with great skill and efficiency. The delegation of Liechtenstein wishes you success and pledges to you its full support.
It is a great pleasure for me to pay a tribute today to the
Secretary-General. I wish to express my heartfelt thanks to him for the

friendship that he has shown to my country even when it was not yet a Member of the United Nations. It was a privilege for us to host his visit to our country a few months ago, and I would like to thank him again for having paid this honour to Liechtenstein. We have much admiration for the excellent leadership he has shown during his 10 years as Secretary-General of the Organization, and I wish to express our gratitude to him and to his staff. Because of the momentous changes in the world and thanks to his efforts, the
 nations is slowly assuming more and more the peace-keeping responsibilities throughout the world in accordance with the original intentions of its founders. We all know, of course, that many further efforts and endeavours are necessary to bring peace and happiness to every region of the world.
Liechtenstein wishes to welcome the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, which joined the Organisation on 17 September. We are convinced that the admission of the two States duly corresponds to the principle of universality expressed in the Charter, as well as to the wish of the Korean people that the process of reunification be expedited.
Moreover, I wish to extend warm congratulations to the Federated States of Micronesia and to the Republic of the Marshall Islands, as well as to the Republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania on their admission as sovereign and equal members of the United Nations.
As the representative of the smallest Member State of the United Nations, I want to thank you for accepting Liechtenstein last year as a Member of this international Organization. Membership of the United Nations is of great significance, especially for small countries like Liechtenstein. The United Nations is a special meeting-place for all countries, some of which do not have representations all over the world. Moreover, United Nations membership gives protection to those countries which are too weak to defend their independence.
Not every State is fortunate enough to have neighbours like Austria and Switzerland, which have respected the independence of the Principality of Liechtenstein over centuries. I should like to avail myself of this occasion to thank those two countries for all the help and support they have given us throughout our history.

In the recent past we have been able to witness rapid and almost revolutionary political changes in the world. Tensions between East and West have been greatly reduced. Europe is no longer divided. Solutions to some regional conflicts are closer as ever before. These developments form the background for the new challenges that the world community is facing.
The role of the United Nations has changed. The Organisation has entered a new phase. Profiting from the absence of great-Power confrontation, it is acting more efficiently and is concentrating on the cause of peace and security.

Small States have a special need for protection and security. The Principality of Liechtenstein, although it is, fortunately, a prosperous and secure country surrounded by two permanently neutral neighbours, feels that this issue is of direct relevance. Respect for international law is our only protection. For these reasons, we feel deeply committed to the principles of the sovereign equality, political independence and territorial integrity of States. While we were not a Member of the Organization in 1989, we fully support resolution 44/21, in which the General Assembly urged Member States inter alia to settle disputes peacefully, and adhere to the principles of equal rights and self-determination of peoples and of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Unfortunately, again and again in the history of mankind we have seen brutal aggressions of one country against another. The aggression of Iraq against its small neighbour Kuwait was just the most recent example in a long list. The peace-loving countries of the world have to be grateful to the United Nations and to the Member States that took part in the military action against Iraq that finally resulted in putting an end to the occupation and preventing the permanent annexation of Kuwait. International law served as

the umbrella for the international response to the Gulf crisis, and thus constitutes the most recent proof that respect for its precepts is a small country's only protection. Let us all hope that this crisis was a turning-point in human history, for as long as the United Nations reacts as it did during the Gulf crisis, such aggressions will cease to become attractive instruments for even the most power-hungry dictators.
Unfortunately, we know that even if we succeed in preventing all acts of aggression, peace and happiness will not come easily to the world. Some of the most cruel wars in the past decades have been civil wars. Politicians and historians can give us many reasons why civil wars occur: different cultures, languages or religions that have difficulty coexisting in a single State, oppressed minorities or simply political differences that cannot be resolved peacefully.
a solution for some of these problems can be found internally if a State respects human rights and fundamental freedoms and has democratic institutions that work. But history shows that even then civil wars can break out. Human rights can also be violated in countries with a democratic tradition. Democratic institutions can break down. There are situations where peaceful coexistence between different groups inside a single State does not seem to be possible, whatever the reasons may be. Should we, in those cases, not endeavour to find other solutions in accordance with the principle of self-determination, rather than risk cruel and destructive civil wars?
I am aware that the United Nations, for good reasons, has been very prudent concerning the principle of self-determination. To encourage the exercise of the right to self-determination might lead to even more civil wars and to the disintegration of Member States. Non-interference in the internal affairs of Member States has certainly been a wise policy to follow.
Nevertheless, we have to accept the fact that the borders of nearly all Member States, including my own country, have not been drawn according to the principle of self-determination. They are usually the product of colonial expansion, international treaties or war, and very seldom have people been asked where they want to belong. But even if they had been asked, a new generation might have another opinion; circumstances can change and expectations can remain unfulfilled.
A majority of Member States certainly supports self-determination in theory. How this principle is to be applied in practice has, however, in my opinion, not been studied enough. Usually the discussion starts over a specific case when strong emotions are already involved. Would it not be better at least to try to find a minimum consensus between Member States on some guiding principles, when efforts are being made to implement the principle of self-determination?
To be acceptable to the largest possible number of Member States, such guidelines or rules of conduct should foresee a careful evolution, which could start from a low level and go on to higher levels of autonomy before complete independence could be attained. Independence is, however, not always the best solution: it can be a complicated and sometimes traumatic process.
I wish to inform members of my intention to instruct experts to prepare a preliminary study on this question, the outcome of which would be submitted in due course to the General Assembly, if that was considered desirable. A convention modelled after the European Convention on Human Rights could eventually be the product of these efforts I should like to raise a few points and draw a few lines in order to give the Assembly an overall idea of the possible outline of such an instrument.
A central question will be to define what entity can be the beneficiary of the right to self-determination. Several methods have been discussed in the past. It might be sufficient to establish the minimum size of the area and population involved. Setting this minimum size very low would have two important advantages! First, minorities that asked for self-determination would consequently have to grant the same rights to their own minorities; experience shows us that they arc at times unwilling to do so, which can be the cause of new problems. Secondly, a low minimum size would, in my opinion, lead to a decentralization rather than to a break-up of the present States, because for small groups and areas independence will not always be the best solution.
For a modern State decentralization has political and economic advantages. Decentralization is certainly one of the key elements for the prosperity and political stability of Switzerland, a country without natural resources and a population with four languages, various religions and many political parties.
A convention on self-determination could foresee several degrees of autonomy before independence were granted to a certain region, thus giving the central State and the region the time to adapt to the new situation, with the likely outcome that the people would in most instances prefer autonomy to independence. Three degrees of autonomy could be envisaged.
The first degree could involve the election of representatives for the new autonomous region and consequently the administration by those elected representatives of the funds which are allocated by the central government. Some additional rights could be given in the fields of culture and education.
The next step could involve some autonomy in taxation. Direct taxes would probably be raised better by the regions, whereas indirect taxation.
import duties and the like could remain with the central government, A financial compensation plan would have to be worked out at this stage, taking into account the income and the administrative functions of the region, which may, for instance, already include the police and the lower courts.
The third degree of autonomy could involve some legislative power. Examples can already be studied in some of the decentralized States. At this stage of autonomy most administrative functions of the central State could be turned over to the region, with the exception of defence and foreign affairs. Even regional military units could be set up as long as they were integrated into the overall defence plan.
The next step of this process - if it were desired - would be full independence.
Those States which accepted the general terms of a possible convention on self-determination could envisage setting up an international commission or court comparable to the European Commission and Court for Human Rights, to which all parties concerned could appeal n case of conflicts. Such an approach would offer the possibility to observe how these general guidelines worked in reality and to adjust them if necessary. Other States might then be willing to sign the convention too, and perhaps one day those guidelines on self determination could become generally accepted international law, as other conventions have become.
If we look at human history it seams that humanity does not have many alternatives. In the past new States have been born, and new States will be born in the future; States have disappeared or their borders have changed, and that will also happen in the future. If we look at longer periods of time we see that States have life cycles similar to the human beings who created them. The life cycle of a State might last for many generations but hardly

any Member State of the United Nations has existed in its present borders for longer than 10 generations. It could be dangerous if one tried to put a hold on these cycles, which have been present throughout human history. To freeze human evolution has in the past often been a futile undertaking and has probably brought more violence than would result if such a process were controlled peacefully.
Considering the advances is the field of technology, civil wars will become more and more destructive, not only for those directly involved but also for neighbouring States and for our whole environment. The possible destruction of a large nuclear power plant in a civil war is a frightening example. Would it not be much safer to replace the power of weapons by the power of voting, even if it meant that new States might be born?
As the representative of the smallest and one of the youngest Member countries, I wish to thank the Assembly for having given me the opportunity to express my views on a controversial subject and to present ideas related thereto.
Liechtenstein is proud to be a Member of the United Nations, an Organisation that gives full priority to respect for international law and the principles of its Charter. We shall continue to support all United Nations efforts aimed at realizing international peace and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.