First of all, I should like to tell you, Sir, how pleased my delegation is to see you presiding over the forty-first session of the United Nations General Assembly and to congratulate you most warmly on your unanimous election to that important post.
In choosing you, the international community paid a well-deserved tribute to your country, Bangladesh, and demonstrated its great appreciation for your outstanding qualities as a seasoned diplomat and as a defender of the principles and purposes of our Organization. You may be assured of the support and total co-operation of my country in your discharge of your difficult and lofty task.
We also extend our congratulations to your predecessor, Mr. Jaime de Pinies, who guided the work of the fortieth session of the General Assembly with a competence equaled only by his rich experience in the United Nations and his perfect knowledge of international affairs.
In the past year the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar , has admirably discharged his many responsibilities. We congratulate him warmly and urge him to continue the courageous, bold action to which we have become accustomed since the beginning of his term of office. His report on the work of the Organization clearly reflects his determination to work towards solving the serious problems facing the world, through universal respect for the values which underpin the work of the United Nations and through observance for the principles and norms that govern relations among States.
The danger of widespread confrontation that could bring about the extinction of mankind long ago left the realm of fiction. It is rather a tragic aspect of our daily lives. In fact, never in the history of mankind and of international relations has the question of the maintenance of international peace and security been so urgent and vital as it is today. The declaration by the United Nations of the International Year of Peace bears witness to the special urgency of this question on the threshold of the twenty-first century. This situation is diverting the attention of the international community from the true stakes*, development and international co-operation.
At a time when the world economy is in turmoil and the majority of countries
are engulfed in an unprecedented economic recession which hampers any true possibility for economic and social progress, the arms race continues to break alarming new records both in terms of the enormous quantities of material and technological resources it absorbs and in terms of the increased quantity and destructive capability of the highly sophisticated weapons to which it gives rise.
In this context the urgent implementation of meaningful disarmament measures cannot be considered a purely moral issue, but rather as a necessity on which the future of mankind depends. A new summit conference between the United States of
America and the Soviet Union could contribute to true international detente and to conditions conducive to a climate of trust and dialog between the two super-Powers> this could footer the process of general and complete disarmament.
The commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations gave us the opportunity to consider the Organizational  accomplishments, difficulties and operations and to make a critical evaluation of them. It demonstrated the readiness of all Member States to work towards the continued strengthening of the tole of the United Nations and of its efforts for peace, security and development.
The present delicate and decisive stage in the life of the United Nations gives rise to grave concern because of the threat to the very existence of the Organization. Joint measures must be taken as a matter of urgency to reverse the negative trends and give new momentum to the activities of the United Nations. If such measures are correctly applied, they can only strengthen the vitality of the Organization and better equip it to overcome the present crisis.
Yet that approach does not absolve us from the need to assess the situation and act prudently and objectively. We must avoid initiatives which could weaken the Organization's capacity to act and its role as an exemplary instrument of multilateralism and international co-operation.
The financial situation must be improved, and we must make the necessary changes and adaptations both in the structure and operations of the United Nations machine. We must rationalize procedures in order to make the best of the human, material and technical potential available to the Organization, for the Organization's ability to adapt and adjust itself to the realities of the day is among its prime attributes, which explains the Organization's ability to have withstood the tribulations of history during its forty years of existence while Preserving the very essence of its universal and universalist vocation. The United Nations has thus been able to withstand the vicissitudes of its history.
The General Assembly is once again to consider the same gamut of questions, of conflicts and of crises it has considered in past sessions. Very little progress has been made in the settlement of the main problem facing the international community.
The world economic situation shows no sign of recovery, and the gap between developed and developing countries continues to widen, to the great detriment of the latter group. The real chances for economic growth by developing countries -particularly the least developed countries - are growing worse. As their indebtedness increases, their purchasing power decreases and their exports are declining both in quantity and in value.
The countries of the third world are faced with a growing disparity between their socio-economic development and their ability to respond satisfactorily to its needs. This exacerbates the already difficult conditions in which development efforts are undertaken, often at the cost of enormous sacrifices on the part of their peoples.
The problem of indebtedness - particularly the level of debt servicing - is an unbearable burden for the economies of the developing countries. If it is not lightened, that burden will without doubt crush those economies, which, in the long term, would have repercussions for the developed countries themselves.
It is clear that under such circumstances the perpetuation of certain factors - such as deteriorating terms of trade, protectionism, declining multilateralism, decreasing commodity prices, high interest rates, and increased insolvency of debtor countries - cannot serve to promote a new trend in international economic  relations, especially since global negotiations on development issues remain a pious wish.
It is important in this context that special attention be given in the framework of the United Nations to the related matters of currency, finance, trade, indebtedness and development. We hope that the seventh session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) will provide a suitable forum for promoting joint action to launch a program of world recovery.
The special session of the General Assembly on the critical economic situation in Africa was undoubtedly a milestone in the history of North-South relations. It will prove to have demonstrated the advantages of regional dialog in the quest for solutions to common problems of development.
In addition, that special session was the best opportunity for the international community to demonstrate its genuine solidarity. None the less, the measures adopted there require appropriate follow up so that the endogenous efforts of the African countries can be given the needed international support for the implementation of the program of Action adopted at the conclusion of that important session.
As I have said, the same range of questions remains of concern to the international community. The agenda of this session in fact reflects the repetitive nature of the deliberations in the General Assembly at the same time as it indicates how little progress has been achieved in eliminating the tension and conflicts that jeopardize world peace and stability.
Many reasons or pretexts are often adduced to justify the perpetuation of certain crises or the emergence of new conflicts. The real cause of the existence of these crises is non-respect for the principles contained in the Charter and rules of conduct that are internationally accepted and stem from the status of membership in the united Nations.
As representatives know, no problem can be resolved in a lasting way by following automatic responses. The will of all the parties concerned to find an equitable solution to a given problem is always necessary and constitutes an essential element in the planning and development of adequate responses. That is why neither declarations of intent devoid of practical content, nor radical stands based on dogmatism and open confrontation, can make it easier to find the desired solutions in a world where reason must prevail over force.
We believe that if every Member of the united Nations were to respect fully the principles and norms solemnly undertaken and if all Members were firmly committed to defending the Charter objectives there would be no insoluble problems,
permanent tension or inevitable conflicts. There would be neither interference in matters within the sovereign jurisdiction of States nor attempts at domination, destabilization, aggression and occupation. The South African people would not be suffering from the odious system of apartheid, and Namibia would be independent. The States neighboring on South Africa would not be victims of constant acts of aggression and destabilization and, above all, those acts would not go unpunished, as is now the case.
Chad would be free from foreign interference and national reconciliation would already be a reality.
The Palestinian people, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PIO) , would have recovered its inalienable rights to independence and the establishment of its own State. Israel's policy of aggression and occupation against the Arab States of the region would have already received a well-deserved response from the international community.
If the principles of the Charter and international legality were respected, as I was saying, Lebanon and Cyprus would not see their national independence and territorial integrity threatened. The fratricidal war between Iran and Iraq could have been avoided and peace in the Mediterranean and Gulf regions could have been strengthened.
In Central America every State, in sovereignty and without foreign interference, would be exercising its right to choose its own political and economic systems, and the commendable efforts and initiatives of the Contadora Group would today have the support of all the States of the region, thus contributing to the establishment of a lasting peace in that part of the world.
South Asia would not be an arena of the dangerous conflicts and tension that exist there at present, and the Khmer and Afghan peoples would be living in peace. The Korean people would be able, in harmony and independence, to meet its aspirations for the peaceful reunification of its homeland and fully play its role within the international community.
The peoples of the Western Sahara and East Timor would at last take their rightful place in the community of free and independent nations; and the peoples oE other territories still under foreign domination would also be masters of their own destiny.
The mission of peace and good-offices undertaken by the Secretary-General in the quest for peaceful and negotiated solutions to the many problems of the present day would also be given real and sincere support by the parties concerned and the rest of the international community.
In that connection, as concerns Western Sahara, the action undertaken by the United Nations Secretary-General, together with the President of Senegal, Mr . Abdou Diouf, seems bo have provided some encouragement in the process of finding a definitive solution to the conflict prevailing in that part of Africa. Me encourage the continuation of that action and are convinced that the present Chairman of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), Mr. Denis Sassou N'Guesso, will spare no effort in that direction.
The convening this year of the International Conference on Sanctions Against Racist South Africa, the International Conference on the Immediate Independence of Namibia and the fourteenth special session of the General Assembly devoted to the question of Namibia demonstrate how concerned the international community is at the explosive situation in southern Africa.
There is undoubtedly some unanimity in recognizing in apartheid the fundamental cause of the tension, instability and conflicts in that tormented region of the African continent. None the less, it is regrettable that the same is not the case in respect of compelling, by the application of vigorous measures, the racist South African regime to put an end to its policy of apartheid. The hesitant attitude of certain countries, towards that policy, together with the absence of concerted and effective action at the international level, has in fact given reassurances to the South African Government in its bellicose behavior.
Constant incursions by South African forces into front-line States, in particular Angola and Mozambique, and Pretoria's obstinate refusal to comply with United Nations resolutions and decisions on the independence of Namibia - Security Council resolution 435 (1978) in particular - are the clearest demonstration of the lack of will on the part of the South African regime to accept a peaceful settlement to the problems that it has itself created in southern Africa.
We are pleased to note the progress registered in the struggle of the patriotic forces against apartheid and the occupation of Namibia, the struggle of the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC) and the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) in particular. The inter national community is duty bound to intensify its moral, political, diplomatic and material support needed in order to achieve the complete liberation of southern Africa from racism and colonial domination.
The complex problems of an increasingly interdependent world can be resolved only through effective multilateral action. This assertion by the Secretary-General, contained in his most recent report, indicates in our view the priority task incumbent upon the international community in the period before the next millennium*, in other words, to strengthen the basis of multilateralism, through the strengthening of the United Nations in particular, and to found co-operation among States on universal respect for the norms of international law. The Non-Aligned Movement firmly underscored that need and in the important documents adopted at Harare indicated ways and means of meeting it.
The precarious nature of the international political and economic situation impels us to adopt an approach in keeping with the imperatives of the growing interdependence and interaction of the contemporary world.
We are confident that mankind, united for better or for worse in the dialectic of human existence and inspired by the valuable lessons of an era rich in sublime moments but also in tragic events, will cross the threshold of the twenty-first century with wisdom and assurance.


 Allow me first, Sir, to congratulate you on your election to the high post of President of the forty-first session of the General Assembly. We are convinced that under your able guidance the session will adopt important decisions aimed at strengthening peace and security for the well-being of all countries and peoples.
We live in a complex, contradictory, and at the same time, interdependent world, it is faced with many difficult problems, but the most important is indisputably the survival of the human race and the prevention of a suicidal nuclear war. The world situation remains alarming. The arms race is tunning at an accelerated pace. Vast reservoirs of distrust and prejudice have been stored up in relations among States. An anachronistic approach, based on reliance upon military force as the main instrument for solving world problems, is still having a ruinous effect on the international climate.
Today, mankind is going through a critical moment of its history. Never before has it been so acutely confronted by the dilemma of choosing to embark upon the salutary road of eliminating nuclear weapons, of disarmament and resolving pressing world problems, or to become a hostage and possible victim of the nuclear elements which it has itself unleashed.
As was recently stated by the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Bulgarian Communist Party and President of the Council of State of the People's Republic of Bulgaria, Todor Zhivkovt
"Nuclear catastrophe is a universal threat. Its prevention calls for the collective efforts of all Governments, States, parliaments, peoples, political parties, mass movements of peace activists, anti-missile movements, scientists and all people on earth, irrespective of class, national, ideological or religious differences."
There is only one way in which mankind can confidently enter the twenty-first century and that is through a policy of peaceful coexistence, co-operation and dialog among all States. That is the road leading to the future.
In the modern nuclear and space age, one can no longer rely on force and on the maxim "might is right" to resolve the different problems in the international arena, nor to ensure the security of anyone. The desire to acquire military superiority, coupled with expansionist ambitions, accompanied by violations of the elementary rules of civilized relations, are in total contradiction with present-day realities. The existence of previously unheard-of means of destruction, capable of destroying every living thing, has put the problems of peace and war, strategy and politics in a different perspective.
These realities require new political thinking and a decisive break from many stereotypes which have determined, and which still determine the positions of certain political circles on these issues. Objective analysis shows that in our time the security of any State cannot be ensured by military-technical means alone. The problem of security has taken on a universal character and a comprehensive political meaning, uniting the various military, economic and humanitarian aspects into a single whole. Peace is indivisible. This truth is valid now as never before. There can be no security for some which would endanger others. In other words, the safeguarding of national security requires that a reliable system of comprehensive international security be established. This position of principle underlies the proposal of the socialist countries, including the People's Republic of Bulgaria, to have the forty-first session of the General Assembly of the United Nations consider the question of establishing a comprehensive system of international peace and security.
In putting forth this proposal, we do not proceed from abstract and Utopian ideas, but from a clear understanding of the imperatives at this juncture of politics and history. In order to guarantee international peace and security, urgent and purposeful actions are needed to curb the arms race, to reduce the military arsenals and to achieve real disarmament. It is imperative to eliminate the existing hotbeds of tension in various parts of the world and not to allow new ones to flare up. It is also necessary to restructure the whole system of international economic relations on a just and democratic basis, to overoome the backwardness of developing countries and to halt their economic exploitation. A comprehensive system of international security includes, as an integral part, active co-operation in humanitarian matters in order to ensure full enjoyment of human rights, above all the right to life and the right to peace, with respect for the sovereignty of States. The adoption by the world Organization of an authoritative document containing the fundamental principles of such a system which would serve as a guidepost in securing the requisite material, political, legal, moral, psychological and other guarantees of security, is the order of the day.
As has already been said, disarmament is the corner-stone of such a system. For every sober-minded person it is perfectly clear that the lessening of the danger of war depends precisely on the state of affairs in that area. Demonstrating high political responsibility, the socialist countries have during the last year alone put forward a whole set of well-founded ideas for reducing military confrontation. In this connection, we should particularly point out the scope, viability and boldness of the program for the total elimination of nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction by the year 2000 as set forth by Mikhail S. Gorbachev on 15 January 1986.
The Soviet Union has submitted a number of concrete and constructive proposals to help reach agreements in the talks on strategic arms and on medium-range missiles. I would also like to note the importance of the initiative on establishing "star peace" in contrast to "star wars" and on turning outer space into an arena of peaceful and fruitful co-operation among States. The socialist countries have elaborated and proposed a comprehensive plan for the reduction of conventional weapons from the Atlantic to the Urals.
Today the question of ending nuclear-weapon tests has indeed become the sole criterion determining the position States take on the most urgent issue - averting the threat of a nuclear conflagration. More than a year has passed since the Soviet Union, rejecting the traditional canons of confrontation, took a wise and farsighted step by adopting a unilateral moratorium on nuclear tesing. The latest extension of the moratorium to 1 January 1987 is a vivid demonstration of the sincerity and seriousness of soviet policy. This decision represents both a genuine step towards disarmament and a major and effective confidence-building measure. It provides a historic opportunity to rethink outdated concepts and to proceed in a practical fashion to the elimination of nuclear arsenals which is so much talked about and demanded by all peoples of the world. Now, obviously, the problem of verification should no longer pose any obstacles to this aim.
The peace proposals of the socialist countries contribute to improving the international climate and to achieving a breakthrough for the purpose of banning war from the life of present and succeeding generations. They are in accord with the interests of all mankind, with the aspirations of peoples throughout the world and with the officially expressed positions of dozens of countries in support of a world free of armaments and wars.
The international situation remains complicated and tense. Our assessment, however, would be inaccurate if we were to see only dark colors. The awareness of the common interests of the vast majority of States on the planet is emerging ever more clearly as the dominant factor in the dynamic interaction of tendencies in the world arena. On this basis, a broad international consensus is taking shape on the vitally important problems of peace and war, security and disarmament. Peoples have begun to talk with each other on these problems in one and the same language without the need of an interpreter.
A major contribution to the struggle to maintain peace is also being made by the countries of the Non-Aligned Movement. In Harare, at its recently concluded conference, the Movement called for common sense and political realism and for the urgent taking of concrete measures to improve the present situation.
We endorse the proposal that the Chairman of the Non-Aligned Movement should participate in one form or another in the work of the Security Council. We also highly value the efforts made by the Heads of State of the Six aimed at the immediate cessation of the arms race in its most dangerous and ruinous forms. The success of the Stockholm Conference is an example of the triumph of realism and of a sense of responsibility. The reaffirmation of the obligation of States not to use force against one another and the adoption of a wide spectrum of mutually complementary confidence-building and security measures has undoubtedly strengthened the foundations laid at Helsinki on which the common edifice of detente is built. We would like to expect such results from the forthcoming Meeting in Vienna as well. Also on the agenda is the reaching of agreement on banning chemical weapons.
Peoples have also placed great hopes in the Soviet-American dialog. The international community was very pleased to learn of the forthcoming meeting in Reykjavik. This is only natural and understandable. We are talking about those States that are most powerful in military and economic matters, and it is on there, first and foremost, that the curbing of the arms race and the prevention of a third world war depend. Together with other peace-loving countries, we also expect much from the Soviet-American contacts at the summit level. They could reach key agreements having a long-term positive impact in all areas of world politics. Good will and a sober view, freed from the dogmas of militarist thinking, would be sufficient for this to come about. On the whole, the current state of international affairs provides most serious grounds for concern as well as for optimism. The world has begun to think in simple and normal human terms about breaking out of the nuclear deadlock.
The priority which ny country attaches to disarmament in no way diminishes for
us the importance of resolving the conflicts in various regions of the world. We
proceed from the understanding that today issues of international security are
inseparable from the peaceful and just settlement of various conflicts which
inflict death and suffering on many peoples and which could easily escalate into a global confrontation.
In this connection, we welcome the proposal for convening an international conference on the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations. As a first step in that direction, Bulgaria supports, in particular, the idea of setting up a preparatory committee within the framework of the Security Council. The establishment of a just and lasting peace categorically requires the withdrawal of Israel from the Arab territories occupied since 1967, the exercise by the Arab people of Palestine of its inalienable and legitimate rights, including the right to self-determination and to the establishment of an independent State-, it requires also the ensuring of the right of all States of the region to exist in conditions of peace and security.
The problem of Cyprus also remains unresolved. In the interests of the people of Cyprus and of international security that hotbed of tension in the Mediterranean must as a matter of urgency be eliminated. We support the idea of convening an international conference to try to reach a viable and enduring settlement of the question of Cyprus, one that would ensure the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity of the Republic of Cyprus as a non-aligned State on whose territory there would be no foreign troops and no military bases.
The situation in Central America and the Caribbean basin is also a source of great concern to us. A powerful imperialist State brutally threatens Cuba, persists in its aggressive action against the democratic gains of the Nicaraguan people and flouts the decisions of the International Court of Justice. The People's Republic of Bulgaria is in full solidarity with Nicaragua in its heroic struggle to safeguard its freedom and sovereignty, and welcomes its readiness to sign a regional peace treaty. We support the efforts of the Contadora Group and of the Lima Group fpr a political settlement of the situation without outside interference.
It is high time the international community took immediate and effective measures to put an end to the illegal occupation of Namibia and to grant independence to its people, in compliance with Security Council resolution 435 (1978), as was also demanded by the General Assembly at its recently concluded special session on this question. Together with the overwhelming majority of Member States, we categorically condemn the criminal system of apartheid in South Africa and South Africa's acts of aggression against neighboring countries, as well as the support rendered it by its well-known protectors. Comprehensive mandatory sanctions must be imposed on Pretoria as soon as possible, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, and an end must be put to that shameful phenomenon,
The People's Republic of Bulgaria also calls for an end to the destructive war between Iran and Iraq and for a peaceful settlement of the issues in dispute.
My country supports the proposals of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea for the withdrawal of foreign troops from the southern part of the peninsula and for its transformation into a nuclear-weapon-free zone for the peaceful and democratic unification of the country.
Conditions also exist for a political solution to the problems relating to Afghanistan and Kampuchea. Such a solution depends entirely on those who have created the tensions around those two countries and are continuing to aggravate them.
Regional initiatives and the elaboration of confidence-building measures among States to secure the inviolability of their borders have a considerable potential for strengthening international security. As already mentioned, extensive positive experience in this respect has already been gained in Europe. The necessary conditions exist for the initiation of a similar process in other parts of the world also. In this connection we see merit in the proposal to include the region of Asia and the Pacific in the efforts to establish a comprehensive system of international security, the implementation of which would decisively facilitate the overall normalization of the world situation.
There is need for close co-operation among States in many other areas as well, i would mention one, namely, the fight against terrorism. The black hand of terrorism reaches out into the lives of innocent people and breeds an atmosphere of fear, mistrust and tension. The People's Republic of Bulgaria resolutely condemns and repudiates the hijacking of aircraft, the taking of hostages, assassinations, and accordingly the mass and arbitrary acts of repression that are sought to be justified in their name, all bearing the mark of obscurantism and inhumanity. In many cases, acts of terrorism are the result of such no less outrageous phenomena as occupation, annexation, foreign domination and other forms of violence. Terrorism could be wiped out completely through a resolute struggle against its manifestations and through elimination of its socio-political causes. One of the important problems under consideration by this world Organization is the role of the mass information media in the present-day world. That powerful instrument of civilization must be placed in the service of peace, co-operation and progress.
The various and complex problems facing mankind require collective, concerted action on the part of all States, large and small alike. The United Nations, as the most authoritative and in essence universal international Organization, is the sole forum where all world problems are being addressed in the search for common approaches to their solution.
The overwhelming majority of Member States sincerely support the United Nations and seek to enhance its effectiveness. The People's Republic of Bulgaria fully shares that position. We are, however, concerned at the attempts of certain Member States to impose on the Organization methods of work and aims that are incompatible with its Charter and to create difficulties that would impede the normal and undisturbed activities of Member States. Today we are all responsible for keeping alive and consolidating trust in the United Nations, which like a living organism develops and breathes in a changing political climate. The great demands of the present time require that the United Nations find a proper course of action in the complicated situation that now exists and affirm itself as a mainstay of peace and security. We would like to avail ourselves of this opportunity to express our profound respect to the Secretary-General of the United Nations,
Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, and to reaffirm our support for his tireless efforts in this area.
As a Balkan State, the People's Republic of Bulgaria devotes particular attention to its relations with the other countries in that part of the world. We are pleased to note that, on the whole, our relations are developing well and in a stable way and are steadily improving. At the same time we must note that attempts have recently been made to undermine confidence and engender tensions in our peninsula. As far as we are concerned, we are opposed to such tendencies and have consistently been exerting efforts to further co-operation in various fields where there are long-term common interests.
Bulgaria is continuing its efforts to transform the Balkans into a zone free of nuclear and chemical weapons. We reaffirm our proposal for the conclusion, with all Balkan countries, of bilateral agreements which would include a code of good-neighborly relations. Quite recently my country signed an important bilateral document embodying the lofty principles and ideals set forth in the Charter of the United Nations and in the pan-European process. We have also put forth an initiative for the elaboration and adoption by the Balkan States of a treaty on protection of the environment of our peninsula and for the drafting of a joint appeal on that issue to all the countries and peoples of Europe. The People's Republic of Bulgaria is doing all in its power to implement the ideals of international peace and security. The Thirteenth Congress of the Bulgarian Communist Party, held earlier this year, charted the basic directions of our foreign policy. We are seeking political dialog, and mutually advantageous and equitable co-operation, with all those who desire it, and are fighting steadily for the elimination of vestiges of colonialism, fighting against neo-colonialism, racism and apartheid, fighting for respect for human rights, and above all the right to life in conditions of peace and freedom. We are active participants in the work of the world Organization and other international forums, and we contribute to the settlement of regional conflicts and help to resolve pressing global problems.
That is how we see our role in building that just and harmonious world without wars which all nations wish to see.


Mr. President, I welcome you to your prestigious office with the same warmth which exists between our two countries - both members of the CeraHonweaifcu. I share with you some knowledge of the English Bar and know that you will show the dedication, wisdom and objectivity which, if I may say so, is the hallmark of our legal profession.
I cannot fail at the same time to pay a tribute to your predecessor, who represents a fellow member of the European Community. Ambassador de Pinies has had a distinguished career at the United Nations, crowned by his handling of the fortieth anniversary session, which captured world attention. He did not disappoint the high expectations we all had of him.
Nor can I omit to pay a tribute to our Secretary-General and to say how happy I am, how happy we all are, to see him restored to health. His modesty and patience - qualities which once again showed through in his annual report - are an example to us all.
I have the honor to address the General Assembly today on behalf of the European Community and its 12 Member States.
Forty years ago, on 19 September 1946, Winston Churchill had this to say of Europe:
"Over wide areas a vast quivering mass of tormented, hungry, care-worn and bewildered human beings gape at the ruins of their cities and homes and scan the dark horizons for the approach of some new peril, tyranny or terror." A generation later it is sobering for us in Western Europe to remember those words. They remind us of the full destructive force of what Churchill, in a later speech described as:
"Ancient nationalistic feuds and modern ideological factions [which] distract and infuriate the unhappy, hungry populations."
The destructive power of Churchill's "feuds and factions" is undiminished, and it is for that reason I wish to dwell for a moment on the more hopeful experience of the European Community. I say this with great humility; for in this century, as often before, we Europeans have feared and distrusted, fought and plundered one another. Yet today 12 free countries of Western Europe can speak to the world with a single voice; and we can do so in the conviction that we shall never attack one another again.
The Community is an ambitious undertaking. The decisions we take in our Community can change the laws of all our countries. They touch the life of all our citizens. Of course it sometimes takes us time to agree; but we believe other nations could profit from the same stability and trust which we have built in Europe since 1945. This mutual trust has allowed us to build up our joint political and economic strength. We are determined to go on advancing our interests together. Let there be no doubt: a challenge to one of us is a challenge to all: whether it be to our liberties, interests, rights or well-being; whether it comes from terrorists or drug-dealers, from bullies or from tyrants.
Last year my predecessor, Jacques Poos, the Foreign Minister of Luxembourg, spoke here as representative of 10 members of the European Community. It is my privilege to address you on behalf of 12 member States, for the Community has welcomed two new members - Spain and Portugal. Their accession weaves two more strands of European culture and history into one ever-thickening cable. Meanwhile the construction of Europe goes on. We are ratifying new treaty provisions on foreign policy co-operation. And by the end of 1992 we mean to have broken down the barriers that still divide the Community; so that, from Aberdeen to Athens, from Copenhagen to Cadiz, goods, services and capital and, by no means least, people, can move freely between us.
Our Community has learns to work together in domestic affairs. It is now the world's single greatest trading bloc.Individually we have made powerful contributions to world affairs: our contribution must and will grow, now that we act together. The principles of the Charter of the United Nations have always been basic to our Community. He believe that our history imposes on us a particular responsibility to work for those principles and to promote in the world the ideal of dialog and peaceful co-operation which has served the member States so well.
But Europe, the wider Europe, remains divided. Twenty-five years ago the Berlin wall cast its shadow between East and West. Barbed wire and concrete set neighbors and families apart from each other. These man-made divisions oblige us, as Europeans, to search for reconciliation and the rebuilding of trust between nations. Our common history and culture encourage us to believe we can succeed.
The accident at Chernobyl, to which the Soviet Foreign Minister has just referred in his own speech, has added a new dimension to exchanges between East and West. Let us hope that the lessons of that accident will be well learned. As Martin Luther King Jr. said, in a different context:
"We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."
For us in Europe, as for the rest of the world, better relations between the two super-Powers are of the greatest importance. We warmly welcomed the Geneva summit meeting last November between President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev. We share the widespread hope that there will be another summit this year. That prospect has already produced major proposals by both sides. We therefore much regret that the arrest of a respected American journalist in Moscow has cast a cloud over those hopes. We look for its early removal.
The Geneva negotiations have as one priority the prevention of an arms race in outer space. The other urgent priority is deep cuts in the strategic and intermediate forces of the United States and the Soviet Union. We believe that the United States, the Soviet Union and Europe can make significant progress towards disarmament without compromising their security. An early agreement on the world-wide elimination of chemical weapons should and must be obtained.
Even if the objective of general and complete disarmament can only be gradually achieved, it nonetheless remains our ultimate goal. But agreements will have lasting value only if they are fair, balanced and verifiable. And if confidence is to grow, existing arms control agreements must be respected by all parties. We are approaching a critical period: there is an opportunity for major decisions. Future generations will not forgive failure.
Arms control and disarmament negotiations are only part of East-West
relations. Practical steps are needed to overcome the tension and divisions that lie behind the high level of armaments.
That is why the Helsinki Pinal Act is so important. It is fundamental for the health of East-West relations that all the Helsinki commitments should be honored. We look to all the participants in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) process to do so. At the CSCE follow-up meeting in Vienna, we will press for the sort of steps which ordinary people in our countries can see and understand.
The Twelve warmly welcome the successful conclusion of the Stockholm conference last weekend. The agreement that has been reached there is a significant contribution towards reducing the risk of war in Europe and towards establishing greater confidence between East and West. The Twelve, who made a substantial contribution to that result, will seek to build on it both in the field of arms control and, more widely, in the CSCE process.
Although Afghanistan and Cambodia are two countries far distant from our own, the outside interventions there symbolize many of the problems we face in East-West relations and in working for greater stability in the world at large. In Afghanistan in particular, some small detachments of Soviet troops may be withdrawn, but over 110,000 Soviet troops will still remain.
Tens of thousands of Afghan citizens have been killed as a result of the Soviet occupation. They will not return to life. Four million people remain outside their country, living as refugees. Many of them have been taken in by Pakistan, which has been rewarded by numerous attacks launched across its border from Afghanistan.
Speaking for a moment as the Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom, I cannot refrain from observing that it was in this context that the Foreign Minister of the
Soviet Union said that "the time has come to learn to call things by their proper names." I cannot refrain from expressing my astonishment and dismay that the facts which I have just described - the events which have taken place in the past six years in Afghanistan - were described by the Soviet Foreign Minister as "a national, democratic revolution". If that be their view, then it is not a view that can be shared by the rest of the world.
Speaking again for the Twelve, the principles we seek are those that must underlie a solution. They have been massively endorsed by the Assembly on many occasions. The Soviet Union should implement those principles, withdraw all its troops from Afghanistan and agree an acceptable timetable without delay. We support the efforts of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to resolve the conflict. Only the success of those efforts - and soon - can prevent further suffering.
Few parts of the world have suffered more than the Middle Bast from the ancient feuds and modern factions of Churchill's phrase. Our approach is the same: to counsel dialog and co-operation. There are no military answers to the conflict in the Middle East or in North Africa.
A just, lasting and comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israel dispute can be achieved only through negotiation. We take encouragement from the agreement between Egypt and Israel over Taba. We have made our own views known on many occasion, and we stand by them. An international conference could make a major contribution if the gap between the parties could be narrowed and if they could agree on the principle and nature of such a conference.
All parties should clearly and unambiguously accept two principles: the right to existence and security of all States in the area, including Israel, and the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and all that that implies.
We appeal to the parties concerned - the Arab States, Israel and the Palestinian people - to open the door to peace by recognizing each other's rights.
The Twelve are working individually and collectively to help development in the occupied territories. We call on Israel, pending its withdrawal in accordance with Security Council resolution 242 (1967), scrupulously to fulfill its obligations as the occupying Power and to ease restrictions on political activity and economic development. But such measures must be a prelude to, not a substitute for, true peace negotiations.
Six years ago this month, the conflict between Iran and Iraq broke out. It has claimed well over half a million casualties and gravely damaged both countries. It is a source of great concern to their neighbors in the Gulf, with whom we sympathize. We have unreservedly condemned the use of chemical weapons and the escalating attacks by both sides on shipping in the Gulf. The two countries should ask themselves what possible good is served by continuing this conflict. We would deeply deplore any further escalation.
It should be accepted equally by both parties that this conflict can only be brought to an end by negotiation. Security Council resolution 582 (1986) forms the best basis for such a negotiated settlement. We urge Iran and Iraq to agree an immediate ceasefire and to seek a peaceful, honorable solution to their differences, co-operating fully with the Secretary-General in the exercise of his good offices.
In the Western Sahara, as well, we appeal to the parties to respond positively to the Secretary-General's efforts to find a peaceful solution.
The United Nations is doing vital worth the effort to preserve Lebanon's sovereignty, unity independence and territorial integrity. We deplore recent
incidents which have put new obstacles in the way of the mission of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). We extend our sympathies to the victims. We wish to underline the urgency and importance of taking measures to enable the Force to carry out its mission safely and effectively. The latest events have demonstrated how intolerable the present situation has become.
I now turn to the problem of Cyprus, which after too many years remains an important matter of international concern. The island remains tragically divided. The Twelve reaffirm their strong backing for the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity of Cyprus, in accordance with relevant United Nations resolutions. We stand fully by our previous statements.
In particular, we reject any action that purports to establish an independent State within Cyprus. As we have made clear on many occasions, we support the Secretary-General in his mission of good offices for a just and viable solution to the problem. We ask all concerned to co-operate with him and not to take any action that would make his task more difficult.
In South Africa, the Twelve have worked to promote the genuine national dialog that is so obviously and urgently needed if there is to be a peaceful solution to the country's problems. South Africa's policies also affect its neighbors. We have forcefully condemned its armed incursions against neighboring countries. There must be no recurrence of those armed raids.
The Twelve have repeatedly made clear their revulsion at apartheid, we have demanded that it should be abolished. We utterly reject a philosophy which denies opportunity or liberty to one child yet gives ordinary rights and privileges to another solely on the basis of his or her colour. Such a system breeds hatred and violence. There have been reforms in South Africa, but too few and too slow to stem the surging bitterness and bloodshed in the country. The present state of emergency has brought desolation to the homes of many thousands of people imprisoned without trial and has worsened, not improved, the prospects for peaceful change.
Violence will not end apartheid. Instead, conditions must be created in which dialog can begin., But dialog is impossible while black leaders remain imprisoned or detained and black organizations proscribed. That is why the Twelve have repeatedly called on the South African Government to release unconditionally Nelson Mandela and other political prisoners and to lift the ban on the African National Congress, the Pan African Congress of Azania and other political parties.
In September 1985 the European Community countries agreed on a series of measures - some restrictive, some positive - designed to impress on the South African Government the inescapable need for fundamental reform. In June this year, at The Hague, the European Council decided to take additional action. As part of that action, Heads of State and Government of the Twelve asked me to undertake a mission to southern Africa. In the course of two visits to the area ^r July I sought to explain the policies of the Twelve to South Africa's neighbors and to impress upon the South African Government our deep concern and the need for steps to encourage a peaceful negotiated solution.
In the absence of any progress in that direction, and having consulted the major Western industrialized countries, the Twelve agreed at Brussels last week to
impose a ban on new investments in South Africa and on the import of iron, steel and gold coins from South Africa. Those measures represent a further step reinforcing the measures we took last year, which included bans on all exports to and imports from South Africa of arms and paramilitary equipment, a ban on oil exports and a ban on all new co-operation in the nuclear field.
In addition we are implementing a concerted European program to help the victims of apartheid, both individually and collectively. We are helping those arrested under the state of emergency and we are putting heavy emphasis on programs of training and education for black South Africans. We are also helping South Africa's neighbors, for example over the improvement of transport facilities in the region.
We shall keep up our effort in all these areas and do everything we can to promote urgent and peaceful change.
Time is short. We appeal to the South African Government to look to the future, to accept that fundamental change is inevitable. That Government clearly understands the demographic and economic challenge. South Africa's white leaders are sowing the wind; unless sincere negotiation begins now, their own children will reap the whirlwind.
The South African Government also bears a heavy responsibility in Namibia. Last year it set up a so-called transitional government of national unity. That body has no status whatsoever under the United Nations plan. We cannot accept unilateral moves by South Africa to transfer power in Namibia. We call upon the South African Government to implement the United Nations plan without further delay.
Central America is another area where armed force will solve nothing. dialog and peaceful negotiation are the only way forward. A political solution is
of the highest importance and it must emerge from the region itself. We support the Contadora peace process, which is a major step in the right direction, but further effort is needed by all concerned to reduce regional tensions. .*t Luxembourg last November we established a political dialog with Central America to underline our active support for that process in the interests of stability and pluralistic democracy. We also signed a co-operation agreement. We reiterate our intention to increase our aid to the region substantially in order to encourage regional co-operation and economic development.
On behalf of the United Kingdom I shall be circulating a document, a separate national communication, on the FaIklands.
More widely in Latin America, we have been encouraged by the continuing consolidation of democracy in most countries of South America. We hope that this process will continue throughout the region. But problems certainly remain in some countries. We have made plain our particular concern about human rights abuses and the continuation of violence in Chile. The Chilean Government has re imposed a state of siege following the attempted assassination of General Pinochet, we view this development with deep concern and reiterate our hope that the Government will immediately release political prisoners and initiate without delay a dialog with the democratic opposition about a peaceful restoration of democracy.
The human rights abuses in Chile and South Africa are by means unique. This Assembly cannot remain indifferent in the face of the systematic violations of individual liberties, of the tyranny, oppression and indiscriminating violence which persist in many countries and of the fact that hunger, disease and lack of opportunity deny the most basic economic and social rights to countless people.
On 21 July this year we issued a statement setting out our principles in this field. That was a signal of the high priority we attach to human rights in our
international relationships. This Assembly has established clear standards - in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international instruments. We seek the universal observance of those instruments. That is, what our people expect, not just fine words, so we attach particular importance to maintaining and strengthening the mechanisms established by the United Nations for the protection of human rights.
The scourge of international terrorism has brought a new precariousness to modern life. It has killed innocent people in airports, shopping arcades and crowded streets. We utterly condemn cowardly attacks like the Karachi hijack and the recent atrocities in Istanbul and Paris, which can do nothing to help the political causes that their perpetrators profess to believe in. Our horror is greater when sovereign States lend their support - moral or material - to the terrorists. This year we have taken certain steps to deter State-supported terrorism, particularly in the case of Libya. No country which supports terrorism can expect to enjoy normal relations with the Twelve. We are determined to do more, and a ministerial meeting of the Twelve will be taking place on 25 September to consider future action. We shall not tolerate such behavior by supposedly responsible Governments.
So, too, the problem of drugs demands an urgent collective effort. International drug trafficking is now on a scale that threatens to undermine whole societies. Close international co-operation is required to defeat this evil trade. We shall play our part at the World Conference in Vienna next June - a valuable initiative by the Secretary-General.
Economic issues have been central to the development of the European Community. It is now the world's largest trade grouping, accounting for 20 per cent of world trade. We are the world's largest importer, in particular of products from developing countries, amounting to $US 105 billion in 1985. Our
320 million citizens are linked to some 400 million people in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific through our trade and aid agreements with their countries. We are collectively the largest donors of aid in the world. This economic weight gives us certain responsibilities towards the world's trading systems and we take these responsibilities seriously.
Since the Second World War, growth in world trade has been stimulated by the progressive dismantling of the tariff barriers that existed between the two world wars. Nevertheless there are strains in the world trading system. Old traditional industries in the Western world have faced massive contraction as comparative advantage has passed to the newly industrialized countries, with traumatic social changes for those involved. Pressures for import controls have grown. They look like easy solutions, but they are not.
Protectionism above all penalizes developing countries by reducing access to prime markets in developed countries. In the developed countries themselves, protectionism penalizes consumers by increasing prices and restricting choice and exporters by increasing their production costs. ProtsGfeicnisa is self-defeating. A spiral of retaliatory protectionist measures would have disastrous effects on world trade, particularly for the third world. Let us always remember that trade fosters growth.
The contracting parties of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) have just concluded their ministerial meeting at Punt a del Este at which an important agreement has been reached to launch a new round of multilateral trade negotiations. The Community has worked hard for a successful outcome. Multilateral trade negotiations serve two purposes: to renew the GATT system, bringing it up-to-date with the realities of world trade, and to pursue trade liberalization by allowing countries to make concessions multi later ally that they may find difficult to make bilaterally. If we all share the burden of adjustment, we spread the pain. We are fully committed to this process.
You may ask what the Community is doing to give effect to these admirable principles. Let me give two brief examples:
First, in the textiles sector, the Community has achieved a. remarkable degree of restructuring. The Community is glad that the new Multi-Fiber Arrangement agreed in July foresees the application of GATT rules to trade in textiles as a final objective and calls for all participants to co-operate in the progressive liberalization of the textile trade. The Community also argued strongly for the particularly favorable treatment that the new Multi-Fiber Agreement gives to the
least developed countries.
Second, agriculture is a major political issue, and one that mnst be tackled urgently. There has been a revolution in food production in the last 10 years. New technology has meant new fertilizers, fatter cattle, new types of grain and rice, more efficient storage. India is now exporting food. China is virtually self-sufficient. These are great success stories which serve as an inspiration to those struggling to overcome food shortages.
Ironically, more plus more can equal less. Too much food in some countries can aggravate food shortages in others.Expensive producers growing more can cause poorer producers to grow less. The result is a tragic paradox: that even in an age of plenty, famine persists. Meanwhile trade disputes become political conflicts, as countries compete to subsidize their food exports, and dispose of their growing surpluses.
We have to address these problems now. While recognizing the importance of agriculture for the well-being of rural communities, the Tokyo Summit agreed on the need "to redirect policies and adjust the structure of agricultural production in the light of world demand". The Community is committed to this. Heads of Government agreed at the European Council in The Hague in June that "a better control of total production must be ensured so that it is better adjusted to the market situation". This is not the responsibility of one country or group of countries. The problem is world-wide, and we can only deal with it - in the words of the Tokyo declaration - in co-operation with each other. Last week, GATT Ministers agreed to launch a new GATT round, including negotiations on agriculture. We have no more important task than to make this a success. The Tokyo Summit was also an important opportunity to review progress on the debt problem. The annual meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMP) and World Bank are less than a week away, so I shall be brief.
The last year has seen important changes. International recovery may be in its fourth year, but the international economic environment remains unfavorable. Growth is still unevenly distributed throughout the world and growth rates are still lower than we want. Lower interest rates help us all, even if in real terms they are still high by historical standards. Oil price falls help many but severely affect others, and commodity prices generally remain weak. Many debtors have undertakes courageous adjustment programs of the industrialized
countries have reduced the imbalances of the early eighties which aggravated the difficulties facing debtors.
The debt burden remains heavy for a number of countries. The Community fully supports the United States initiative for sustained growth, which aims to meet the legitimate aspirations of debtor countries for growth through structural adjustment and economic liberalization with the necessary external financing. Or, in plain language, it recognizes that we sink or swim together. Those who expected instant results misunderstand the initiative and the problem's complexity. But much has been achieved. The World Bank has stepped up its policy-based loans. The IMF and World Bank are working more closely together. And, in recent weeks, they have shown a flexible and imaginative approach to the very difficult problems faced by the oil-producing countries.
There has been much criticism that resource flows have declined. This may be so for the banks in the short term: it partly reflects falling short-term demand for loans. But the banks have a crucial role to play in support of the United States initiative. We are confident they will rise to that challenge. For their part the creditor countries are responding to the need to ensure adequate finance for adjustment through rescheduling at the Paris Club-, new export credits; aid program; and support for the international monetary bodies. The Twelve will support a general capital increase for the IBRD at the appropriate time, and they welcome progress towards a 3US 12 billion replenishment, IDA-VIII, to help the poorer countries.
One way or another, be it bilaterally, multilaterally or through the institutions of the European Community, we provide one third of the world's official development assistance. We shall maintain and, where appropriate, expand
these flows to meet the commitments we have made individually to targets established by the United Nations.
The problems of Africa are particularly acute. As the special session recognized in May, many countries face grave economic problems. But natural disasters such as droughts and man-made disasters such as civil war have made them far worse. We extend particular sympathy to the people of Cameroon who have suffered the appalling natural calamity of Lake Nyos.
At the special session on Africa, African countries acknowledged the role they themselves must play. The industrialized countries, including the Twelve, agreed on the importance of increasing official development assistance to Africa, and on improving its quality and effectiveness. We maintain substantial bilateral aid programs and contribute to international and regional development agencies; in addition, we are making a substantial collective contribution through the Lome III Convention and other association and co-operation agreements.
Finally, this Organization itself faces a very serious problems how to confront its own financial crisis. A number of countries, over the years, have either delayed payments or withheld contributions. The Twelve collectively provide just under 30 per cent of the United Nations budget. We believe that every State should sect its legal obligations. The Secretary-General has shown courage in proposing certain measures, endorsed by the General Assembly at its resumed session in the Spring, to deal with the short-term problem. But further measures are required. There is a clear need for changes in the system which will produce broader consensus on financial issues and help overcome the reluctance of some Members to meet their financial obligations.
We are grateful for the work done by the Group of 18 high-level experts. We shall make a positive and constructive contribution to the discussion of their report. We support the creation of a new mechanism to consider the program and budget, structured so 53 to ensure effective decision-making and to contribute to greater rationalization and efficiency within the system. He are firm in our support for the Charter and for a strong and effective United Nations. Greater budgetary discipline, improved co-ordination, and rigorous adherence to priorities can only strengthen the Organization and ensure its future stability and vigor.
As this Session will once again demonstrate, the world faces many grave problems - too many to cover in one speech; and I have not attempted to do so. So I am also circulating today as document A/41/634 a memorandum as a companion piece to this speech, describing our position on a number of other issues to.which we also attach the highest importance.
Voltaire once observed that, in India and China, they believe that a prophet will come out of the West, whereas people in Europe expect their sages to come from the East. The lesson of this, perhaps, is that we all have something to learn from each other. The United Nations is a place to listen as much as to speak. And if we do so, perhaps we shall find to our surprise that we can learn from each others' experiences and profit from each others' good will.
I have tried to show how our experience of co-operating together in the European Community has shaped our positions on a number of key issues facing this Assembly. I believe those positions, though ambitious in aim, are fair and realistic in practice. It is an approach which we believe fulfills the ideals to which this Organization is committed. In our search and support for freedom, peace, justice, democracy and prosperity for mankind, in offering our friendship to all who wish us well, we shall continue to pursue our duty to other nations, notably to those less fortunate than ourselves. At the same time we shall uphold and defend what we have built together.


On behalf of the Government of Ecuador, it is a great pleasure for me to extend to you Sir, our congratulations on your well-deserved election as President of the General Assembly. It reflects just acknowledgment  of your personal qualities and the determination your country has shown to co-operate in promoting the goals of our Organization.
I should like also to extend my most hearty congratulations to Ambassador de Pinies on the skillful manner in which he directed the work of the General Assembly as its President.
Similarly, I wish to express the gratitude of the Government of Ecuador for the tireless work carried out by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, whose skill and wisdom have enabled him to discharge his delicate functions with success.
Ecuador is present here during the Year of Peace, a time when the countries Members of this Organization wanted to call the attention of the Governments and peoples of the world to the value of coexistence free from violence or pressure.
Peace is a blending of universal values. It is a result of the interplay of certain realities. Peace is an objective to strive for and to be deserved. The basic ingredient of this ideal is the clear decision by citizens and Governments to live in harmony and mutual respect. Diplomacy achieves little and international organizations make small progress if we do not start from unambiguous premises: good will among men; good intention on the part of leaders; and a clear perception by everyone of one's neighbors as possessing rights which deserve the utmost respect.
This year devoted to peace, despite some effective results attained in various
areas, has not been characterized by any substantial progress on the hard road of trying to turn our world towards peace.There are encouraging signs, such as when there appear forces straining for understanding in the Middle East. It is extremely encouraging to find Egypt and Israel overcoming age-old problems. The effects of the admirable solution achieved for the Beagle problem by Argentina and Chile are still vividly recalled. However, in stern contrast, we have many other universal problems that remain unresolved and a significant resurgence of violence at the hands of organizations, overt or covert, which substantially disturb the tranquility of men and even threaten the security of States.
All ethical, cultural and political manifestations which throughout history have claimed the right of the individual human being to the respect of his neighbors and the respect of States constitute the basic pillar supporting harmony. It follows that the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights did no more than give concrete form, in apt synthesis, to old aspirations of our cultures. The importance of that Declaration was that all the Member States of the United Nations consented to be bound by it. Failure to grant those rights gives rise to the individual notion of injustice, the tendency to complain, even violently; in other words, the foundations are laid for erosion of the peace.
when Pope John Paul II, in his address on 1 January 1986, proclaimed that peace must be a value without frontiers, he was voicing a profound truth springing from the human condition itself. Man, without distinction as regards frontiers, aspires to peace, because he aspires to live in surroundings where all recognize his body of rights inherent in the human condition.*
Legal concepts relating to human rights must revert to the ethical purity that they have been losing over the past few years, devastated by political accommodation or ideological compromise.
It has become acceptable for many to recognize differences in type among human beings and to accept the rights of some being maintained and substantiated within a narrow framework in which greater scope is given to might and less to human dignity. At the same time, other human beings are subjected to a strict scale of values which we hope can be made stricter still, but only on condition that it be universal. This distinction, sometimes subtle and sometimes clear-cut, is conferred by the political alignments or ideologies practiced by Governments.
Ecuador does not admit such a double standard. Ecuador reiterates the historical need to acknowledge that all men, regardless of latitude, cultural level or economic development, have the elementary rights which mankind has declared to be inherent in the human condition.
Ecuador maintains that States must contain their coercive force within the solid wall of respect for all human beings and will not tire of proclaiming this universality of rights until they find effective expression in our complex and multiple times confused world.
While the inalienable rights of human beings command the respect of men and States, the right of the peoples to choose together the form of Government and the authorities they choose is another essential principle for the maintenance of peace.
Violence is used in a large part of the world to prevent peoples from having access to appropriate means of choosing an organizational system. And still in a large part of the world citizens are persistently denied the right to vote. The self-determination of peoples is an unassailable principle and is essential to world harmony. It is also a reality that could be improved upon in many States. In my own country, we still have sane way to go before the citizen's right to choose his leaders is fully recognized. Our Constitution contains a limitation - which the present Government has tried unsuccessfully, alas, to eliminate - whereby the right to be elected is conditional upon membership of a political party. The voter thereby loses the possibility of electing many people because they are not members of political parties, but who may merit the citizen's trust in public office.
But, while there is room for improvement in countries that apply the principle of self-determination, there are unfortunately other countries where the possibility of self-determination is growing increasingly rare and where there is persistent denial of that principle.
The interdependence that growing intercommunication creates among human beings is gradually making survival impossible for societies in which political domination deprives men of the right to self-rule.
The rule of might over men, the imposition of an institution which may be backed by the force of arms but not by the will of the masses, is gradually becoming a historical anachronism. It is the duty of statesmen to understand that such systems, however much they may stress the sovereignty of a mandate, will never
be able to claim democracy or the support of the will of the majority. And a
clear-sighted statesmen must also understand that the tendency is for the word to
free itself from such systems and to claim, even through recourse to violent means,
the effective expression of something that emanates from the human condition itself. Thus, the occupation of territories by force becomes daily less admissible.
The withdrawal of foreign forces from any territory directly or indirectly under occupation by a foreign army is a' categorical imperative, no matter what the continent or what justification be claimed for the maintenance of such a situation of violence.
The self-determination of peoples has a rather political connotation. It is - , oriented towards the active exercise of political rights by human beings in a given community. But, over and above that right, today's world demands effective recognition of the right of national communities to development.
Development does not automatically mean wealth. Development means an evolutionary process that makes possible increasing satisfaction of the needs of human beings, families and communities. Development means the individual and collective right to acquire cultural values, to pursue a dignified material life and gradually to participate actively in the life of the society. Development means that the individual can hope for gradual improvement and the assurance that the Government will co-operate with the individual to that end, without impediment of any kind. But development also means - and this is a concept that seems to recede further every day - that the international community should take note of the simultaneous, common need for that phenomenon to take place all over the world.
It is natural that not all communities will achieve the same degree of development, but it is also an inescapable truth that the development of some cannot continue at the expense of the vast majority.
The world of today, particularly the richer countries and those that have the most influence in the international community, must, for the sake of common survival, orient their economic and social policies in such a way as to rescue those peoples whose condition is obviously deteriorating. There are whole blocs of countries - one might even say continents and subcontinents - where the gradual
decline in the quality of life has become a persistent problem and has grown so extreme as to blunt the perceptions of many of those who are responsible for the international economic and political phenomena.
We cannot stand idly by faced with the tragedy taking place in many African countries. There are not only an international financial crisis and increasingly unfavorable terms of trade, but also the gradual destruction of the environment and natural resources. This must serve to single out many African countries as subjects of the most urgent international concern.
The world cannot deny its responsibility, because it encouraged the process of decolonization, which was, and still is, a notable step forward in historical development. It must appreciate the new collective responsibility in a situation where lack of awareness cannot be countenanced.
As part of the right to development, the enjoyment of natural resources with equal benefit to the countries concerned, is essential. Ecuador supports the need for co-operation between the country with sovereignty over a resource and the country that may have the technology to exploit it, between the country that provides the manpower and the country that invests its capital and technology. We neither miserly withholding of a resource, which is then unused and brings no benefit to mankind, nor wanton exploitation, which, while of maximum benefit to one party, causes the depletion of the resource and deterioration of the environment,
In the same context, we consider that the Convention on the Law of the Sea is one of the most important contributions to international law in the past 30 years. Ecuador, together with other countries making up the South Pacific Commission; contributed to this development. It hopes to continue to initiate sound projects for reclamation of the natural rights of peoples from whom marine resources have
been taken, without underestimating the degree of international co-operation needed, in order to bring then into the service of the international coKaaunity.
With regard to outer space, the position of Ecuador concerning its use and that of the geostationary orbit and its frequency expecting stems from the same understanding. The peaceful use of those resources for the benefit of all States must be a permanent goal, while bearing in mind the special right to development of developing countries and equatorial countries.
The submit meeting of the Non-Aligned Countries has just taken place in Zimbabwe. Ecuador is a member of the Movement. Twenty-five years ago, when the Movement started, its founding fathers stressed two attitudes towards the great Powers - independence and autonomy.
Non-alignment represented a historic response to the great Powers trend to set up hegeraonistic blocs, binding to themselves specific groups of client countries. They lost their independence, faced with the might of the Powers and ceased to direct their destinies by themselves.
The history of the world was itself turning into a play between two or three hegemonies, around which several dozen satellite States gravitated helplessly.
This concept of the world was bound to generate a series of negative consequences. Among them, the tendency for each bloc to protect itself, to restrict access or the presence of other blocs, to create a politico-economic enclosure, to fragment the world into vertical blocs, from North to South.
To break out of this unrelenting pattern, to develop the national personality, to overcome ideological prejudice, to maintain open relations with any sector or group of countries, such was the indispensable historic counterpart.
The destiny of non-alignment had to be such as it is. Unfortunately, the spirit of the Movement has hesitated on many occasions. Attempts have been made to turn it into a club of poor countries, against rich countries. At other times, and in flagrant contradiction with the essence of the Movement, the antithesis has been sought: alignment with specific blocs; more than alignment: true alienation.
Ecuador proclaims, as it did in Harare, that it is essential to reclaim the original spirit of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, in the ethical, juridical and political sense.
Non-alignment does not mean loathing or violence; it does not mean verbiage bristling with epithets; it does not mean perennial and repetitive allegations against certain countries in the Western world. Starting from the concept of the sovereign equality of States, non-alignment means having an independent and open attitude, free from prejudice and antagonism, upholding the right of peoples not to
be swallowed up into huge, iron-bound blocs of influence. Our Government will not rest until this international reality is restored.
With regard to disarmament, few issues have such immediacy and importance as
this.
Although the right of every country to maintain a force to ensure internal order and the integrity of its sovereignty is indisputable, nevertheless the enormous size of this force constitutes an unmistakable path to provocation, confrontation and conflict.
The disproportion of forces in various areas or regions, inevitably produces situations of injustice and displaces the rule of law. In view of these considerations, disarmament must be seen as a multiple process. Disproportionate spending on weapons or other military items means impairing the peoples' ability to strive for economic and social improvement.
In those regions where there is an obvious disproportion in military forces, it is essential to set up real and effective systems for disarmament. The international community, the United Nations, must assume the task of promoting disarmament conventions, under effective international control, that go beyond a mere freeze of the arms race.
The case of the great Powers deserves special attention. Ecuador encourages their continuing to deal with each other in order to come closer to true systems of disarmament. It is not through dramatic gestures that the arms race between the Powers will be curbed. There must be binding agreement, brought about not merely by their own conviction, but also by the growing moral pressure of the international community.
The development of atomic weapons must particularly attract the attention of all peace-loving peoples. Atomic energy should be directed towards peaceful ends. Ecuador is particularly concerned about the atomic tests which threaten nature's balance on Earth.
Just as the countries of Latin America did in the Treaty of Tlatelolco, our Government considers it appropriate for the international community to expand the scope and the concept of nuclear-free zones. The Pacific Ocean in particular, that huge sea whose very name originated from the strong impression of peace which it made on its discoverer, must become a nuclear-free zone. The Pacific is the sea where relations of the future will more significantly gravitate. This sea, which links the coasts of America to these of the age-old continent of Asia and of the very new continent of Australia, is bound to emerge not only as a zone with a clear economic destiny, but as a zone in which juridical values are invested with special character aimed at the affirmation and reaffirmation of peace.
The very serious issue of the foreign debt has made little progress over the last year. Developing countries in particular are, to a greater or lesser degree, the victims of this acute problem of our times. The countries' massive foreign indebtedness was not due to chance, nor was it a concerted attitude on the part of the debtors.
While it must be acknowledged, and in the case of ray own country I do so openly, that one of the components of the foreign debt was the application of erroneous economic policies, the joint responsibility of the creditor countries and of the multilateral agencies is unquestionable. Many countries, mine among then, believed in and practiced illusory policies of development promotion, based on an increase of bureaucratic costs, together with a type of protectionism favoring barely profitable activities which consumed a good part of national energy. The immediate consequence of this mistaken concept was to use up not only the capacity of internal savings and local indebtedness, but also to draw on the resources o  international borrowing to finance growing expenses and to bridge the balance-of-payments gap. Moreover, international lending agencies and creditor Governments fueled this indebtedness. Their main motivation was probably the recycling of resources emanating from the increase in the price of oil.
When, through a consistent policy of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, oil prices began to rise, a transfer of resources from oil importing countries, developed and developing alike, to oil-producing countries took place. These incremental resources are caught by the international banking system which seeks to place than not only within the traditional private group of clients, but also in a market: that of Governments, including the Governments of developing countries. This policy reached its climax in 1982 when the debtor countries' ability to pay came to an end.
The solution which was found was to compel the debtor countries to make severe readjustments in their economies to ensure effective margins for the repayment of the debt, at the expense of the country's own development. Initial steps consisted in reducing import capacity, with the recessional effects this entails; and the next step, when this policy could no longer be maintained, was to encourage a rescheduling of the debt, on a case by case basis.
Ecuador, with a relatively high per capita foreign debt, was able to renegotiate its debt over several years with the creditor countries and banks. This renegotiation meant committing about 30 per cent of foreign exchange earnings to debt amortization.
When Ecuador's economy seemed to have adjusted to this new circumstance and international trade started to flow again, a new dramatic event occurred: oil prices suddenly fell.
This time, resource transfers went in the opposite direction. Oil-producing countries, nearly all of them developing countries, transferred resources in 1986
to the consumer countries worth approximately $80 billion. It should be noted that the privileged countries enjoy this benefit in direct proportion to their consumption. Thus, developed countries receive more than 80 per cent of this transfer of resources, while the advantage is greatly reduced for the consumer of developing countries.
My country lost a third of its export earnings in 1986. This has forced it to make new readjustments in its economy.These readjustments have been made on the basis of safeguarding the autonomy of foreign trade, the basis for the free market quotations of foreign currency earned by private exports and those needed for private imports; while oil earnings, whatever the fluctuations of the price of the product, remain earmarked to pay for the State's expenditures, including amortization of the debt.
But, apart from the way in which our country is facing up to its own problem, the basic drama remains.
The debtor countries cannot be condemned to a permanent state of uncertainty and discouragement. Peoples cannot live without logic and hope. However great the effort they nay have to make, peoples must glimpse a more promising future.
The creditor countries and the multilateral bodies must realize that a basic solution to the debt issue has to be found; that the distressed peoples are moving headlong towards undesirable consequences; that many Governments, unable to find viable solutions, are even yielding to wishful thinking, opting for what appears to be a remedy, but is not.
It must be understood that the scope of the tragedy is not financial, but rather political and historical; and that the bloc of debtor countries, not as a club of conspirators set against the creditor countries, but as a group having common, identified needs, will seek solutions, realistic or unrealistic, but in some way different from what the international financial conclaves may have supposed.
The tragedy of the debt is directly linked to the tragedy of international trade, and consideration of the latter issue is most timely now that a round of negotiations by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) is taking place in Montevideo.
The foreign debt must be paid, for reasons of international ethics. But payment is impossible unless there is a rise in the exports of the debtor countries. To increase exports, internal adjustments in the economic policies of the countries are admittedly required. Nevertheless, all efforts are useless as long as the developed world does not abandon its protectionist policy.
Protectionism imposes a heavy burden on the national communities which subsidize the high cost of producing certain goods; and at the same time, it is unfair and prejudicial to the countries that could produce them more economically This is one of the hardest things for Latin America to bear. On other continents, our products are discriminated against; and no hegemonic bloc applies any kind of protectionist formula in our favor. In other words, the system brings us nothing but harm.
I think I can make this plea for the abolition of protectionism, since my country implements a free market economic policy. We have no restrictions or subsidies. Access to foreign currency is free and we do not use any median ism to compensate exporters for the lower prices of exported goods. Thus we can, with full objectivity, call for the gradual but definite abolition of a protectionism which is causing the selective impoverishment of certain areas of the world without, in the medium term, benefiting any country.
The Government of Ecuador believes that terrorism and the drug traffic are two collective threats that are interlinked. The huge resources which the drug traffic can generate and the hidden, dark force teed by terrorism mesh together and encourage each other. Our Government believes that terrorism and drug trafficking represent two special types of crimes, whose characteristics identity them as crimes against mankind. Both threaten indiscriminately, imprecisely, generically. They both cross boundaries; they both use international resources; they both operate and strike simultaneously in many parts of the world. It is essential that the international community act in concert to combat them.
In accordance with the Quito Declaration against Traffic in Narcotic Drugs, of 11 August 1984, and with the statement of May 1985 of the United Nations Secretary-General, the International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking has been called for June 1987. Ecuador, which as of 1986 is a member of the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, endorses its view that traffic in narcotic
drugs must be declared a crime against humanity, and the sinister symbiotic relationship it bears with terrorism must be acknowledged.
The agenda for the forty-first session of the General Assembly contains an item relating to measures to be taken to prevent international terror ism. Last year, on the recommendation of the Sixth Committee, and in accordance with resolution 40/61, the General Assembly unequivocally condemned and qualified as criminal all acts, methods and practices of terrorism, wherever and by whomever committed, including these which jeopardize friendly relations among States and their security. In endorsing those criteria, we renew our appeal to qualify terrorism also as a crime against humanity.
Crimes against humanity are to be dealt with under special norms of international criminal law. Specific shelters granted to other types of crimes would have -to be restricted or eliminated in the cases of crimes against humanity. Special norms on extradition should emanate from an international consensus. And let there be no confusion between terrorism and the policies, however repressive, of certain states that combat it. Attempts are made to. effect an ideological shift aimed at blurring the clear, repulsive outlines of terrorism, seeking to give the same name to the sometimes extreme conduct which may occasionally be adopted to punish the crime.
In no manner can the immoderate use of force be excused, nor the denial of the fundamental rights of human beings, nor the withdrawal of persons and things from the natural jurisdiction of their judges.. But between this and the mixing and confusing of ideas, there is a wide gap which is bridged with ideological and grammatical twists. Terrorism, the action aimed at intimidating, by use of fear, to compel or restrain, so that societies lose their tranquility and the center of gravity of their own destiny, is something that has no. excuse whatsoever. Ecuador
is ready to cooperate openly and frankly with other countries of the world for the condemnation and eradication of this atrocity of our century.
There have not been any favorable developments with regard to the tragedy in Central America in the last few months. The disproportionate size of the armies and of the stock of weapons,, the immoderate and open intervention of several Powers within the area, and the continued and deplorable installation of certain totalitarian systems keep on aggravating the tensions in that stricken area, of our Americas. Ecuador deeply regrets, out of continental solidarity, out of Latin American spirit, out of its perception of a geopolitical threat, this tragedy for which a remedy has not yet been found.
All and any of the resources of international law are appropriate for the solution of the problem. There is no exclusive forum, nor action that enjoys exclusive rights. All the resources that international law can bring to bear must be used to solve the Central American tragedy. In the end, so long as democracy does not find true and effective expression, so long as there is no elimination of the practice of forcibly compelling peoples to accept regimes that they have not themselves freely chosen, so long as it is impossible for many to live in their own country, dominated by tyrannical elements, peace will be a distant and almost contradictory aspiration. Peace has to come from the existence of justice and law, not from the blind imposition of force ruling over the actions and even the conscience of.people.
The international community, the regional and ad hoc forums, as well as the Contadora Group-itself will have to exert strong pressure to eliminate the causes of war 01 guerrillas in the Central American and to restore in the area the effective validity of the peoples' rights to self-determination, of democratic systems and of- non-intervention.The Government of Ecuador, faithful its traditional policy of firm commitment to the rule of law in relations among States, convinced of the need to contribute to the reinforcement of a creative peace that would enable all peoples to satisfy their legitimate aspirations for progress and well-being, renews its decision to faster and strengthen friendly relations with the Governments of neighboring countries, in order to contribute to the well-being of their peoples, with whom they are destined to be closely linked> and to create the climate for a just, peaceful and honorable solution to the territorial problem, within a framework of mutual co-operation.
Ecuador reiterates its belief in the validity of the efforts that the United Nations is making to improve conditions in the international community. What has not yet been achieved must not discourage such efforts. A positive achievement shows that joint participation in forums in which the legal equality of States is recognized, is an indispensable mechanism of civilized coexistence.

Ecuador hopes that all States of the world which aspire to membership in the United Nations may accede to it. Particularly noteworthy is the case of South Korea, a country whose justifiable desire to joining the Organization should not be blocked by the position of third parties.
We also support all principles or practices to eliminate discrimination against individuals. Race, religion, political conviction, age or sex should not be used as reasons for depriving individuals of certain rights or benefits. We therefore support the efforts of the international community to eliminate all forms of discrimination.
Of special interest is the effort to reinforce the mechanisms for the peaceful settlement of disputes. For a number of reasons we consider useful the proposal to establish a commission of good offices, mediation and conciliation. And we are also encouraged to learn that the Secretariat is preparing a draft manual for the peaceful settlement of disputes.
The Organization must keep progress in the field of women's rights under review. Ecuadorean legislation has eliminated all discrimination against women. The ever-increasing presence of women in the professional world, in the scientific community and in political life, is helping our society to incorporate or further emphasize the values which women seem to hold particularly dear. My country has been active in applying the strategies designed to further the advancement of women between now and the year 2000, adopted by the World Conference to Review and Appraise the Achievements of the United Nations Decade for Women. It has also acted with particular diligence in the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and in the Board of Trustees o. the International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women.
Finally, I wish to make a special reference to an international principle which my Government considers to be the backbone of the civilized and peaceful development of our times. I am speaking of the freedom of the press. We must gradually make progress in the world's ability to inform and comment regularly, using all means of mass communication, without restrictions or pressure, without interference from the State or other such quarters. There are still many countries that do not recognize the need to consider this principle, that limit the freedom to express opinions and comment, that exercise control, on the basis of what is seen as the official truth, the citizens' right to receive true and prompt information, and the right of the thinking man and the journalist to exercise their informational abilities.
Ecuador is confident that these still considerable barriers may be brought down, gradually but firmly. Ecuador itself regards it as a duty to follow those principles which safeguard the unrestricted freedom of the press and the practical application of that principle. A diversified, broad and entirely free informational community is one of the traditional requirements of life in Ecuador and one of the reasons for the climate of peace and the constantly increasing emphasis on progress which has always been characteristic of our country.