First of all,
I would like to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to
the presidency of the General Assembly at its fifty-fourth
session. I am fully confident that your experience and
competence will contribute to the success of this session.
With the end of the cold war, there was a feeling
that the world would see balanced international relations,
characterized by peace, stability and well-being. But the
state of affairs has proved otherwise; the international
imbalance continues and is being used to place the logic
of hegemony above all else in order to perpetuate it in the
world and its international organizations, particularly the
United Nations.
Because of this situation, the world has witnessed a
series of deep and rapid-moving changes that have led to
the emergence of many areas of political and military
conflicts with dangerous consequences reflected in the
human, economic and social conditions of many regions
in the world. These conflicts have claimed the lives of
hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians and have
caused the huge squandering of material and human
resources.
The world will enter the new century in this fashion.
The picture before us demonstrates the tyranny of force,
the imposition of hegemony and the aggravating
economic problems by which the States of the South are
increasingly marginalized to the extent that their entities
and elements of survival are about to be eliminated. This
27

will lead to economic subordination, inevitably followed by
political subordination. In this context, there has emerged
a new phenomenon of imposing various kinds of embargoes
and economic sanctions, withholding development and
depriving States of the exercise of their economic rights as
enshrined in international law and covenants. The
catastrophic effects of this imbalance are reflected in the
social conditions of many regions in the world. These
effects are demonstrated by an increase in the intensity of
poverty, the spread of illiteracy, deterioration of the health
situation and degradation of living standards. It can also be
seen in the marginalization of many social segments of
society, especially youth, because of lack of jobs; the same
goes for the increase in crime and the prevalence of drugs,
as well as other serious social problems which can hardly
be controlled.
It is no secret that one of the main reasons for the
aggravation of this situation is the arbitrary imposition of
comprehensive sanctions and embargoes on many States in
the world for political purposes, without any sound
foundation in international law. It is obvious that this policy
has resulted in tragic effects on the economic and social
structures of the targeted States and on third countries. It
constitutes a flagrant violation of the purposes and
principles of the United Nations Charter and the principles
of justice.
The most dangerous phenomenon witnessed during the
present decade, which in the course of this session has
become an endeavour orchestrated by a group of Western
States, is the advocacy of so-called humanitarian
intervention. This doctrine, which has no place in
international law, stems from an organized infringement of
the most fundamental rules of the present international
order, such as sovereignty, political independence, territorial
integrity and non-interference in internal affairs. These
principles cannot provide a protective shield for grave
violations of human rights or for intervention, sometimes
with the use of force, in order to protect those rights. No
one should be deceived by this doctrine as the new
framework for a modern forum of neo-colonialism based on
the logic of power.
First of all, we should realize that no situation used as
a justification for this doctrine is free from the external
political interventions that led in the first place to the
emergence of such a situation. Accordingly, it could not be
claimed that international responsibility for the situation
rests exclusively with the targeted Government. On the
other hand, we should also realize that the purposes and
principles of the United Nations Charter and the
mechanisms of the Organization are not devoid of
modalities to deal with any situation of the type advanced
to justify this doctrine.
The problem does not lie with the principles, rules
and procedures. Rather, it rests with the selfish and
unilateral policies of the controlling Powers, whose
interests cannot be served by using the United Nations
mechanisms established for the correct application of the
principles and rules of the Charter, which reflect the joint
will and collective interests of the members of the
international community.
The logic of this Western doctrine is not unknown
to Iraq. At an early date, President Saddam Hussein drew
attention to the dangers of the policy of might and
opportunism in international relations that is carried out
at the expense of the balance between rights and
obligations and joint responsibility, as reflected in the
Charter and in international law.
It is not justifiable to consider the role of the United
Nations as marginalized after it has become captive to the
views of the controlling Powers in international relations
and their selfish interests. Regardless of what the Charter
provides in terms of rights, duties and procedures, we are
convinced that the doctrine of presumed humanitarian
intervention represents a dangerous destructive tool that
affects the gains that have accrued through joint efforts in
favour of the general international interest, as evidenced
by the records of this Organization. The universalization
of the concepts of this doctrine would mean the complete
denial of the will of the vast majority of States, with the
result of destroying the present international order. Iraq
joins all delegations which have declared a position
contrary to this Western doctrine. We call for joint efforts
to confront it.
I wish here to refer to a live example of the logic of
power experienced in Iraq in 1998, at around this time of
year, when the Security Council was discussing the
arrangements for conducting a comprehensive review of
the implementation by Iraq of its obligations under
Security Council resolutions, especially those relating to
disarmament, with a view to considering the lifting of the
comprehensive sanctions imposed on Iraq since August
1990. While the Security Council was convened to
discuss the Secretary-General's report on Iraq's
cooperation in the field of disarmament, the United States
and British forces stationed in the Gulf region launched
a large-scale military aggression against Iraq, from 16
December through 20 December 1998, using the lies and
28

fabrications of Richard Butler as a pretext for their
aggression. That aggression claimed the lives of a large
number of innocent civilians, in addition to destroying
many infrastructure sites, as well as much industrial
equipment which had already been subject to a strict
monitoring system established by the former Special
Commission, which did not detect any violation of Security
Council resolutions at those sites.
In spite of this gross violation of the Charter and
mechanisms of the Organization, the Security Council, the
main organ concerned with the situation, remained
completely crippled and did not take any immediate
collective action. The international condemnation of the
American/British aggression against Iraq last December did
not come from the Security Council. Rather, it came from
Governments and peoples of Member States on a larger
scale after a noticeable lull. As the Assembly will recall,
the Security Council was preoccupied with a bare-faced
process for gaining time through mandating panels to assess
the special situation concerning Iraq's implementation of its
obligations under the resolutions of the Security Council.
Those panels began their work unilaterally, without
any advanced consultation with the Government of Iraq and
without listening to its point of view. This process resulted
in reports reflecting the political balance within the Security
Council, which distanced it from the real substance of the
situation. At that point the process reached the stage of the
presentation of draft resolutions ignoring the rights and
obligations provided for in the resolutions of the Council
itself. In fact, those draft resolutions added new obligations
for Iraq, not contained in the relevant resolutions of the
Security Council that Iraq had already implemented.
While the Security Council resolutions imposed
various obligations on Iraq, they in turn imposed a specific
obligation on the Security Council, stipulating that the
comprehensive embargo was to be lifted once Iraq fulfilled
its obligations under the same resolutions. But what has
happened in the course of the last nine years is that the
Council, during 40 sessions held to review Iraq's
implementation of its obligations, has failed to take a
decision to lift the comprehensive embargo, much less to
ease the situation even by 1 per cent, despite the fact that
all countries, even Iraq's enemies — for example, the
United States of America — have attested that after nine
years of intensive implementation under the severest
circumstances and threats of continued aggression against
Iraq nothing important has been left unfulfilled.
Why then has the Council failed to lift the embargo
on Iraq? The reason behind all this is the American
hegemony over the Council, which prevents the Council
through various means from properly implementing its
resolutions. We have seen for several months intensive
endeavours in the Security Council, particularly by the
five permanent members, to adopt a unified position on
Iraq.
The correct position that conforms with the
resolutions of the Security Council is very clear and
uncontroversial. Once the logic of law and justice is
adhered to, Iraq demands its clear and legitimate rights —
namely, the lifting of the iniquitous sanctions imposed on
it in accordance with the Council's resolutions. These
resolutions were agreed upon by the five permanent
members and have been implemented by Iraq over the
last nine years. Now it is the turn of those five States to
honour their obligations. Iraq's position should be clear to
all. To gain Iraq's approval, any proposal or resolution —
or consequences, if there are any — should be based on
international law and non-selectivity, otherwise the results
will meet with a definite rejection and we will continue
our struggle to lift the sanctions comprehensively and
finally in order to achieve all our legitimate demands.
It has become clear to all, through public, personal
and official testimonies, that the former Special
Commission — a panel unfortunately bearing the name of
the United Nations and acting nominally under its flag —
has been used by the United States and Great Britain to
achieve their aggressive objectives against Iraq's people,
sovereignty and security. In order to achieve the ultimate
end of its main mission, the former Special Commission
had adopted two methods for its work in Iraq: first,
conducting espionage activities for American, British and
Israeli intelligence so as to enable them to realize their
objectives of destabilizing Iraq politically and removing
its patriotic regime; and, secondly,keeping the embargo in
place by reporting to the Security Council that the Special
Commission had not yet fulfilled its mandate of disarming
Iraq.
During its work in Iraq, the former Special
Commission resorted to dubious methods to falsify facts
and present them in a manner that was in line with the
American approach, which is hostile to Iraq. The last of
these had to do with the issue of VX vials found in the
Commission's headquarters at Baghdad. Those samples
were used by the Commission to contaminate the missing
warheads that were sent to American laboratories for
analysis. That was in order to enable the United States
29

Administration to find evidence supporting its allegations
regarding Iraq's weapons programmes. The Commission's
dubious practices were not limited to this, but went as far
as hastily destroying the VX samples in order to conceal
the irrefutable evidence of the Commission's involvement
in the American conspiracy against Iraq.
The American attempts to distort and pervert the
relationship between Iraq and the Security Council have not
been limited to exploiting the former Special Commission.
They reached their ugliest forms in the open obstruction of
any efforts to ease the effects of the comprehensive
embargo imposed on Iraq, which has resulted in bitter
suffering for the people of Iraq, particularly its children.
The obstacles experienced during the implementation
of the Memorandum of Understanding signed between Iraq
and the United Nations regarding the oil-for-food
formula — which all reports and realities indicate cannot
meet the essential humanitarian needs of the people of
Iraq — are striking evidence of the American
Administration's insistence on harming the people of Iraq
and depriving them of their fundamental humanitarian
rights, as enshrined in all international covenants.
It is worth mentioning that the total value of the
supplies that arrived in Iraq for the five initial phases of the
implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding is
almost equal to the funds deducted from the revenues of
Iraqi oil sales to cover the expenses of the Special
Commission, the expenses of the United Nations in Iraq
and the costs of the United Nations Compensation
Commission. The total value of the supplies that have
arrived in Iraq from the beginning of 1997 to the present is
$4,948,300,000, while the funds deducted for the Special
Commission, the United Nations services and the
Compensation Commission are $4,041,185,000.
A cursory look at these two figures clearly shows the
failure of the Memorandum of Understanding to meet the
essential humanitarian needs of the people of Iraq. The
methods the United States and Britain use in dealing with
the contracts that are related to humanitarian needs, and the
deliberate delay in processing these contracts, make the
main goal of the Memorandum of Understanding the
financing of the expenses of the United Nations instead of
securing the essential humanitarian needs of the Iraqi
people and stopping the deterioration of their humanitarian
and health situation.
This also exposes the intentions of the American and
British Governments to strip the Memorandum of its
humanitarian substance by putting on hold the contracts
directly related to the health situation of the people of
Iraq. For example, while the value of the contracts signed
for water, sanitation and electricity has amounted to $352
million, the value of the supplies that have arrived in Iraq
so far is only $64 million — that is, only 18 per cent of
the total value of those contracts. The rest has been put
on hold by the British and the Americans.
The most striking evidence of the suffering of the
children of Iraq as a result of this unjust, comprehensive
embargo is the 12 August 1999 report of the United
Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), which contains
statistics on child mortality resulting from malnutrition,
shortages of medicines and the deteriorating economic
and nutritional situation of Iraqi mothers. The report has
proved decisively that the embargo imposed on Iraq is the
main reason for the huge increase in the child mortality
rate.
The United States Administration has spared no
costs to distort the facts about the Memorandum of
Understanding, or spared any tendentious lies and
allegations about the distribution of food and medical
supplies. The Secretary-General's reports on the Iraq
programme, which are based on the reports of United
Nations observers deployed throughout Iraq, have proved
the accuracy, regularity and equity of the distribution
process of all humanitarian supplies received under the
Memorandum of Understanding.
The United States of America deliberately works to
maintain the embargo and to double the suffering of the
people of Iraq, despite the disappearance of all the
reasons linked to the imposition of the embargo. This
American objective has become quite clear through the
many statements made by American officials that make
the embargo a tool to achieve the hostile American
political policy against Iraq.
One of the basic pillars of the hostile
American/British policy against Iraq is the imposition of
the two no-fly zones on Iraq. This constitutes a violation
of the United Nations Charter and international law. We
have already mentioned the evidence about this in a letter
to the President of the Security Council dated 15 January
1999. This has also been confirmed by the views
expressed by some permanent members and by others
inside and outside the deliberations of the Council.
It is well-known that the continuation of these no-fly
zones is a means to perpetuate the aggression with a view
30

to achieving the purposes of the Anglo-American political
scheme against Iraq. American officials do not hesitate to
indicate their real intentions of using these daily
bombardment operations to achieve the United States
Administration's goals against Iraq's independence and
sovereignty and to destabilize its patriotic Government.
The Washington Post published on 31 January 1999 an
article quoting a senior official of the United States
Administration describing a certain attack as a means of
reaching the goal in a way that satisfied all objectives
without any loss, and saying that if the United States were
to carry out a massive campaign, people would inquire
about what had provoked such attacks.
Proceeding from this policy of partitioning the
aggression, the American and British warplanes have been
carrying out daily exercises in a show of power that
violates Iraq's airspace. In this way they launch savage
bombardment operations against civil and economic sites in
Iraq, including communication stations, oil pumping stations
and private houses. Even mosques and churches have not
been spared these continued savage attacks; the churches
include the Church of Mar Matti, which goes back to the
fourth century AD and which the American and British
aircraft bombed on 11 August 1999.
From the aggression of December 1998 to the present,
the total number of sorties carried out by American and
British aircraft amounted to 12,143, of which 9,830,
launched from Saudi and Kuwaiti territory, were carried out
in southern Iraq. Two thousand three hundred and thirteen
(2,313) sorties were carried out in northern Iraq from
Turkish territory.
The United States Administration is seeking to find
inconsistent pretexts for these daily acts of aggression, to
which hundreds of innocent civilians fall victim. It claims
that the bombing of civilians is in legitimate self-defence
against Iraqi air force attacks.
Let us ask this: where does the United States derive
the right to defend an act that lacks any kind of basic legal
legitimacy? Who gives the American aggressors the right to
act in self-defence, as they claim, in Iraqi airspace? The
acts carried out by the United States Administration
represent a declared war waged against the people of Iraq.
This is a charade — no more, no less. A senior Pentagon
official, in describing these operations in the The
Washington Post on 2 September 1999, admitted that this
was a low-level war.
Proceeding from its legitimate right to self-defence,
which is guaranteed in all international instruments and
covenants, Iraq will not hesitate to counter all American
and British acts of aggression that aim at violating the
integrity of its airspace and territory and threaten its
security as well as that of its people.
Iraq will continue to confront American and British
aggression by all available means and potential. It will not
yield to American blackmail. The hostile policy of the
United States towards Iraq, which runs counter to the
Charter of the United Nations and international law, has
been made clear in official statements by senior officials
in the United States Administration that stress that the
United States is determined to unseat the patriotic
Government of Iraq and dismember its national unity.
In addition, the highest American legislative body
has enacted laws that allow the Administration to interfere
in Iraq's internal affairs, to allocate huge sums of money
to carry out acts of terrorism, sabotage and assassination
inside Iraq and to appoint high-ranking officials in the
Administration to oversee these immoral and illegitimate
tasks.
This American policy has contributed to encouraging
Turkish forces to carry out large-scale military operations
inside Iraqi territory on the pretext of chasing elements of
the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). These Turkish
military operations have caused instability and disorder in
northern Iraq and pose a threat to Iraq's national security
and territorial integrity. Iraq has regularly reported these
repeated Turkish acts of aggression to the United Nations
Secretary-General and to the President of the Security
Council. These acts constitute a violation of the principles
of good-neighbourliness and a threat to international
peace and security in the region. But the United Nations
has taken no action to curb these operations, and the
reason is very clear: it is a reflection of the United States
policy aimed at maintaining the abnormal situation in
Iraq.
The continued United States hegemony and
governance of the destinies of the peoples of the world,
as well as of international economic and political
organizations, confront the United Nations with its most
serious challenge ever. The United Nations should stand
up to this domination and prove its ability to restore
equilibrium so as to realize the purposes set out in the
Charter, primarily the achievement of peace, security and
stability, the promotion of friendly relations and the
encouragement of economic cooperation between States.
31

In a speech delivered by President Saddam Hussein on
17 January 1999, Iraq called for an assembly of various
institutions to be established by interested States to agree
upon statutes and charters with a view to achieving serious
cooperation in the economic, political and military fields in
order to preserve balance and bring about peace, starting
with Asia and questions related to it. That assembly would
not be directed against anyone, but would be aimed at
protecting its members and at legitimately defending their
security and interests as well as international security, in
accordance with established humanitarian norms. From this
rostrum we call upon the peoples and States of the world
that have faith in the values, culture, freedom,
independence, justice and equity of the nations and peoples
of the world, to consider President Saddam Hussein's
proposal with a view to initiating a dialogue aimed at
turning the proposal into a reality that would help achieve
balance, peace and security throughout the world.
Moreover, many States, including permanent members of
the Security Council, have explicitly called for a multipolar
world in which political, economic and military balance
prevails, in the interest of maintaining international peace
and security.
The United Nations adherence to the principles set out
in its Charter and the full and fair implementation of its
resolutions, without selectivity and discrimination, is the
benchmark of its credibility in restoring the trust of States
in its ability to achieve justice and peace and to
encourage States to comply with and implement the
provisions of its resolutions.
The United Nations, in particular the Security
Council, should implement its resolutions on the Middle
East, primarily those relating to the question of Palestine,
and should support the legitimate struggle of the
Palestinian people to regain their legitimate and
inalienable rights to live on their national soil in Palestine.
It should also support their struggle against the Zionist
colonization of their territory and their fight to establish
a sovereign independent State on their national territory,
with Jerusalem as its capital.
The United Nations must implement its resolutions
on making the Middle East a zone free from weapons of
mass destruction. In particular, it should implement
paragraph 14 of Security Council resolution 687 (1991),
which considers Iraq's disarmament a step towards
establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons
of mass destruction. So far the United Nations has taken
no steps in that direction.
In conclusion, the realization of the concepts of
justice, democracy and development throughout the world
is subject to the fair democratization of international
organizations, in particular the United Nations. These
concepts can be achieved only through carrying out an
interrelated series of administrative, structural and
political reforms of the United Nations, its agencies and
organs so that it can shoulder its responsibilities under the
Charter, primarily its responsibility for the maintenance of
international peace and security.


Let me first extend sincere
congratulations to you, Sir, as the new President of the
General Assembly. I am confident that your rich
diplomatic experience and the reputation you enjoy will
play an important role in leading the Assembly’s work.
I would also like to give credit to Mr. Didier Opertti
of Uruguay for the great skill and persistence he showed
in presiding over the work of the fifty-third session of the
General Assembly.
May I also welcome the three new Member States of
our Organization, Kiribati, Nauru and Tonga. The United
Nations is richer for their membership.
We are only one year away from the Millennium
Assembly, an event whose symbolism should inspire us
to strive harder to achieve all the goals of the
Organization. In looking forward to the challenges of the
future, our countries also realize that the world continues
to hold many dangers. It has been rightly said that
globalization has two faces. While accounting for an
increasingly complex web of linkages across the full
spectrum of human endeavour, it has also led to increased
alienation and, in some cases, disparity. Quite clearly, the
United Nations is at the forefront of efforts to address and
reconcile these complex processes. The struggle to raise
and improve the quality of life of the hundreds of
millions who continue to suffer the anguish of poverty,
the protection of our precious environment, the
strengthening of democracy and the protection of human
rights, responding effectively to natural disasters, further
13

progress in disarmament and dealing properly with security
crises as they arise all continue to occupy us.
Having mentioned the issue of security, allow me to
observe that the situation in South-Eastern Europe has come
full circle with the return of the epicentre of the crisis to
the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Kosovo, where it
started more than a decade ago. The military intervention
of the international community, supported by all the
countries of the region, including Croatia, must now be
followed up with an appropriate political response. Just as
we joined the international community in condemning
violations of human rights, it is clear that energies must
now be concentrated on building a lasting and just peace.
With regard to the security issue of Prevlaka, as with
other matters resulting from the aggression and territorial
pretensions of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, bilateral
negotiations have been unsuccessful. The simple reason is
that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia does not wish to
accept Croatia's internationally recognized borders. Only
when the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia accepts Prevlaka
as a purely security-related issue instead of considering it
a territorial dispute, and refrains from abusing this issue in
internal Serbian-Montenegrin relations, will a solution be at
hand. The opening of border crossings with the Republic of
Montenegro has, by allowing for the freedom of movement
of people and goods, significantly contributed to regional
stability and helped the democratic transformation of
Montenegro.
Croatia has proposed the establishment of a bilateral
security regime as a follow-up to the present one
administered by the United Nations Mission of Observers
in Prevlaka (UNMOP). Whether as a result of successful
bilateral negotiations with the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia, of a Security Council resolution or even of
unilateral action consistent with the rights and duties of
Croatia under international law, the UNMOP mandate
should be terminated soon. Further prolongation of the
mandate will only serve those who wish to stall
negotiations indefinitely, which is contrary to good-
neighbourly relations and the interests of stability in the
wider region.
The key legal issue arising from the disintegration of
the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia
remains that of succession. As long as this matter is
unresolved, the prospects for lasting normalization in the
region will be hampered for all the successor States.
Responsibility for this state of affairs lies squarely with the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which keeps rejecting the
conclusions of the United Nations/European Union
Conference on the Former Yugoslavia, as well as the
relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the
General Assembly. Only if rooted in this existing body of
international law and authority can the question of
succession be resolved. Pending a full resolution of this
issue, the normal economic processes that might
otherwise promote stability and cooperation cannot have
a positive effect, either on the region or on bilateral
relations.
Over the past year, Croatia has persevered in its
determination to enlarge and enrich the content and scope
of its special bilateral relations with Bosnia and
Herzegovina. I am particularly pleased to be able to
inform the Assembly that we have recently resolved one
of the hitherto open questions in our relations with Bosnia
and Herzegovina: an agreement has been signed settling
the issue of our common border.
Croatia will continue both to support the
implementation of the Dayton agreements regarding
Bosnia and Herzegovina and to maintain its commitment
to ensuring the rights of the Croats, as the least numerous
of its three constituent peoples.
Following a slow initial response, there has been a
proliferation of both national and multinational initiatives
throughout the second half of the 1990s aimed at ensuring
long-term stability in South-Eastern Europe. The new
Stability Pact for South-Eastern Europe builds upon the
sound foundation provided by the prospect of the
inclusion of the States of the region in the Euro-Atlantic
integration processes. However, its success will depend
upon an individual evaluation of the progress being made
by the respective States, an evaluation which should be
based upon simple, clear and transparent criteria.
My country has welcomed the Pact as an important
development involving all the relevant international actors
and seeking a comprehensive solution. In the view of
Croatia, the strengths of the Pact — provided that it is
implemented to the letter — are, first, its
comprehensiveness and, secondly, its vision of integrating
the participating States into the Euro-Atlantic structures.
In this way, we hope that it will marshal the hitherto
dispersed energies of the international community. Croatia
lends its full support to the process related to the Pact and
reiterates its determination to continue to take an active
role in its implementation.
14

The joint success of the United Nations and the
Croatian Government in peacefully reintegrating the
previously occupied part of eastern Croatia early last year
has been followed by the gradual return of displaced
persons to their homes, not only in that region, but also to
other areas of Croatia. It is a complex process involving the
return of Croats to their homes in the previously occupied
areas, and the return of Croatian Serbs to their homes from
other countries and from eastern Croatia to other parts of
the country.
While the difficult economic circumstances,
particularly in the areas of return, are certainly not helping
the process, they are affecting all citizens equally. In spite
of these objective circumstances, the national Programme
for the Return and Accommodation of Displaced Persons,
Refugees and Exiled Persons is being successfully
implemented and has resulted in the return of 65,000
Croatian Serbs.
Croatia maintains intensive relations with the
International war crimes Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia. It has taken numerous steps, from providing
documentation and access to alleged crime sites to assisting
in the voluntary surrender of indicted persons to the
Tribunal. Whenever a legal dispute has arisen, Croatia has
sought ways of resolving it through proceedings within the
Tribunal Chamber itself. However, while it has lent its full
support and cooperation to the Tribunal, Croatia is not fully
satisfied with the results to date. Indictments issued so far
do not adequately reflect the true nature and scope of the
war crimes committed by different sides in the conflict. The
unusual delay in bringing persons in custody before the
court — in some cases more than two years, despite the
initial assurances of speedy trials — has not strengthened
the Tribunal's credibility.
No one has been charged for the crimes committed
against Bosnian Croats — despite assurances given as long
ago as the Dayton negotiations — and no one has been
sentenced for crimes committed during the aggression
against Croatia, despite ample evidence and 14,000 deaths.
Allow me to repeat what I have said on previous
occasions in this forum. The Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia continues to harbour the notorious war criminal
Mile Martic and the perpetrators of the most heinous war
crimes committed in Vukovar — Mrksic, Sljivancanin and
Radic. Its stance overtly defies the will of the Security
Council, the international community and justice in general.
It also poses a big obstacle to the reconciliation process.
We have witnessed tremendous advances during the
twentieth century. However, many challenges remain,
particularly if we are to eradicate poverty, protect our
environment, and promote and achieve sustained social
development and economic growth.
The recent important deliberations and work of the
Economic and Social Council have confirmed that the
Council is an important forum for addressing the manifold
issues arising from globalization. Croatia believes that
implementation of the negotiated outcomes in the broad
subject areas of sustainable development is the key to
promoting the global agenda of leaving a healthy planet
Earth for future generations to enjoy. The system of
international conferences, now undergoing their five-year
reviews, and the United Nations system as a whole, have
a leading role to play in this regard. It is with all these
factors in mind that Croatia has chosen the Economic and
Social Council as the first principal body to which to
present its candidature.
Our hopes and goals for the future notwithstanding,
the world is still encumbered with the legacies of the
twentieth century. The scourge of war and all that violent
conflicts bring with them are still a clear and ever-present
concern. The United Nations must be ready to cope with
these challenges. This inevitably requires reform of the
Organization. There is, of course, a broad consensus
about the need for reform, but as always, the devil is in
the details. The United Nations needs to have mechanisms
at its disposal to address the issues arising from the new
international order in a timely and efficient manner. The
reforms within the competency of the Secretary-General
are moving ahead. The Member States should now grasp
the symbolism of the new millennium in order to
conclude the reform process.
The reform of the Security Council remains stalled.
The primary task of the Council, the maintenance of
international peace and security, makes its representation
and transparency, and hence its reform, highly important.
Questions related to mine clearance and to the
destruction of anti-personnel and other types of mines are
a matter of special concern to Croatia. In spite of the fact
that much work is being done to alleviate this problem,
hundreds of thousands of mines still lie scattered over
6,000 square kilometres of Croatia's territory. Having
ratified the Ottawa Convention last year, Croatia was
pleased to host a regional conference on anti-personnel
mines in Zagreb in July this year and thus share its
15

experience and expertise directed at ridding the world of
these terrible weapons.
The United Nations is best known for its peacekeeping
role around the world. Croatia, which has hosted five
separate peacekeeping operations on its territory, has in
recent weeks taken on the role of a contributor of
peacekeepers. As we have announced in the past, through
its participation in the United Nations mission in Sierra
Leone Croatia will now be able to repay in kind the good
deeds previously bestowed on it. The Croatian Government
is honoured by this responsibility and is confident that its
soldiers will be exemplary members of the United Nations
force. Additionally, we welcome the evolutionary
developments in the area of peacekeeping, from the use of
civilian police and preventive forces to the “White
Helmets” proposal.
The promotion and protection of human rights requires
constant vigilance and effort by all responsible
Governments. The Croatian Government, through its
National Committee for Human Rights Education, in
cooperation with the United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and experts from the
Council of Europe, is preparing a national programme on
human rights education targeting schoolchildren at the
primary and secondary levels.
Croatia continues to follow closely the progress being
made towards establishing an International Criminal Court.
The establishment of an efficient, permanent International
Criminal Court will be a milestone in the march towards
the universal protection of human rights and the rule of
law. Croatia has signed the Statute of the Court and looks
forward to other States doing so, too, so that this great
achievement of the international community can commence
its operation as soon as possible.
The present session of the General Assembly will be
vital in preparing for the coming Millennium Assembly. It
is important that this Assembly be well prepared so that it
is an event of substance rather than of ceremonial character.
Croatia hopes that it will be a real crossroads and that it
will succeed in providing guidelines for a better and more
tolerant world in the coming millennium.
Allow me to conclude by noting that Croatia is
looking forward to the work of the fifty-fourth session,
hopeful that it will bring further progress in addressing the
challenges and grasping the opportunities of our times.


On behalf of the
Government and people of Thailand, I extend my warm
congratulations to you, Sir, upon your unanimous election
to the presidency of the fifty-fourth session of the General
Assembly. I am confident that with your leadership and
experience this session will complete its work successfully
and set the stage for the Millennium Assembly and the
millennium summit next year.
I should also like to take this opportunity to pay
tribute to Mr. Didier Opertti, President of the Assembly at
its fifty-third session. My delegation truly appreciates his
leadership and his tireless dedication to the heavy
responsibilities entrusted to him during the past year.
May I on behalf of the Government and people of
Thailand congratulate the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic
of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga on their admission as
new Members of the United Nations, which further
reinforces the universal character of the Organization.
As we gather on the threshold of the new millennium,
we find the United Nations and the international community
are still preoccupied with maintaining international peace
and security. Yet this is only one of the many purposes of
our Organization; to achieving international cooperation in
solving international problems of an economic, social,
cultural or humanitarian character and in promoting and
encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental
freedoms for all is no less an important goal in our Charter.
Invariably, the traditional security paradigm
predominates in the discussions and ensuing actions
regarding international peace and security. A decade after
the end of the cold war, global and regional organizations
tend to focus their efforts primarily on traditional security
concepts and related tools for solving security problems. In
South-East Asia, the Association of South-East Asian
Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum (ARF), which deals
with some aspects of security issues in this traditional
sense.
But the traditional concepts of security are woefully
inadequate to meet the new challenges faced by mankind.
The very narrow scope of its definition serves as an
intellectual strait-jacket which limits our ability to
conceptualize and respond to new threats of our time.
This fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly is
being conducted under the menacing shadows of the
conflicts in Kosovo and East Timor. All of us are
preoccupied with the implications and consequences of
the ways in which we choose to handle these conflicts.
More and more, we in the international community
are being faced with conflicts within States, not between
or among States, as in the past. Rather than State rights,
State interests, State sovereignty, we now have to grapple
with the defence of the common good, the protection of
rights beyond borders and intervention to promote and
safeguard humanitarian ideals and objectives.
Our Organization is now being challenged to provide
clear guidelines for the collective pursuit of these new
lofty goals and this complex agenda. Unless and until we,
as the foremost Assembly of mankind, come up with
criteria, objective and consensual, the international
community will not be able to address the many lurking
internal conflicts effectively. The period between now and
the millennium summit next September is an opportune
time for our collective deliberation on this issue. And I
commend the Secretary-General for his leadership role in
launching the process of consultation at the beginning of
the session. My delegation pledges its full cooperation
with him and with all representatives in the Assembly for
the successful outcome of this historic search.
But let us not forget that before we can protect and
promote those common interests, save rights beyond
borders and think about intervention on the ground of
humanitarian concerns, we have to make sure that we are
in agreement about what it is that we must, that we want
to, protect and promote.
I propose that we should begin to change our
traditional, exclusive preoccupation with the security and
sovereignty of States to serious consideration on the
emerging concept of human security. It is a concept
which attempts to take us beyond the traditional meaning
of security, by addressing new issues. The scope of what
falls within the realm of human security is still not yet
well defined, except to place people at the centre of our
definition of security. Security is now people-related more
than State-related.
10

One interpretation of human security in vogue includes
upholding human dignity, protecting and promoting human
rights and use of humanitarian law, shielding women,
children and non-combatants from the effects of armed
conflicts, and combating terrorism. We have also seen
concerted action to meet these objectives through joint
efforts to eradicate anti-personnel landmines, prevent the
proliferation of small arms and struggle against organized
crime. This somewhat limited interpretation of human
security emphasizes physical protection of the human
person, and strives to provide human beings with freedom
from fear. This is a step in the right direction.
But it is not sufficient. We think human security
should be more comprehensive. Can we afford to continue
to attach less importance to addressing the social and
economic dimensions of human security? Can we honestly
enjoy genuine security amidst l.3 billion people who live on
less than $1 a day, or another 840 million who remain
malnourished? Can we fully enjoy freedom from fear
without having freedom from want, which emanates from
living in an environment free from infectious disease,
illiteracy, poverty, natural disaster and social unrest? If we
are to give importance to protecting children from harmful
effects during times of war, should we not give equal
importance to providing children with basic benefits during
times of peace? We cannot turn a blind eye to the need to
secure for people their freedom from want. We believe that
human beings will begin to enjoy genuine security only if
they have a chance to make a living, to be able to stand on
their own two feet, to have equal opportunities to develop
their livelihoods and to make their own decisions about
their own futures. This will not happen so long as people
are threatened by socio-economic ills such as poverty,
disease, environmental degradation and social vices,
including drugs.
The need to pursue human security in such a broader
and more comprehensive definition is made even more
urgent by the multifaceted challenges that we face from
unbridled globalization. Granted, globalization has created
many important opportunities and benefits, such as the
creation of more competitive world markets, which has led
to greater efficiencies in production and faster economic
growth. But I ask the question: has globalization helped
eradicate poverty in the marginalized subregions of the
world, or eliminated social and economic inequities even in
the developed world? We cannot deny that uncontrolled
market forces and unfettered short-term capital flows, to
take but a few examples of globalization, have had
devastating consequences on our economies, social
cohesion, political stability and cultural identity — in
many cases for the worse rather than for the better.
The events of the recent financial crisis in Asia have
brought us face-to-face with the worst consequences of
globalization. Millions of adults were unemployed and a
large number of children were forced to leave school.
But, if anything, the crisis has made us even more
determined to meet this challenge, which, though
primarily financial in nature, has had immense social
consequences. We have learned that the multifaceted
nature of the challenge of globalization requires a
multifaceted response.
In our case, besides the traditional economic reforms
and adjustments undertaken, we also sought to focus our
efforts on addressing the short-term and long-term threats
to the viability and welfare both of individuals and of our
society. We therefore give strong priority to promoting
the establishment of adequate social safety nets and the
development of human resources. This strategy puts
people at the centre of our national efforts to bring about
our economic revival. I can proudly say that our efforts
have finally borne fruit. We have emerged from the crisis
more competitive, more resilient and better prepared,
economically and socially.
At the global level, I firmly believe that to meet the
challenges of globalization and take the most advantages
from its benefits, we must join hands to promote
globalization with a human face. This is not a new idea.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan has spoken of it. The
United Nations, particularly the United Nations
Development Programme, has long been a proponent of
this concept. Unfortunately, when it was introduced some
years ago, it was still considered an idea far beyond its
time. If we still find such a concept revolutionary, we are
indeed behind the times.
We need to ensure that globalization leads us to,
among other things, greater equity among peoples and
nations; the easing of social tensions and the
strengthening of communities; the inclusion of a greater
number of economies as stakeholders and co-partners in
the building of the global economy; declining poverty and
the reduction of the income gap between the very rich
and the very poor; enhanced protection and preservation
of our environment; greater protection and promotion of
human rights and fundamental freedoms; and, perhaps
most importantly and very simply, a better life for all
peoples.

The holding of the tenth session of the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development — UNCTAD X —
in Thailand in February 2000 will be an important, defining
moment in our quest to promote globalization with a human
face. We will consider all these challenges together. We
hope to be able to tame the tsunami of globalization and
turn it into a benevolent force of reconstruction and
equitable distribution of wealth and opportunities, and not
the menacing force of destruction and destabilization it has
thus far been.
I am pleased to report that our preparations for
UNCTAD X are going well. I wish to take this opportunity
to convey the Thai Government's assurance to all of you in
the Assembly that Bangkok will be fully prepared for
UNCTAD X in February 2000. Thailand, as the host
country, strongly encourages all Member States to consider
sending to Bangkok delegations at the highest level
possible.
Joining hands to promote globalization with a human
face is a distinct contribution to promoting human security.
The United Nations is already playing a leadership role in
realizing this goal at the global level. But the United
Nations cannot do it alone. It needs to forge a partnership
with the non-governmental sector, especially the private
sector and civil society, and with other international
organizations. In a sense, our endeavour to define and,
indeed, to promote human security has philosophical and
practical implications — both positive and negative — for
us as sovereign States and for the United Nations as the
leading global multilateral Organization. We are embarking
on an effort to define what the key role of the United
Nations will be in the next millennium. I urge all of us to
contribute to this important mission together.


At
the outset, I wish to greet the President of the General
Assembly, His Excellency Theo-Ben Gurirab, Minister for
Foreign Affairs of Namibia, whom I congratulate on his
election and offer all the cooperation of the delegation of
Paraguay in his work.
In greeting Secretary-General Kofi Annan, I
congratulate him on his excellent work for the
Organization and reaffirm the full support of the Republic
of Paraguay for his efforts on behalf of world peace.
At the same time, the delegation of Paraguay wishes
to welcome the Republics of Kiribati and Nauru and the
Kingdom of Tonga to membership of the United Nations.
We are convinced that their work will contribute to
international peace and development and that their
presence among us is further evidence of the
universalization foreseen under the Charter.
This regular session of the General Assembly finds
Paraguay at a crucial moment in its political life and for
its expectations for economic and social development. The
Paraguayans have very recently overcome internal
destabilization. However, a rapid, broad and heroic
mobilization of the citizenry, in particular the members of
Parliament, youth, workers and peasants, formed an
impenetrable barrier against an attempt to foment a
constitutional collapse and provided support for the
resistance to this attack on democracy.
As a result of the crisis of March 1999, the gravity
and importance of which caused it to be followed by the
media throughout the world, a Government of national
unity was established in the framework of the National
Constitution. That Government, which I have the honour
to represent before this Assembly, is composed of all
political parties through democratically elected
parliamentarians. Today, it faces the great challenge of
5

pulling Paraguay out of chronic economic stagnation and
great social inequity.
In various international forums, and yet again in this
arena of brotherhood among the States of the world,
Paraguay appeals for the solidarity and cooperation of the
multilateral and bilateral organizations in carrying out its
economic reactivation programme and the implementation
of social and anti-poverty policies. This activity will be the
basis and guarantee of the survival of our democracy.
In this context, for the first time in my country's recent
history, the political parties, the authorities of the State and
the representatives of civil society have agreed in a patriotic
consensus on policies and strategies to rechannel economic
growth, alleviate poverty, combat social exclusion and
achieve well-being for our people. Democracy, as an ideal
form of organization and coexistence, will be insured for
history by sustainable development, which will guarantee
the material well-being of the impoverished majority.
In this respect, my country has subscribed to and fully
supports the principles, objectives and measures adopted at
the United Nations Conferences on social development,
population and development, and women. We are
unswervingly committed to political democracy because we
know that we must consolidate it with justice, social equity,
economic growth and sustainable development. My
Government is firmly decided to participate and act jointly
with other countries of the world at all levels to enhance
natural resources and preserve the environment as an
irreplaceable framework for human development.
In a significant response to the requirements of the
Cairo Conference, Paraguay has adopted a national plan and
a Council for Reproductive Health. With the establishment
of the Women's Secretariat, we have strengthened women's
presence in government and made available a programme
for women's equality in education. This measure has
allowed us to incorporate gender equality into educational
reform and to adopt a women's equal-opportunity plan.
We have attributed equal importance to the
Convention on the Rights of the Child and to the
commitments made at the Children's Summit. In this
respect, the Executive Power has submitted a code for
minor's for parliamentary approval.
Clearly, these important steps have had a positive
effect. Paraguay today, according to the most recent report
of the United Nations Development Programme, is in a
comparatively improved position that favours its human
development indicators.
The dynamic of today's world is an unavoidable
challenge demanding not only domestic democratic
cooperation, but also negotiations that will raise countries
to a level of development at which they can work with
other regional and multilateral partners.
Convinced of this, Paraguay, freely and in full
sovereignty, has decided to join the great Southern Cone
Common Market (MERCOSUR) project, a regional
experiment that has proved to be a useful instrument for
addressing the challenges of an ever-changing world
economy. Thus, we look forward to the opening of
negotiations to establish a free-trade zone between
MERCOSUR and the European Union. Similarly,
Paraguay is actively participating in the ambitious Free
Trade Area of the Americas, an undertaking that will
have enormous repercussions for the American continent.
In its decisive struggle for comprehensive progress,
my country is participating with renewed hope and great
faith in the ideals that formed the basis for the
establishment and existence of the United Nations. We
therefore reaffirm our full commitment to the principles
of multilateralism, equal sovereignty of States and respect
for the legal order that support the essential principles of
the Organization.
In this respect, Paraguay is examining the process of
change and the strengthening of this Organization. We
will support all efforts to improve its efficiency and
operational capacity to maintain peace and contribute to
the human development of all peoples.
Nevertheless, my country believes that the structure
of the United Nations must be made less costly and more
efficient. The Organization should strengthen the
Economic and Social Council, continue to streamline the
Secretariat and reduce the overlap of its specialized
agencies, through efficient rationalization of the flow of
resources for cooperation for sustainable development.
Given the challenges facing the United Nations, we
attach considerable importance to the adoption of
measures to ensure the good financial functioning of its
organs, and we therefore urge Member States, particularly
the most developed, to meet their financial obligations as
an essential prerequisite for the reform of the
Organization.
6

Similarly, the Government of my country does not
consider that the present composition of the Security
Council reflects the presence of all the main actors of the
international community, nor that its numbers are in
proportion to the totality of Members. Only an increase in
the number of permanent and non-permanent Members will
ensure more equitable participation within the Security
Council and, thus the necessary political balance. In that
respect, the progressive process of international
democratization must conclude with the elimination of the
right of veto of its permanent members.
Therefore, Paraguay supports the aspiration of Latin
America and other continents to have greater representation
in the Council, where the presence of Brazil as a permanent
member, could represent the great interests of our region.
Paraguay is convinced that maintaining international
peace and security must continue to be one of the priorities
of the United Nations, in particular in those areas of
conflict where its intervention can contribute decisively to
stabilizing the situation on the ground and achieving peace.
As proof of its commitment to these noble purposes,
the Government of Paraguay has officially offered the
Secretary-General the participation of members of its armed
forces in United Nations peacekeeping operations, a
decision which will contribute to this noble humanitarian
purpose. To that end, a battalion of elite officers of the
Paraguay army is receiving special training to participate in
those operations, in accordance with the memorandum of
understanding to be signed between the Republic of
Paraguay and the United Nations.
However, we truly believe that the best guarantee of
peace, together with the monitoring of human rights and
equal opportunity for development, is to reduce armaments
progressively and in a sustained manner until they are
totally eliminated.
Paraguay strongly condemns terrorism in all its forms,
regarding it as one of the most serious threats to our
societies. In that respect, we have supported all the United
Nations initiatives to counteract this scourge, making clear
our resolve to prevent it, combat it and eliminate it. It is
timely to recall that my country has itself suffered from the
effects of this terrible scourge; in this very year we have
suffered the horrendous assassination of the Vice-President
of the Republic, Luis Mar'a Argaña. I take this opportunity
for the President of the Republic of Paraguay to thank the
General Assembly for the tribute which was paid to him.
Paraguay will not cease its struggle to eradicate terrorist
bands, which are alien to our tradition and our history.
With regard to other scourges which afflict our
societies, I must emphasize with great satisfaction the
efforts which my country is making in the crusade against
illicit drug-trafficking and related crimes, a struggle which
is carried out with the greatest cooperation. The twentieth
special session of the United Nations, on the question of
drugs, held in New York in June 1998, conveyed in its
decisions that spirit, which should lead us inexorably to
the final destruction of the merchants of death, a victory
which will be achieved with the shared responsibility of
the nations committed to the crusade.
These purposes will be achieved with the faithful
fulfilment of the commitments undertaken with regard to
human rights and fundamental freedoms. In this respect,
my country has followed the recommendations of the
United Nations with regard to signing, adhering to and
ratifying those commitments, whose purpose it is to
strengthen the framework for the promotion and
protection of the rights of the individual. International
legal instruments in this regard form part of the law in the
Republic of Paraguay.
For that reason, my Government accepts verification
and monitoring by organizations concerned with the
protection of human rights, thus complying with the
provisions of the covenants which it has ratified, as a
commitment of its will to fulfil them. We must note here
that Paraguay has just received a visit from the Inter-
American Commission on Human Rights, which arrived
in the country in response to an invitation by the
Government.
With regard to the priorities of justice concerning
crimes of international scope, we find it very satisfactory
to note a most promising event: the approval in 1998 of
the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, to
pass judgement on individuals accused of the crimes
which most offend the human conscience. Paraguay,
being one of the signatories, has submitted this document
for parliamentary approval.
Furthermore, Paraguay, whose population includes
15 per cent of foreigners, the majority of whom live in
border areas, free of segregation or discrimination, notes
with satisfaction that the problem of the Balkans is
moving back to its natural ambit, the United Nations
Security Council, which must necessarily approve any
decision.
7

Our permanent, determined support for the Conference
on Disarmament is one of the pillars of our international
policy. Paraguay, which supported the process of
decolonization and the autonomy of peoples from the time
the United Nations was established, has followed with great
concern the events in East Timor. I sincerely hope that with
the efforts of the United Nations, the best solution will be
found to the problem, with the consecration of the rights of
this people, legitimized in the referendum and encouraged
by our Organization.
My country has firmly decided to keep to the essential
principles of coexistence and civilization; this is a necessary
result of its belonging to the international community.
Following the principle of universality, Paraguay supports
the right of all the peoples of the world to make their
voices heard at the United Nations.
Paraguay believes that the situation in the China Strait
must be resolved within the framework of international law,
non-aggression and peaceful coexistence of nations.
I cannot fail to state here that we share the sorrow of
the people of the Republic of China at the catastrophe
afflicting its territory. We must all commit ourselves to
offering cooperation and help to achieve its full recovery.
In my country there is an unswerving commitment to
democracy and the belief that this can be consolidated only
through justice, social equity, economic growth and
sustainable development. That is why my Government has
resolved to participate and act together with other countries
in all efforts aimed at preserving natural resources and the
environment, an indispensable task for comprehensive
development. For the same reasons, in this year when
humanity will achieve the surprising figure of six billion
inhabitants in the world, we, the Heads of State and
Government and political leaders and officials have the
historic responsibility to respond to the needs and
expectations of this huge world population. But let us not
do it with hunger, thirst, wars, terrorism, discrimination,
genocide, tyranny and injustice — let us do it with
responsibility, with positive actions, and with security for
the human person.
On the threshold of the new millennium, Paraguay is
prepared to participate in this urgent task of improving
human civilization.


We are coming to
the end of 1999, a date that many see as the end of an
epoch, given the proximity of the new millennium. The
imminence of its arrival invites us to reflect on the history
of men and women.
It is with humility that Western nations, such as
mine, consider the development of mankind, which well
before our year one was recorded by other calendars
during thousands and thousands of years, as homo sapiens
began to create tools of wood and metal, began to bury
their dead with dignity or to build empires and cultures
ever greater, and also ever more ephemeral. Today we
marvel at the mysterious paintings of prehistoric man,
such as we find in Andorra and throughout the Pyrenees,
or at the great architectural projects of ancient Egypt. Our
culture, our crafts, our way of life — all these have
certainly changed; but our intellect, though more
cultivated and filled with more knowledge, continues to
grasp at the problems of our existence in the same way,
with the same hesitations — caught between superstition,
cruelty and fear on the one hand and optimism and hope
on the other.
In short, at the dawn of the year 2000 we remain
essentially human and we can still discern in ourselves
the traces of our ancestors who were born of natural
evolution. However, the progress of human societies has
so intensively transformed our environment that our era
is intrinsically new and different from those that preceded
it. This new world, so recent and so obvious to us that it
appears it could not be otherwise, is the world of the new
millennium. Globalization defines the spirit of the age.
This phenomenon is of such importance that the General
Assembly should reflect upon it, each of us according to
his unique perspective. The universality of this
international forum — where, because of the far-
sightedness of its founders, all nations, large and small,
have the same voice — makes it the ideal place for a
sober reflection on globalization and its effects.
The nineteenth century saw the birth of nationalism,
which, in giving cohesion to human communities of all
sizes, mythologized its unifying elements, often to an
extreme. Andorra is a State, the fruit of a juridical
agreement that defined it, long before the coming of
nationalism. Our national essence is not based only on our
language, Catalan, which we share with our neighbours to
the south and to the north, or on other manifestations of
modern nationalism. Institutions are the pillars of our
community: a democratic parliamentary system that began
in 1419, a culture of peace that has continued
uninterrupted since 1278. Perhaps, since the Andorran
fatherland is the result of institutional and political ideas
worked out in a unique historical experience, born out of
23

a pact, we can emphasize these ideas today in this speech
so that here at the United Nations they can serve as
unifying institutional elements, thereby promoting the idea
that globalization should be shared by all in common
progress.
What is important in the new millennium is to know
how to orient this globalization with international criteria,
so that a son of the Argentine pampas or a daughter of
Gabon can equally laugh and cry at the same cartoon, so
that their freedom and ambitions can be equal and equally
unconstrained. For if their childhoods are no longer so
culturally separate, the political and economic opportunities
they have when they pass into adulthood should be equally
similar.
Globalization is probably the greatest opportunity for
humanity, but it will not develop its potential if it is not
accompanied by both principles and political action at the
highest levels which allow for the establishment of new
“post-national” communities with different cultures but with
similar characteristics, communities that together can work
towards a world of peace and economic progress. This will
never be realized without the United Nations, the
indispensable Organization. There are no indispensable
nations, just as there are not men and women who are
better than others because of the accident of their places of
birth. What exists today are the indispensable economic and
political precepts that our parents, survivors of the
Holocaust and other terrors of the Second World War, gave
to the United Nations and to the other international
organizations allied to it. This Organization, which many
love to criticize, while it may be distorted or weakened by
the weakness of its Members, is at its core the expression
of one of the greatest moments of the soul of humanity.
The political power of the United Nations comes from
the defence of the rights of man and the peaceful resolution
of conflicts. Its power in the economic sphere is based on
an ethical cry for development. I spoke before of the
children of the pampas or of Gabon, as I might speak of
children of the American Midwest or of East Asia or the
French Pyrenees or the Arab peninsula. Many of these boys
and girls will grow up with the same aspirations, instilled
in them by a global culture, but once the age of adulthood
is reached the possibilities for the exploitation of their
potentials is not the same, and in this great injustice lie the
seeds of new wars, exploitations and corruptions. For many
of these children globalization has little meaning.
We cannot turn our backs on the fact that 20 per cent
of mankind lives in conditions of extreme poverty, and that
many millions of others are very close to this state. What
does global culture represent for all of these people?
Perhaps simply a mirage of all that they might have had
and taken pleasure in had they been born citizens of a
richer country. The world has today more that 1.5 billion
people who lack access to potable water and basic
sanitation facilities and who are largely illiterate. What
kind of global community will we be creating if these
numbers do nothing but rise? The United Nations
indicated what needed to take place after the Social
Summit in Copenhagen in 1995. That conference traced
a path that we have begun to follow, but that must now
be followed with a firmer step. Why do we not, in the
decades to come, try to apply the desires expressed in
United Nations policy to economic organizations, such as
the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary
Fund and the World Bank? We must do this. Otherwise,
globalization cannot be any more than it is now: a
dictatorship of the financial world over people and their
legitimate representatives.
A discussion of the responsibility of those States that
administer economic aid returns us to the questions of
political rights, the advancement of democracy, the
transparency of the political and economic process and
the consolidation of the rule of law. Models exist, and if
they have been developed in specific nations of the earth,
these models do not carry any copyright. Human
communities are either free or not; there exists no other
possibility. True democracy, the freedom to choose the
people to administer the public good through regular
elections, is the only form of democracy that can be
defended. Today, with the information we have at our
fingertips, nobody should dare defend tyranny by
resorting to cultural arguments. During the first years of
the new century, it will be necessary to keep alive the
principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
so that people everywhere are educated in the social
responsibility of the individual and so that democracy is
accepted as the only natural form of governance for all
regimes.
The recent conflict in East Timor is a good example
of the opportunities as well as the dangers that the United
Nations has before it. On the one hand, we find ourselves
facing a long but productive process, in which a popular
vote accepted by all the parties will lead towards an
unequivocal resolution of a long-standing problem. On the
other hand, once this democratic process was effectively
carried out, violence broke out, and now we must react
quickly in order to stop the massacre. The United Nations
capacity for reaction and the mobilization of the forces of
24

the States that compose it is therefore essential. Here is the
third aspect of the United Nations that must become more
effective than it is at present. Peacekeeping must be
conducted using more powerful and better organized
mechanisms of intervention that allow for rapid action and
guarantee the effective conversion of words into deeds.
Globalization, a current reality, presents both
opportunities and dangers. In order for it to be a tool of
progress, it must be accompanied by a system that is both
political — involving democracy, the rule of law and
respect for human rights — and economic — involving the
goal of the eradication of poverty and encouragement of
development. Support for the system depends on the United
Nations having a real capacity for intervention so that
peacekeeping is more effective. This was the point of
departure for my series of observations. I can guarantee that
Andorra, a small State that has been a United Nations
Member only since 1993, will make every effort so that the
desire to make the United Nations an instrument for
positive globalization is not in vain. We are making
increasing efforts within the Organization.
Andorra's active participation in the Rome Conference
to establish an international criminal court, where it was the
second State, after Italy, to sign the Statute, which begins
with words written by Andorra well illustrates the efforts of
my country to aid and reinforce the rule of law in the
world.
I have the pleasure to announce to the Assembly today
that once the juridical analysis and translation from Catalan
has been completed, my Government will give to the
Consell General, our Parliament, a copy of the Statute for
ratification. We hope, therefore, shortly to be one of the
States that will permit the International Criminal Court
(ICC) to become a reality by being one of the first
countries to ratify the Statute for its entry into force.
Another small European State, San Marino, preceded us
towards this goal and we congratulate it on its speed and
support for the ICC.
The work of Andorra in the United Nations concerning
the rights of man continues to occupy a special place in this
fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly. In particular,
our delegation will follow with interest the work of the
Commission on Human Rights during its meetings in
Geneva. Andorra's desire to mark its opposition to the death
penalty as punishment for a crime will again be expressed.
We will also insist on the need to teach human rights to
children, as is emphasized in Article 29 of the Convention
on the Rights of the Child. We will also work this year on
other United Nations Conventions concerning human
rights to which Andorra has committed itself to adhere
pending internal proceedings.
The year 2001, as a result of the internal rotation of
the Western Group, will allow Andorra to be a member
of the Economic and Social Council. This represents an
important goal for us in our international life, and we are
pleased to inform the Assembly that Andorra has started
its preparatory work for its presence in this organ, so
important to the United Nations. The deliberations of the
next session of the Economic and Social Council which
will take place in New York in the year 2000. For the
session to take place in 200l in Geneva, where we will
participate as full members, the recent extension of our
Permanent Mission to the Geneva Headquarters will
assure our being able to carefully follow the proceedings.
To this end, I have asked our Permanent Representative
to establish at this session which of the members of his
team, and in what capacity, will be responsible for the
Economic and Social Council in 2001 for Andorra. This
preparation will ensure that our contribution will measure
up to the noble work of the Council, notably in the war
against poverty.
Still on the economic plane, Andorra's candidature
for the World Trade Organization represents one of the
most important current challenges for my country,
alongside the relationship we are exploring with our
neighbours in the European Union. As a small State
which tries to understand its economic opportunities, we
find the flows of global commerce, and our participation
in them, of particular interest.
In 1998 each Andorran gave around $6 to our annual
budget for contributions to the United Nations; this is the
per capita figure for the Andorran contribution to the
Organization. I am aware that it is not an enormous
contribution, but it is much greater than that which each
inhabitant of the biggest countries with a high income
pays or should pay. A good part of this figure was for
voluntary contributions towards disarmament. An
exhibition on children and small arms opened recently.
Prepared by the Department of Under-Secretary-General
Dhanapala and the United Nations Children's Fund
(UNICEF), and sponsored by Andorra, it will move to
different sites in the world to raise consciousness
concerning the tragedy brought about by the presence of
small arms in areas of conflict, especially for the young.
We have also made contributions towards programmes
designed to collect small arms in some of those countries
that suffer from an infestation of this plague. My country
25

intends to continue to contribute to initiatives such as these
in order to express our solidarity with the actions for peace
of the United Nations. It is right that a small country such
as mine, which has been blessed by 721 years of
uninterrupted peace should participate in the United Nations
in those acts which bring about a culture of peace.
The last time I visited the Headquarters of the United
Nations, during May of last year, I did so to present a
programme of computerization for the archives of the
Group of Western European and Other States to the high-
level working group on informatics. I am happy that the
diplomatic mission of a small State such as ours can bring
about the realization of this project, aided by the National
Computer Science Centre of Andorra. The server computers
installed at the Mission function at a good rhythm and other
regional groups have asked for information in order to
establish a similar system. I therefore reiterate the offer I
made last year concerning the cooperation of Andorra with
any other interested regional groups.
The United Nations is certainly imperfect, but it is the
best organization that we have to orient this unpredictable
world of the third millennium towards a culture of peace
and international solidarity and also along the path of
development.
There are many labours left unfinished: the reform of
the Security Council, the new tasks of the Trusteeship
Council, the revitalization of the Economic and Social
Council, the increase in possibilities for peacekeeping
operations, among others.
We have a great chance to change this world so
transformed by globalization. Do not forget, however, that
at the end of this century marked by the worst excesses of
humanity, the United Nations represents our charitable spirit
and at its centre there is not a machine, but human beings,
albeit exceptional ones: the first among them, Kofi Annan,
the Secretary-General; Didi Opertti, the outgoing President
of the General Assembly, whom we thank with all our
hearts for work well done; Theo-Ben Gurirab, the new
President, whom we congratulate on his election; and many
other persons who bring their individual beliefs to this
common house for humanity. It comforts us to think not
about systems, but rather about those people who,
indefatigable, work for a better world. Let us therefore have
the optimism to believe in our species. For I believe that,
as the Nobel Prize Winner William Falkner said:
“man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is
immortal, not because he alone among creatures has
an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a
spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and
endurance.”