It is a pleasure for me to participate in a session held amidst such special international circumstances, in which concerted efforts are being made in the quest for peace, and tireless, unrelenting work is being done in addressing the countless international and regional issues and laying the foundations for constructive and fruitful co-operation among the peoples and countries of the world.
Such circumstances have become possible thanks to the new international climate based on conciliation and deriving from the improvement in Soviet-American relations and the positive results of summit meetings, particularly the recent Moscow summit. That summit created a climate of detente, opened new horizons for a just and comprehensive peace and provided the conditions necessary for tackling numerous regional and international questions.
In these special circumstances, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate you. Sir, on the confidence placed in you and on your well-deserved election to the presidency of this session of the General Assembly. We are confident that you are amply qualified to lead us to success in handling the issues under consideration during this session.
This is a good opportunity to convey our deep gratitude to Mr, Peter Florin, Deputy Foreign Minister of the German Democratic Republic, who conducted the deliberations of the forty-second session of the General Assembly with competence and ability that showed how deserving he was of the confidence of the international community.
It would be remiss of me not to express to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, and our deep appreciation of his continuing efforts to consolidate the role of the United Nations in addressing many regional and international questions. These efforts translate the will of the international community, which defines the ways and means for finding just solutions to those questions. We take note with great pleasure of the tangible progress achieved in his direction.
Our participation in this session of the General Assembly coincides with the celebration by our people in Yemen of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the National Liberation Devolution of 14 October, under the leadership of the National Front for the Liberation of Southern Yemen. This part of the Yemeni homeland regained under British occupation for 129 years, years of backwardness, throughout which it was divided into more than 23 sultanates, emirates and sheikhdoms, which separated our citizens and impeded our growth and development.
Ever since we won our independence 21 years ago, we have been trying to achieve balanced urban and rural development and build an independent national economy free from foreign hegemony. We wanted to build an economy that catered to the material and spiritual needs of our citizens, after the unification of all emirates and sheikhdoms under the administration of one central Government. Despite the scarcity of resources, the backwardness of the infrastructures of the national economy that we inherited, and the acute internal and external difficulties that we faced from the very day of our independence our country was able to stand on its own two feet. We were able to endure our plight thanks to the steadfastness and solidarity of our people, who believed in the justice of their national and social cause, under the leadership of the Yemeni Socialist Party. As a result, we have succeeded in consolidating our political independence and have come a long way along the road of our independent social and economic development. We have sought to improve the standards of living of our people, increase their participation in the practical political life of the country and enhance their contribution to building their new society.
Within the national Yemeni framework we have worked tirelessly with our brethren in the northern part of the homeland to create the objective bases on which the desired state of unity of a unified Yemen will be built. We have achieved tangible progress in this direction following the signature of the historic agreement of San 'a on 4 May 1988. Under this agreement we agreed to joint oil investment in the border area between north and south Yemen, namely, in the area between the governorates of Shabwa and Magreb. We have also agreed to freedom of movement for all citizens of the Yemeni homeland with identity cards. We believe that the San'a agreement has opened wide horizons for further tangible practical steps which can lay the bases for the reunification of the Yemeni homeland through peaceful and democratic means.
On the regional level, we are working to develop brotherly relations with the countries of the region on the basis of mutual respect for sovereignty and independence, and non-interference in the internal affairs of others. We are seeking to expand the spheres of co-operation among us in a manner that serves the common interests of our peoples, promotes peace and stability in the area and helps to avert present risks so that our peoples can at last enjoy prosperity and progress.
We have achieved auspicious progress in this direction by creating the best conditions for building the economy internally and contributing to the promotion of joint Arab endeavours, side by side with our brothers in the Arab countries. By so doing we hope to serve our national causes, foremost among which ranks the recovery of the national inalienable rights of the Arab Palestinian people. This common approach will also enable us to face challenges to and frustrate the conspiracies hatched against our peoples.
Within the framework, principles and objectives of our foreign policy we continue to promote and develop our relations with other countries of the world in the political, economic and social fields. Through continuing efforts we are trying to expand the activities of our country in international forums, particularly within the framework of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, which is the common denominator for us and the majority of the countries of the world.
This year has witnessed many salient events and developments, including the cease-fire recently agreed to between the two neighbouring countries, Iraq and Iran. We support that decision whole-heartedly, just as we have always supported Security Council resolution 598 (1987). The war, it is known, did not pose a danger for the belligerent parties alone, it threatened our region in its entirety. The continued hostilities exacerbated tension and presaged disasters, inflicting instability on the region and bringing turmoil to the international situation. Now that the war is over, everyone is called upon to strive for the success of the negotiations, and to build a solid foundation for a permanent peace. We want this call to be construed as a call to the peoples and countries of the region, which bear full responsibility for the maintenance of its peace and security. We hope that the direct negotiations between Iran and Iraq will lead to a just and comprehensive peace agreement, and end the conflict between them by addressing its underlying causes through constructive meaningful dialogue. That would eliminate the dangers facing our entire region and spate the two neighbouring peoples further -losses in life and property. It would also frustrate the sinister plans hatched against our people to undermine the peace and stability of the region, and ultimately pave the way to the rebuilding of what the war has destroyed.
While we commend the climate of detente on the International scene which has created conditions favourable for the reaching of agreements on many, regional and International problems, we appeal to the international community to concentrate on the dangers that would result from any further exacerbation of the situation in the Middle East region. The continued Israeli occupation of the Arab Palestinian territories is a time bomb that may explode at any minute, and as such it is a threat to security and stability locally, regionally and internationally. Responsibility for this state of affairs rests with Israel's arrogance, its continued policy of aggression, Its defiance of International law, norms and humanitarian principles, and Its rejection of all International efforts aimed at achieving permanent, just and comprehensive peace in the region. There is no need to recall that peace in the region can be reached only by addressing the crux of the problem - that is the need for realization of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.
In saluting the Arab Palestinian masses in their heroic uprising In the face of the brutal acts of oppression perpetrated by the Israeli occupation authorities, we renew our commitment to stand side by side with our Palestinian brothers in their struggle under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (РLO), their sole, legitimate representative. We reiterate our continued support for the courageous and heroic popular uprising. Furthermore, we believe that a just solution of the Palestinian question can be brought about only on the basis set forth by the international community, namely, recovery of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, foremost among which are their rights to return, to self-determination and to the establishment of their own independent State on their national soil.
In order to find a just, permanent and comprehensive solution of the Middle East question, we believe we must undertake urgent and necessary steps to convene the International Conference on Peace in the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations, with the participation of all the parties concerned, including the FLO, the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, as well as the permanent members of the Security Council.
While speaking of the Middle East, I find it opportune to renew our appeal to our brothers in Lebanon to resort to reason and reach an immediate agreement that will end the political vacuum there, guarantee Lebanon's unity, independence and sovereignty, provide security and stability to the Lebanese people, and pool all efforts to put an end to the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. There are also indications on the horizon of the success of international efforts aimed at finding a political solution to the problem of Western Sahara in conformity with United Nations resolutions. Similar efforts are being made to solve the question of Cyprus in a way that will guarantee its territorial integrity, independence and non-aligned status. We welcome and support all such efforts.
We also welcome what has been achieved in the context of the Geneva agreement on the political settlement in Afghanistan, and the steps so far taken in that direction. We call upon all parties concerned to redouble their efforts to implement this agreement, to overcome all attempts to obstruct it, and to give impetus to the process of national reconciliation in Afghanistan so that the Afghan people can start enjoying stability and prosperity.
Furthermore, we applaud the efforts to reach a just political settlement on the situation in Kampuchea so that peace and stability can be achieved in South-East Asia. We also welcome all serious attempts to reunify the two Koreas by peaceful and democratic means, and we support the efforts made by the democratic Republic of Korea to this end. We also call for concerted international efforts to support the Central American peace plan. We deem it necessary to eliminate all obstacles being put in its way. We also believe it necessary to end all designs and acts of aggression aimed at undermining the sovereignty of Nicaragua and its national Government, which is the only way to guarantee the promotion of peace and stability in the region.
With respect to southern Africa, we hope that the agreement readied in Geneva will prove to be a step towards the independence of Namibia. In this regard, we believe that responsibility for Namibia and its people lies with the United Nations. Hence, we renew the call to implement Security Council resolution 435 (1978), since it represents the internationally agreed framework for the independence of the Territory, and we confirm the need for the full participation of the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) in any endeavour to that end.
We believe that the international community must impose mandatory sanctions on the South African racist regime to deter it and to ensure that it will respect and comply with the international will. The international community must bring mote pressure to bear on the racist regime to obtain the release of Nelson Mandela, the prominent African hero.
While reviewing the important achievements of 1988, we cannot but give due credit to the results of the Moscow summit meeting between the leaders of the United States and the Soviet Union. That summit meeting has made it possible to exchange the instruments of ratification of the most important bilateral agreement ever readied in the field of disarmament. There is no doubt that this agreement, together with other bilateral accords concluded between the two countries on various levels, has had extremely favourable results on their bilateral relations and on the international situation and co-operation in general. We are confident that the results of the Moscow summit meeting will be the beginning of a continuing process of giving priority to dialogue and co-operation in international relations and enhancing spheres of mutual co-operation and common interests. Here we should like to pay a tribute to the positive initiatives of the Soviet Union and to express our hope that what has been achieved thus far will contribute to the adoption of fruitful and effective measures to curb the arms race - particularly the nuclear arms race - and ultimately end it. It is our sincere hope that it will prove possible to reach an early agreement on a SO per cent reduction in the strategic nuclear armaments of both countries, prevent the arms race in outer space, eliminate all weapons of mass destruction and conclude a convention to ban the production and use of chemical weapons. We cannot overemphasize the importance of reaching an agreement on a comprehensive nuclear test ban.
On the regional level, we believe that urgent measures must be taken to eliminate the dangers posed by Israeli nuclear armaments and the nuclear capability of the racist South African regime. We deem it extremely urgent to oppose in no uncertain terms the dumping of nuclear waste in developing countries and to call on the international community to address this problem and the dangerous risks inherent therein. We also hope that the recent improvement in international relations will spill over to give impetus to the international efforts aimed at the convening of the international conference on the Indian Ocean as a necessary step towards the implementation of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace.
It is natural that we should pin our hopes on the improvement of international relations which has created favourable conditions in which to address the numerous regional and international political problems. № for our part will spare no effort to contribute, side by side with other members of the international community, to the creation of favourable circumstances for further conciliation and co-operation among the peoples of the world so as to improve and enhance the quality of life for all. We whole-hearted support the sincere efforts made to strengthen the role of the United Nations and its various bodies, thus enabling it to fulfil its task and realize our peoples' aspirations to stability and security.
We likewise hope that adequate attention will be given to international economic problems and to finding just solutions to them, thus supporting our countries' development efforts and fulfilling our peoples' aspirations to independent economic and social progress. Failing to address the trend of international economic, fiscal and monetary relations and make them more just and equitable by recognising the developing countries as active partners in the international arena will exacerbate the crisis in the international economic order and widen the gap between the developed industrial countries and the developing ones. This gap is bound to widen further and further as a result of the restrictive attitude of some developed countries in the trading, monetary financing and developmental spheres. The unfair conditions imposed by the international financial institutions add insult to injury  thus causing political and social instability in the developing countries, exacerbating the stagnation of their economies or the decrease of their growth rates. This becomes common place in the majority of developing countries in particular the least developed among them which already suffer from scarce natural and financial resources.
It is not strange then that the exacerbation of the suffering of the developing countries and their inability to pay their foreign debt have created a real crisis that has become known as the foreign debt crisis. This crisis should be addressed by finding objective and comprehensive solutions that take into consideration the interests of all parties concerned free from narrow, selfish concerns.
This grim picture of the international economic situation requires, first and foremost, the revitalisation of international negotiations for the establishment of a new international economic order.
The international community, which is enjoying the breeze of international political detente, can reflect the same atmosphere in the field of international economic relations. This does not require planning strategies and new Instruments Inasmuch as It requires a sincere desire and definite resolve to implement economic strategies and Instruments In the economic field that have already been agreed upon. More Important still is our co-operation for the realization of the desired objectives of our peoples. Will we not proceed in the march of prevailing optimism? We hope so. Otherwise all that we have so far achieved will remain incomplete.


When we Moslems open our statements by saying, "In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful," we in fact renew a pledge before Allah, the Lord, to state the truth and to uphold justice, to advocate compassion within the framework of human relations - for mercy is the linchpin of brotherhood, human rights and co-operation towards progress.
It is on the premise of such a pledge by man before his Lord and by man to his Fellow human brothers that I address you now.
It gives me pleasure to express to you, Mr. President, on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), of which I have the honour to be the chairman during its fifth session, and in the name of the State of Kuwait, as well as on my own personal behalf, sincere congratulations on your election to preside over the forty-third session of the United Nations General Assembly.
Your election represents a responsibility entrusted to you at the outset of an era of global understanding when the world has made some genuine steps towards peace and co-operation. Yet further major breakthroughs are still required in order to address major long-standing universal problems. It is our hope that, by virtue of your personal skills, experience and the confidence we have all placed in you, further progress will he made.
You, Mr. President, belong to a friendly and beautiful country, Argentina, with whom my country, Kuwait, has amicable relations of co-operation and mutual respect. We do look forward to stronger ties between our two nations in larger and more diverse areas of co-operation, and we hope that you personally may perhaps be able to visit us in Kuwait sometime in the future as a dear guest.
I should also like to put on record our appreciation for the efforts made by the President of the forty-second session of the General Assembly, His Excellency Mr. Peter Florin, who demonstrated his deep commitment to the issues of international peace and co-operation as well as his outstanding capabilities and wealth of experience. I should like to recall here the close ties, based on mutual trust and respect, that exist between the German Democratic Republic and Kuwait in several expanding spheres.
The addition, we in Kuwait - along with those throughout the Arab and Islamic worlds - pay a tribute to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, His Excellency Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for his constructive and sincere efforts in the causes of peace, as well as for his positive and forthcoming approach represented by his personal participation in international and regional meetings. His prudence and patience have been crucial to ensuring fruitful co-operation and reconciliation. We thus express to him and to his aides and representatives our deep appreciation.
This year, as the result of a tragic accident, the Organization of the Islamic Conference lost a staunch advocate of the Organization, our brother and friend the late General Modammad Zia Al-Haa, former President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Tributes to his memory were paid and condolences were expressed in this Hall over the loss of General Sia Al-Haa and his companions. The late General, may his soul rest in peace, demonstrated remarkable leadership in steering his country, and in that framework he served as Chairman of the second session of the Organization of the Islamic Conference and presided over its Science and Technology Committee from its inception. General Zia Al-Haa tirelessly strived to close the ranks of the Moslem world and to defend the cause of Islam. On behalf of the OIC, I should like to take this opportunity to express our thanks for your noble expressions of sympathy for the late General, his family and his nation, and to extend once again our condolences to the families of all those who lost their lives in the tragic aircraft crash.
Mankind has attached high hopes to the United Nations ever since its creation, for it represents the supreme forum in which all the peoples of the world voice their aspirations and concerns about their problems. Within the framework of the United Nations system the wealthiest, most powerful and most advanced nations meet with the poorest, the weakest and the most vulnerable countries. The United Nations presence has been a major factor in preventing a third world war. We view the world Organization as a larger workshop for moulding and refining human brotherhood and international co-operation and as an instrument for dialogue and peaceful coexistence in lieu of confrontation.
That should prompt us all to enhance our support for the United Nations and its various organizations and agencies. However, although a multilateral system of this scale and with such a magnitude of responsibility may be in need of some review from time to time, such exercises of reform must not preclude sustained support and help for the United Nations system in order to ensure its ability to fulfil its obligations. We believe that the enhancement of the efficiency of the United Nations should go hand in hand with efforts to ensure its existence.
Co-operation between the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference is based on a shared vision of goals and means, as well as on a common approach in addressing global and regional problems. We all believe in overall human unity, in human rights and in the dignity of the human person; we believe in the fact that the individual human being is at the centre of the human pursuit of advancement. All of us believe in common action towards peace and in respect for every people's right to self-determination, to establish its State on its national territory, and to choose its life-style without any external interference.
The Organization of the Islamic Conference was established in 1969, following the criminal action committed against the Al-Aqsa mosque in Al-Quds Al-Sharif, the holy Arab city of Jerusalem; it reflected the modern Islamic awakening; it manifested the rejection of aggression and terrorism; and it expressed the wish to join a world march towards civilized progress.
The fifth Islamic summit, to which Kuwait  as honoured to act as host in January 1987, adopted a set of resolutions that both reaffirmed earlier resolutions and responded to the most recent world-wide developments with international and regional implications.
States members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference are ever seeking co-ordinated action both within the organization and outside it on the basis of respect for the sovereignty of nations and regional co-operation. Two examples are the Co-operation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf and broader co-operation within the framework of the League of Arab States. We also maintain ties of co-operation with the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, the Organization of African Unity, the European Community, the big Powers and, indeed, the entire world community in the United Nations and its agencies.
These are bridges we should like to see widened and made more effective, and in all our endeavours in this connection we recognize that we live in a world of ever-changing international relations whose diverse cultural Focal points vary in their scope and impact. Given that diversity, coexistence and co-operation on the basis of mutual respect is imperative. It has therefore become essential that each and every civilization view other cultures through a more tolerant and objective pr ism.
Among the most significant trends in today's international life is the recent move by the two super-Powers towards mutual understanding; this has resulted in agreement on a reduction in the arsenal of nuclear weapons. That agreement is all the more significant in the light of its having been proven that the use of nuclear weapons could lead to massive loss of human life. Moreover, the super-Power accord coincided with the defusing of several complex international crises.
I wish here to pay tribute to the peoples of the United States and the Soviet Union for the breakthroughs achieved by the United States President, Mr. Ronald Reagan, and the Soviet leader, Mr. Mikhail Gorbachev.
Smaller nations view this rapprochement with great optimism and now cherish fresh hope that the new understanding will in time have a positive effect on the long-awaited just solution of their own problems with a view to attaining their legitimate rights.
I turn now from East-West relations to North-South issues. The single most important question here is foreign debt and the mounting debt-servicing burden. This problem, in its current magnitude, has come to impede and severely restrict development. It is also being used as a tool to exert pressure on the South in an attempt to secure its raw materials at depressed prices while selling to the countries of the South the North's manufactured goods and cereals at constantly rising prices. This results in an ever-widening gap between the two groups.
Furthermore, by exporting the vulnerability of the poor - and in some cases by tendering up-front payments without due regard for the value of the human being of the South - some industrial enterprises of certain countries of the North have maliciously used places within the national territory of a number of poor nations of the South as dumping grounds for nuclear and toxic wastes without taking effective precautions. In certain cases, in fact, dumping took place without the knowledge of the Governments concerned and without any regard for the most fundamental human rights, including that of the physical safety of present and future generation.
This whole problem can be pondered in the form of single question: Why is all this tremendous pursuit necessary? It is hard enough for us in the South to cope with natural disasters, including long droughts, devastating floods and epidemics that dominate the world news. But unfortunately our friends in the North choose to aggravate our problems by creating additional plagues that destroy our ecological system and our human resources and undermine our ability to move forward towards a better future.
In this connection, I should like to take this opportunity to outline a three-point plan of action:
First, we call upon creditor nations to meet to examine the question of writing off the interest due on their loans to the debtor countries. This should be coupled with giving up a portion of the loan principal due from the poorest group of debtor nations. Kuwait, as a creditor country, stands ready to attend such a meeting and is willing to comply with whatever resolutions might be adopted in this respect. In our view, such an initiative represents a far better approach to addressing the matter in a more practical and effective way than leaving it to be resolved on the basis of the demands of the debtors. It also has merit in view of the divergent views of the creditors themselves. We believe that, if carried out, this proposal would benefit the debtor countries by helping them implement their development projects, and would have a broad positive impact on economic and social activities in both creditor and debtor countries.
Secondly, we call on the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank to reconsider their stringent conditions affecting States seeking development assistance from them. We call for amendments introducing greater flexibility and taking the humanitarian factor more into account, both to reflect differences among States and to suit the conditions prevailing in debtor nations. Ultimately, this would strengthen their development efforts.
Therefore, we call for expansion and regulation of North-South scientific and technical assistance. Human resource development in this context is extremely important, for without it mathematical statistics lose much of their significance. Eventually, this will lead to concerted efforts at short-term and long-term conservation of natural and human resources. It will reinforce action to combat pollution and promote and expand development plans. Thus, science will be used once more as a tool for rehabilitation, construction and progress rather than as an instrument of destruction and decadence.
The inhabitants of the North and of the South are in fact brothers who just happen to live in different places; they all live within the framework of a single human family. Civilized co-operation is a most desirable -convergence of North and South and should presage the dawn of a new era of genuine universal brotherhood.
If some of us continue to speak of the natural resources of some countries in the South and to the world's oil producing areas, we must remember these basic facts; that oil is a non-renewable natural resource; that scientific research for alternatives to oil continues unabated; and that the use of oil is but one phase in the long history of energy. Therefore, the most promising hope for the oil-producing countries lies in the constant improvement of the scientific and technical capabilities of present and future generations, for true wealth is found in the human intellect, which lends itself to infinite expansion and refinement.
Through science and co-operation in the framework of a new international economic and humanitarian order, we all hope that with help from Allah the Almighty we shall be able to defeat poverty and starvation and shall be better prepared to confront changes in the physical world and to make increasing contributions towards global intellectual innovation. That is the real insurance policy for generations to come.
As we look forward to the establishment of a new economic and humanitarian order, it is the duty of us all to co-operate in combating the terrorism that has mushroomed in various places, regardless of its causes, methods or goals. Vie should work together to enforce proper effective legislation against terrorism so innocent human lives do not become a commodity subject to bargaining under threat or blackmail or in the context of unjust commercial transactions.
We in Kuwait are in the forefront of the community of nations when it corner to condemning terrorism. We have suffered from that plague and have managed, with the help of Allah the Almighty and with the solidarity of the Kuwaiti people, to withstand its evils. When a Kuwaiti civilian jetliner was hijacked last April, the international community rendered its support to us, which strengthened oar will and determination to weather the storm. We acknowledge that help with deep gratitude and appreciation.
But we must draw a clear line between oppressive terrorism carried out openly or covertly by individuals, groups and States on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the legitimate right to self-defence and national defence and resistance against suppression and oppression, as provided for in universal covenants and international law.
That brings me to the issue of human rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the most remarkable achievement of the United Nations system. But it is too often tarnished by acts of aggression. Therefore, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights must be scrupulously preserved and protected by the double power of conscience and the force of law.
Despite all the efforts of the international community and the elaborate covenants adopted by the United Nations in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and despite the universal consensus on the need to promote human dignity, we still feel the presence in certain places of a force coming against the tide of history. This takes the form of attempts to usurp the rights of others and to commit unjust acts against them.
This has created problems that we hope will be justly resolved so human energy can be mobilized for co-operation and building rather than for waste and conflict.
It has been the lot of the Islamic world to see within its lands a number of burning crises, most recently the Iran-Iraq war, the question of Palestine, the internal strife within Lebanon and acts of aggression against it, and the problem of Afghanistan.
The world has welcomed the acceptance by the Islamic Republic of Iran of Security Council resolution 598 (1987), which had been accepted earlier by sisterly Iraq, and the declaration of a cease-fire are the start of negotiations, which we hope will remain on course until all obstacles are cleared and the desired goals achieved. Resolution 598 (1987), in its paragraph 8, requests the Secretary-General of the United Nations to examine, in consultation with the States of the region, measures to enhance the security and stability of the region. The Co-operation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf always welcomes co-operation with the United Nations, as well as with Iraq and Iran, to restore security and a just peace to the Gulf region and to ensure freedom of navigation for all. The Council is in constant touch with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, as well as with the patties concerned.
The eight-year war, with all its sacrifices, has provided yet another proof that no matter how long hostilities might last, the belligerents will eventually have no option but coexistence, good-neighbourliness and co-operation in promoting life, while showing respect for the national sovereignty and independence of every State, and for the system of government it has chosen for itself. The peace sought warrants sincere efforts, free of any side issues that cannot be substantiated by concrete evidence, for to raise such side issues would be to create obstacles that would impede the long-awaited peace for which we have all been yearning and divert attention from the acts of aggression committed against a defenceless people by the Israeli entity in utter disregard of human rights and international norms and instruments.
The Palestinian uprising, with all the suffering involved and its noble goals, is a subject of daily discussion in the international mass media. The Palestinians are defending their land right there on their own soil: they did not leave their homes to fight against anyone. The Palestinian uprising represents the 40-yeat-long pursuit of a legitimate right.
I now address peoples and friends represented in this Hall, and ask them: did you not fight for your independence and drive invading armies out of your  territory? Did you not engage in secret and open resistance and attain your independence by virtue of your valour? Is it then surprising that youth, women and children with virtually nothing at their disposal but the mere stones of their land should use them to demand their legitimate rights and to reject life in their homeland under Israeli oppression and brutalities?
All the Palestinian people is demanding is its independent state on its own land, with its capital in Jerusalem, under the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), its sole legitimate representative.
All sitting in this Hall have a homeland and a house to live in. We all carry passports and know where to be safe following our meetings here; we all look forward to being happy with our families at the end of the day. The Palestinian people demands nothing more than we all have.
I should like to put on record our appreciation for the position taken by the European Community on the Middle East problem. The Community's approach is based on dialogue with all the peace-seeking parties. Accordingly, the socialist group within the European Community invited brother Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO, to address the European Parliament early this month. It also provided him with an opportunity to meet and deliberate with senior Community officials.
It is our hope that, similarly, fresh and favourable winds will blow across the Atlantic Ocean and reach the New World, which we hope will be able to pay more heed to the righteous Palestinian voice and to demonstrate open-mindedness and tolerance in dialogue with Palestinian intellectuals and legitimate representatives, and to express in stronger terms its condemnation of the Israeli atrocities against the Palestinians. We look forward to the time when fie issue of human rights is raised to its proper status, when human rights are a haven built on solved cock and not subject to election campaigns and promises made in pursuit of victory in an election year - promises made even at the expense of justice for other peoples and their right to self-determination.
France gave as a gift to the New World the Statue of Liberty, which stands as a symbol of hope for newcomers, We hope the torch atop that statue will continue to burn in the minds and hearts of men and women and not lose its lustre by becoming a mere historic site lacking real meaning as a source of inspiration.
With regard to Lebanon, one of the bitter results of the Israeli invasion of that land is the current turbulent situation there, which has fuelled violent religious, factional and regional conflicts.
The wholesome life of our brothers and sisters in Lebanon stands no chance of continuity without national unity and coexistence among all Lebanese factions. Lebanon's future must be determined entirely by the Lebanese themselves. The occupation forces of the Israeli entity must withdraw from the Lebanese territory they occupy under the pretext of security invoked to justify any act of aggression and expansion.
If some positive steps have been taken towards resolution of the Afghanistan issue, the compliance by all parties concerned with the terms and conditions of the agreement reached represents the right approach and will guarantee a safer and more secure future in which the people of Afghanistan will determine their way of life and the nature of their relations with their neighbours, of their own free will and without pressure from outside.
In the same spirit we welcome the recent steps taken in Namibia and Angola, We hope that the efforts being made will be sustained until Namibia attains free and independent statehood under the leadership of the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO),
The Pretoria Government, however, continues to live under the illusion of racial superiority that has been unanimously condemned by the scientific and religious communities, as well as by international organizations that defend freedom of conscience against injustices and gross violations of human rights of the kind committed by Pretoria.
The repulsive racial discrimination laws currently enforced by the Government of South Africa flout the dignity of the African person in his native homeland and deny him his historic and de facto rights. The body of apartheid laws must be annulled. We maintain that legitimate rights must sooner or later be attained.
At this point we should like to join all those throughout the world calling for the freedom of the African national Leader Nelson Mandela, who valiantly struggles for the right of his fellow countrymen to achieve national dignity, and for that reason suffers oppression and the harshness of gaol.
From this rostrum, we salute that hero and other freedom fighters everywhere in the world”. We want to reassure them and to tell them of our confidence that there will be a better tomorrow and the sun of freedom will shine, and vicious oppressors will never stop that from happening.
It is our hope that stability will prevail in South-East Asia and between the two Koreas, as well as in the Caribbean region, and that East and West, North and South will work together to build the desired economic and humanitarian system.
Regardless of the origins of the regional conflicts I have mentioned, it is the human being who ignites the spark of war. It is also the human being who is the fuel of war. In the final analysis, war represents the ultimate violation of human rights. Thus, ending any war represents a major victory for the cause of those rights.
I have come here to convey to the Assembly greetings of peace from over 1,000 million Moslems living in all corners of the globe. We come extending a hand of brotherhood in the hope that present and future generations of mankind will enjoy increased prosperity, harmony, co-operation and peace.
Each and every large human community, Muslim or otherwise, has its own problems and its awn aspirations. We have come here to co-operate with members in addressing our common problems and in seeking fulfilment of our common aspirations.
In conclusion, I should like to pay tribute to the General Assembly and the Security Council for all the resolutions and decisions they have adopted in order to reaffirm legitimate rights and to open doors to reconciliation and peace.
To you, Mr. President, and to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and his staff, we should like to express our thanks and appreciation for all the efforts that have been made and continue to be made in the interest of peace and for the settlement of conflicts and disputes by means of wisdom and dialogue.
Tribute is also due to the world mass media for focusing attention on human-rights issues. Special mention should be made of the media's live coverage of the Palestinian uprising and the resistance to racial discrimination in South Africa.
To all distinguished representatives and guests present here, I should like to extend thanks on behalf of the Islamic world and in the name of Kuwait and in my own name for their kind attention.
May I ask all members to convey to their respective Governments and peoples our sincere greetings and appreciation.
I, for my part, shall convey to my people in the Islamic and Arab world, as well as in Kuwait, the sentiments of friendship and welcome I have received from you. God bless you and may He bring peace, mercy and grace upon all of you.


Mr. President, I am delivering this statement on behalf of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Malta Mr. Vincent Tabone. Unfortunately unforeseen circumstances did not permit my Foreign Minister to be in New York at this time and he has requested me to convey his sincere regret for not being able to deliver this address in person as he had intended.
Although I am addressing the General Assembly late in the course of the general debate  my congratulations to you on being elected to the presidency of the Assembly are no less warm and genuine than those of all the preceding speakers. Your excellent credentials  your vast experience in the field of international diplomacy as well as your skill and leadership assure us of a fruitful session. Our appreciation and thanks go also to the outgoing President,
Mr. Peter Florin, the Deputy Foreign Minister of the Ger roan Democratic Republic, for the way he led the Assembly during the past 12 months.
A year ago the Prime Minister of Malta, in his first address to this General Assembly, confirmed Malta's confidence "in the role that the United Nations has to play in the maintenance of peace in the world, the enhancement of security for each and every Member State, the substitution of dialogue and negotiations for armed conflict, and the encouragement of co-operation at all levels and across the barriers of race, ideology, size, power and wealth for the welfare of mankind." (A/42/PV.32, p. 58)
Twelve months later we can look on the intervening period as one in which the United Nations has demonstrated as never before that it is capable of rising to the expectations that its founders placed in it. As we speak of the organization we should not lose sight of the fact that we are, by and large, speaking about its Member States, because the Organization is what we make it. Many things have changed over the recent past and each one, in its own way, may have had an effect on the improved situation. But when all is said and done it is not the Organization or the world around it that has changed but our perception, our values, our confidence, our readiness to stretch out our hands to help each other. There is no reason why we should look back. The more we put into this Organization by way of support and faithfulness, the more we get out of the United Nations.
I would be failing in my duty if I were not to underline the indefatigable efforts of our Secretary-General, Me. Javier Perez de Cuellar, to ensure that the efforts of the United Nations for peace bear fruit. We refused to be daunted by the difficulties in front of him, and his perseverance and faith in the goodwill of negotiators succeeded in several instances which had defied solution over very long years. The greatest tribute and thanks that we can render him is to facilitate his task through greater co-operation and trust among each other.
It was therefore very apt that the United Nations peace-keeping forces should become the recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize this year. The role of these forces usually remains unsung, but their very silent performance is their very strength. It is well that we should be reminded that there are States and people facing risks in areas of conflict which are not their own - that is, looking from a very narrow geographic point of view, for after all we all live in the same world and there is hardly any conflict that may not engulf other bystanders.
Even in moments such as this, when we share our satisfaction at the role of the United Nations and its peace-keeping forces, we cannot but be reminded that there are still many areas where peace does not reign as yet. The military United Nations peace-keeping force has still to be replaced by stronger and more lasting forces forged across the negotiating table in the realization that it is in the common interest of our peoples to arrive at solutions peacefully.
My Government does not miss an opportunity to stress the common responsibility in this respect of all States, and to urge that all our actions and public pronouncements should have as their end the drawing together of peoples, the solution to conflicts, the generation of co-operation. We cannot, with a sense of responsibility, concentrate on condemnations, accusations and negative pronouncements which tend to heighten tension and stiffen attitudes rather than bring together the parties that roust live together in peace.
The developments in the international situation over the recent past should encourage all of us to have more faith in the process of negotiation. This Assembly has heard over and over again of these positive developments and I need not go into great detail. I shall simply list them because the list is indeed impressive, especially when compared with the failures of the past. We note the Geneva accords on Afghan is tan ţ the cessation of hostilities between Iran and Iraq and the start to a negotiated peace the agreement on the implementation of a peace plan for Western Sahara; the renewed inter-communal talks in which the encouraging movements towards the implementation of the independence plan for Namibia; the rapprochement among the parties involved in the Kampuchea question; the positive measures taken by the parties concerned in New Caledonia; the opening of new avenues of peace between Chad and Libya; and the declarations from both sides in favour of the reunification of Korea. Even in southern Africa there seem to be the first indications of a movement towards a change.
But, of course, the agreement between the United States of America and the Soviet Union which heralded the first steps in the dismantling of the iv nuclear arsenals, the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles - the INF Treaty - was without a doubt the most significant success which has encouraged all to realize that with goodwill, perseverance and mutual confidence what had been considered impossible becomes possible after all. We note with satisfaction that these two nations have not stopped at that point but, encouraged by what they have achieved, have embarked on further negotiations aimed at more significant reductions in their nuclear arsenal.
These positive developments have not been mentioned by the various speakers without a sense of realism that makes us all aware that there are still problems, very serious ones, that still defy solution in spite of efforts from a number of well-meaning sources. The reasons for failure may be several, but if we analyse them we are sure to find that they do not differ essentially from the same reasons that held back progress and solutions on those problems where we are now registering success. It is attitudes that have to change.
Earlier this year we had the third special session of the General Assembly on disarmament, which held high promise of success - and indeed consensus was readied on some very important issues. However, on other issues, such as the arms race in outer space, disarmament and development, zones of peace and nuclear-weapon-free zones, no agreement could be readied. What was gained during that special session should not be allowed to evaporate; on the contrary, it should be preserved and developed end exploited in the hope that it will lead to agreement on a wider area. Malta made its studied contribution to that session and I need not go over the same ground at length.
I would, however, stress that we should not be carried away by slogans and Clichés but should remember at the same time that since the last world war any number of regional conflicts have been fought with conventional and not nuclear weapons, and that these have wrought havoc and death and caused tidal waves of human refugees  Let- not the awesome fear of a nuclear holocaust make us insensitive to the threat of other weapons. Disarmament must be all-embracing and balanced to ensure the security of all, where zones of peace and nuclear-weapon-free zones become credible and meaningful.
As an island State Malta cannot but pay special attention to the seas around us and the weapon systems that proliferate therein. It is with the aim of maintaining a balance that we urge that disarmament and confidence- and security-building measures should not be limited to the land masses only. We are not alone in stressing this point and we expect that due attention will be given to this aspect in international disarmament forums. No statement could possibly do justice to all the issues that are of interest to all Member States of the United Nations, and I shall definitely not try to do so. On the other hand, no statement would be complete without a reference to two problem areas that have been facing us for far too long without any real progress towards their solution. These are the question of apartheid in South Africa and the constant turmoil in the Middle East, where the Palestinians are still without a homeland of their own. Can the world, can the people in these areas, go on living in these conditions of strife, deprivation and death? Do we expect the deprived ones to accept with good grace the conditions imposed on them? Is there anyone who can really believe that in this era of awakened awareness of human rights a solution is possible without due regard to the cries of those who do not enjoy full rights in their own homeland? A change of attitude of the mind is required, a change which needs courage, foresight and faith, change as momentous as that which made the INF Treaty possible.
This year this Organization is commemorating the fortieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It would therefore be appropriate if we reaffirmed the pledge made 40 years ago, that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights, and worked with greater vigour to put that noble principle into practice for all peoples throughout the world.
Life is precious, but the quality of life is of no less importance. When one speaks of the quality of life one's mind may focus on a number of issues, but one which is very likely to be prominent is the degradation of the rational human being through an irrational dependence on dangerous or debilitating drugs. The international community recognized this danger long ago, and we have within the United Nations system the International Narcotics Control Board and a long-standing Convention to control the use of drugs. Regrettably, the abuse of drugs and illicit drug trafficking have become more widespread and are closely linked with international crime. The forthcoming Vienna conference of plenipotentiaries convened to adopt a new Convention against the illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances is therefore timely and important.
Development leading to better economic performance and an improvement in the way of life are generally acknowledged as valid national aims, which, however, can best be realized through international co-operation. There are still great inequalities between States and, let us admit it, within States. The reasons are numerous and spread in all directions. Any attempt to, reduce the complicated interplay in the world economy to simple stereotyped clichés is unrealistic; worse still, it is ineffective in offering a solution to those in need. The United Nations can also play a constructive role in this respect, especially through the intergovernmental agencies that deal with specialized economic and social human activity. National interests are bound to feature prominently in negotiations within these bodies, and, since intransigence at such meetings rarely leads to dramatic consequences like those in the field of security. State representatives tend to become less accommodating.
Even here a change of mind, a change of attitude, is called for. After the Second World War a far-sighted United States of America realized that a destroyed Europe could only breed strife and discontent. It realized that a healthy Europe could be a partner in economic development, and the Marshall Plan came into being. Everyone knows what a huge success the Plan turned out to be, to the benefit of both the donor and the recipient countries and to the world economy as a whole. Today the same situation can be said to apply with the developed countries on one side and the developing countries on the other. Stagnation in the world economy brings us all down, while the stimulus of actively developing economies presents opportunities to all. On the problem of massive national debts such an awareness is emerging, but there are other spheres where greater and more efficient international co-operation could alleviate the plight of developing States, to the benefit of economic development In general. Restrictions and other protective measures should be used sparingly.
The United Nations Development Programme is one very effective vehicle in the promotion of economic and social development. Malta has benefited from the Programme, and we are grateful for this. We urge that the funds at the disposal of the Programme be increased and that the criteria for establishing the national indicative planning figures be less tied to the criterion of gross national product per capita, which can be grossly misleading.
Many previous speakers have raised the question, in one way or another, whether economic development is compatible with the maintenance of a good quality of life. The fact that the question is being raised with greater frequency at national and international levels is an indication that development has, at times, led to a degradation in the quality of life. Often this was done without a full realization of the consequences. : As we come to understand the world around us better, and to appreciate nature's precarious balance, we come to realize that not all so-called progress is an unmixed blessing.
This is a new challenge to the world community, one which is gaining urgency as we realize that our environment is being adversely affected by human activity. It is unrealistic to expect that the solution lies in returning to the old days which are sometimes described in idyllic but incorrect terms. Many of the problems we face today have grown with us over the past decades. They grew as national policies were evolved either with an imprecise appreciation of the consequences or in a short-sighted assessment that the consequences could be blown away, literally, flushed down the drain, metaphorically, or buried - in someone else's back garden.
This is an area where, hopefully   traditional rivalries and groupings will not interfere in international co-operative efforts. The Mediterranean Action Plan, which grew out of the Barcelona Convention drawn up under the aegis of the United Nations Environment Programme; has demonstrated that human awareness can overcome political limitations. The Mediterranean Sea does not belong to any single State or group of countries, or indeed to the Mediterranean people alone. It belongs to all of us, and the onus falls mainly on the coastal States to ensure that it remains a healthy living resource for the benefit of them all. Other States which ply this sea or use it in one way or another, or affect its environment through discharges or activities which may initiate well beyond its shores, have the obligation to respect the concern expressed by the people in the area and to co-operate to the maximum extent possible.
I do not speak of the Mediterranean because it is a special area. It happens to be the area where Malta is situated; an area where the countries of the region are more actively involved in co-operative efforts to preserve the environment; an area which is of direct interest to many States outside the region; in short, an area which Illustrates the issues involved and indicates the way of co-operation at the regional level and beyond. Other regions are similarly placed.
Sometimes the problem which faces us is of even greater dimensions, where we have to think more in global than regional terms. Climate, or, rather, the way in which human activity can affect changes in the world climate in general, with consequences for the life we lead, the food we grow, the land we inhabit, the air we breathe, the light and warmth we need - all this is the concern of the human race as a whole. The problem itself is too big to be tackled piecemeal by individual nations. It is for this reason that Malta proposed that a new item be put on the agenda for consideration at this session of the General Assembly, and the fact that the proposal was unanimously accepted as a matter of urgency demonstrates that there is an awareness of the problem. In fact, there are already initiatives under way, and one cannot fail to mention the work of the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme within the framework of the United Nations system. There are also other national and international initiatives, especially at the scientific level, and we have had the formidable report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, under the chairmanship of Prime Minister Brundtland of Norway, which has rightly been praised by several speakers as a most important contribution to the issue before us.
The title of the new agenda item, "Declaration proclaiming climate as part of the common heritage of mankind", reflects the vastness of the problem and its importance to the human race, and indicates the positive action envisaged. Since the item will soon be discussed in detail, this is not the time to elaborate or to propose solutions. My delegation would only underline the need for as broad a study of the problem as is possible, given the resources of the United Nations, the intergovernmental agencies and other international and national specialized institutions, and the need for drawing up a co-ordinated plan of action which will serve as a guide to all of us in a co-operative action which will make national efforts more effective for the benefit of all mankind. This should not be a dream, it should be stark reality for ourselves, but more so for future generations. Past generations and civilizations have grown and died, some literally buried in sands where lushness existed before. Those people may not have realized what was going on and ascribed their fate to unfriendly gods. Today we know more - though we should be humble enough to admit that there is still more to be learned. We know at least that the gods that cause such dislocation as past generations experienced nay well be found not in heaven or Hades but here on Earth amongst us.
One cannot speak of future climatic changes that could affect our lives without a reference to the spate of unusual natural disasters that have afflicted so many parts of the world in recent months, with grave consequences to the people who have become victims to these forces that dwarf human efforts. Floods, winds, droughts, storms, earthquakes - all took their toll. The world as a whole is required to help not only to make good the damage and to rehabilitate life, but more effectively to understand the cause of such disasters and to prevent them or to minimize as much as possible the effects of such natural phenomena. We are convinced that efforts in the field of conservation of climate will produce side benefits which will also apply to situations such as these.
Our attention is often drawn to problems, conflicts and disasters that make us forget that there are also positive developments that require equal attention and encouragement. Most speakers - and I myself - have made reference to some major positive developments, but permit me to put cm record a few other, perhaps more modest developments with which Malta is more directly concerned.
As a participating State in the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE), Malta continues to co-operate with all the 34 member States, but more particularly with the participating neutral and non-aligned States on whom falls the unenviable task of trying to reconcile the initial distant views and interests of the other States without forgetting that they themselves have particular interests to safeguard. We are convinced that a positive end to the Vienna follow-up conference is now in sight. That should usher in a substantial programme of action that should consolidate co-operation and security, not only on the continent of Europe and the seas and regions immediately surrounding it, but in an even broader area as tensions and suspicion subside.
In the wider area of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries Malta is pleased to note that a wind of change is blowing that takes into account the changing international scene, where the traditional military-bloc confrontation is giving way to a realization that the common will calls for more co-operation than confrontation. The non-aligned countries of the world, whether members of the Movement or not, have a constructive and supportive role to play in this connection. All our efforts, all our pronouncements and our behaviour, should encourage this trend towards detente.
The Commonwealth is another group of nations that can - and does - contribute to greater international understanding and peace. Malta is pleased to participate in Commonwealth training programmes for students and refugees from Namibia and South Africa and proudly continues to offer scholarships for that purpose in its educational institutions. Conscious that out main resources are in the human field, we seek ways in which we can exploit them to our benefit and that of the international community. Earlier this year, following up the initiative taken by Malta in the United Nations on the question of aging, we opened in Malta the United Nations International Institute on Aging. We were gratified to welcome the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Javier Perez de Cuelar, on that occasion, thus further strengthening the agreement signed on 9 October 1987 between the Prime Minister of Malta and the United Nations Secretary-General.
On Saturday, 8 October 1988, the International Maritime law Institute was officially established in Malta. On that occasion we had the honour to receive His Excellency Chandrika P. Srivastava, Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), which has given its name and sponsorship to that initiative. The Secretary-General of the IMO, in officially declaring the Institute open, explained that the Institute would fill a void that has long been felt for the training of lawyers from developing countries in international maritime law.
In accordance with articles 276 and 277 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Government of Malta has taken the initiative of proposing the establishment, in Malta, of a Mediterranean centre for research and development in marine industrial technology, which would strengthen the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Malta already acts as host to the IMO Regional Oil Combating Centre. Both initiatives would bring together the resources of developed and developing countries for the benefit of all in the field of the transfer of science and technology. One of the most important decisions taken by the Heads of Government of the Commonwealth at their October 1987 meeting at Vancouver was the creation of a new Commonwealth institution to promote co-operation in distance education. Malta has offered facilities concentrating on marine studies and the problems of small States  and that offer has been accepted.
As a European country, Malta plays a role in that region as well. I have already referred to Malta's role in the region. At this moment it is also offering its services as Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Council of Europe. That task came at a propitious moment when that Council is giving more attention to greater co-operation and dialogue with European States that do not yet meet the criteria set up by the Council of Europe. The concept of a united Europe that stretches to the Urals is one in which Malta believes, and we will not lose any opportunity to explore avenues that could bring it nearer to realization.
In the meanwhile the process of closer co-operation and unity cannot be stopped  and Malta seeks to follow the natural course open to its that of strengthening its links with the European Economic Community. Within a few months the Government of Malta has cleared the deck of the accumulated debris that had stood in its way. That is not an end in itself  but a preparatory step for the next logical one namely an application for full membership in the Community.
That  in brief is the road of international co-operation that Malta has followed in the last few months. As a small island State in a sea that has seen the rise of one Power after another  Powers both military and cultural  we cannot but be aware of our openness and vulnerability. We believe that only unity and friendship can safeguard the peace that is necessary for development  for ordered development that does not overlook the quality of life. The task ahead is not easy  but we would submit that if the determination effort and sacrifice that most nations are willing to make in time of war, when the threat facing them is more dramatic, were to be directed with equal energy towards the pursuit of peace, we would be able to take the great strides that are required to make the difficult easy and the impossible possible.


It gives me pleasure to congratulate Mr. Dante Caputo on his election as President of this session of the General Assembly. Our pleasure is all the greater in view of the good relations between our two countries. We are fully confident that he will meet with success in conducting the proceedings of the General Assembly at this session, which faces many vital issues of concern to the international community.
I should also like to take this opportunity to express my deep appreciation of the efforts of his predecessor, Mr. Peter Florin of the German Democratic Republic, who so efficiently conducted the proceedings of the previous session with all of its important achievements.
Since 1980, our delegation has kept the General Assembly informed of developments with regard to the expansionist war of aggression that the Iranian regime imposed on Iraq. Every time we spoke from this rostrum, we stressed our desire for peace, our readiness for· peace and our resolute determination to achieve peace as strongly as we stressed our determination to continue the legitimate defence of our country's sovereignty, security, dignity and right to live a free and dignified life.
Finally, after eight years of imposed war, with all that that has entailed in terms of costly sacrifice in human life and in ruin and destruction, we find ourselves today at the beginning of the road to peace. The international community is no doubt interested in the negotiations that started on 25 August 1988 with a view to achieving peace  it is closely following their progress and their prospects. To do so with any degree of accuracy, however, it is necessary to review the background of recent events.
Security Council resolution 598 (1987) was adopted on 20 July 1987. Iraq officially welcomed the resolution just two days after its adoption. We stressed our willingness to implement it in good faith based upon our firm position of principle and desire for peace.
The Iranian regime, on the other hand, did not accept the resolution. It followed a policy of manoeuvring, dilatory tactics and procrastination. It devised such means of expressing its position on the solution as had been unprecedented in the history of dealing with Security Council resolutions. The intention was to cover up its actual rejection of the resolution, to justify its insistence on continuing the war against Iraq and on maintaining its policies of aggression against the countries of the region. In spite of the adoption of a resolution which expressed the will of the international community to establish peace, the Iranian regime continued to launch one military attack after another against Iraq. It occupied more Iraqi territory as well as an Iraqi city. Official statements by Iranian leaders confirmed the designs to enshrine the occupation and the insistence on the continuation of war and aggression. The Iranian regime continued to use the term "liberation" to describe the occupation. Operations they had conducted, thus confirming their ambitious designs on Iraq. The Iranian regime continued its acts of aggression against the countries of the region by carrying out military attacks on Kuwait, by threatening Saudi Arabia and other countries of the region, and by continuing to threaten freedom of navigation and attack neutral shipping.
Then came the turning-point. Our armed forces succeeded in liberating the Fao Peninsula from Iranian occupation in April of this year. This was followed shortly afterwards by the liberation of East Basrah, Shalamja, the Majnoon Islands, and the Zubeidat area. These valiant defensive military operations broke the back of Iranian aggression, and the Iranian regime's scheme against Iraq and the Arab Gulf States was frustrated. The illusions harboured by the Iranian regime to impose hegemony over the region vanished and its leaders reaped with their own hands the bitter harvest of their policies of aggression which were so opposed to the logic of history, to the values of the times and to the principles and rules governing international relations. It was in these circumstances of crushing military defeat that the leaders of Iran announced their acceptance of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) on 18 July 1988.
In spite of this fact, we dealt with the situation on the basis of our position of principle inspired by a desire for peace, and our actions were prompted by realistic considerations as well as ,by considerations of principle. With a view to taking the best course of action to achieve peace, I proposed in my letter of 20 July 1988 to the Secretary-General that direct official talks should be held between authorized representative5>of the two sides under the auspices of the Secretary-General in order to discuss and implement Security Council resolution 598 (1987).
This proposal was inspired by good faith and the pragmatic desire to ascertain directly the Iranian understanding of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) once the Iranian regime put forward contradictory interpretations of the resolution which were alien to the letter and spirit of it as well as to the concepts of international law and the rules governing relations between States in modern times.
It was Iraq's legitimate right to ascertain directly the true position of Iran. Any impartial observer who has followed the positions taken by the Iranian regime over the 10 years of its existence will have realized that the aims and slogans of the rulers of Iran have their basis in expansionism, aggression and ambitious designs, and will confirm that they do not believe in international law and the rules governing relations between States in our time. That is why the Iranian regime has rejected all resolutions and initiatives with regard to peace, from the very first resolution adopted by the Security Council on 28 July 1980 and for a whole year after the adoption of Security Council resolution 598 (1987), It has even rejected the principle of the peaceful settlement of the conflict and of the jurisdiction of the United Nations and other international organizations in the matter,. It was necessary, therefore, to ascertain the true intentions of the Iranian leaders in accepting Security Council resolution 598 (1987) ţ. for in accepting the resolution, Iranian leaders nay not have in mind belief in achieving a comprehensive and durable peace based on mutual respect for sovereignty, non-intervention in internal affairs and observance of the rules of international law in relations with Iraq and with the countries of the region. Serious suspicions with regard to the Iranian position are aroused by statements made by Iranian leaders to explain their decision to accept Security Council resolution 598 (1987).
The speeches and statements of the Iranian leaders have been full of references to compelling circumstances and to a predicament; the nature and causes of which they cannot disclose. They have talked with sorrow and disappointment about being forced to accept Security Council resolution 598 (1987). On the other hand, the Iraqi people and other peoples of the region have expressed their joy at the cease-fire because of their belief in peace as a way of life. All these facts, taken together, led Iraq to call for direct negotiations with a view to discussing face to face the steps towards peace and the concept of peace. This position is not intended as a condition, since direct negotiations do not constitute a unilateral advantage for Iraq at the expense of Iran.
In any case, in response to the desire of the international community for a speedy end to hostilities, President Saddam Hussein of Iraq announced on 6 August 1988 that Iraq was prepared to accept a cease-fire if Iran officially announced, with unambiguous clarity, its agreement to enter into direct negotiations immediately after the cease-fire so that we might discuss, reach agreement on, and implement Security Council resolution 598 (1987).
Following this historic announcement, which expresses the true character of Iraq's position and its sincere wish for peace, intensive contacts were made with the Secretary-General. On 8 August 1988, agreement was readied on the announcing of a date for the cease-fire. Agreement was also reached on the date, the bases and the objectives of the direct negotiations to be held between the two parties under the auspices of the Secretary-General, to that date, the Secretary-General addressed to the permanent representatives of the two countries a letter which I shall quote in full because of its importance for the events which ensued: "Excellency, "In pursuance of the official contact I had with Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Iran, I should like to inform you that both Governments have agreed that direct talks between their Foreign Ministers shall be held under ray auspices, immediately after the establishment of the cease-fire, in order to reach a common understanding of the other provisions of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) and the procedures and timings for their implementation."
This outline of the sequence of events will make it clear that the two parties readied agreement, through the Secretary-General of the United Nations, on setting a date for the cease-fire before there was full agreement on all provisions pertaining thereto. The cease-fire did actually take effect on 20 August in the form of the cessation of the shooting, and United Nations observers took up their positions before the detailed provisions and legal obligations relating to the cease-fire had been determined through the agreement of the two parties with the United Nations, It was only natural that the question should be taken up in the Geneva negotiations with a view to consolidating the cease-fire through a clear, definite understanding between the two parties under the auspices of the United Nations and then afterwards they would turn to discussing the other provisions of Security Council resolution 598 (1987),
Against this factual background, we began the direct negotiations in Geneva. In those negotiations Iraq demanded that the provisions and obligations of the cease-fire measures should be made clear and unambiguous so as to prevent different interpretations of them in the course of their future implementation and to ensure that the cease-fire would be a permanent state and constitute a sure step towards comprehensive and lasting peace. ·Iraq also demanded that these provisions and obligations, when implemented on land, in the air and at sea, should ensure equal benefits for the two parties since that would provide a guarantee for the enforcement of the cease-fire.
On this just and sincere basis, Iraq called for the inclusion of a clear provision on the principle of unobstructed freedom of navigation in international waters in the Arab Gulf and in the Straits of Hormuz for all shipping. This position of ours is based on the text of the Security Council resolution, which demands that a cease-fire be observed and that all military action on land, at sea and in the air be discontinued as a first step towards a negotiated settlement. We also base our position on the rule of balance of benefits. It is inconceivable that the provisions and obligations relating to the two sides should be detailed on land and in the air in such a manner as to ensure a balance of benefits for both parties, while at sea they should be impaired by a defect which tends to realize an advantage for Iran at the expense of Iraq because of Iran's geographic situation in the Arab Gulf and the Hormuz Straits.
Iraq also proposed that the United Nations be entrusted with clearing the Shatt-al-Arab and ensuring safe navigation therein, without prejudice to the legal status of the river.
The Shatt-al-Arab is Iraq's only outlet to the high seas. On account of the quantity of obstructions to navigation which have accumulated therein over the war years, the clearing operations will take a long time and will require the services of international experts and the availability of international funds. Since negotiations aimed at the achievement of a comprehensive and lasting peace and the solution of all outstanding issues between the two parties may take a not inconsiderable time, it stands to reason that advantage should be taken of that time to render the Shatt-al-Arab navigable.
These are the only two demands that Iraq made in the negotiations which took place in Geneva between 25 August and 13 September 1988. The Iranian conduct in the Geneva negotiations, however, has been characterized by evasiveness and has not conformed to what is right and just.
With regard to freedom of navigation in international waters in the Arab Gulf and the Hormuz Straits, the Iranian delegation alleged a right to control free navigation there through its claim to a right of search on the basis of interpretations which do not conform in any way to the collective security system as embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, and which disagree with both the letter and the spirit of resolution 598 (1987) and its objective of a comprehensive and lasting peace. It is clear that the interpretation maintained by the Iranian side is conceived in terms of a truce rather than in terms of the cease-fire being only a first step towards settlement, as provided by paragraph 1 of the resolution. This has increased our suspicions with regard to the intentions of the Iranian regime and its true aims in accepting resolution 598 (1987).
This suspicious position on the part of the Iranian delegation was followed by its insistence on provisions which impose a de facto arms embargo on Iraq at sea. Then Iran started to spread lies to the effect that Iraq was asking for free navigation in Iranian territorial waters, whereas the Iraqi demand was quite clear in calling for free navigation in international waters and through the Hormuz Straits. Furthermore, the Iranian delegation rejected the proposal that the United Nations undertake clearing operations in the Shatt-al-Arab at this stage and began to impose conditions inspired by a desire to blackmail and manoeuvre.
Iraq's demand that provision for free navigation and clearing operations in the Shatt-al-Arab be included in the cease-fire arrangements is nothing new. Iraq has taken this position and confirmed it repeatedly since our acceptance of resolution 598 (1987). We included that demand in our letter of acceptance of the resolution on 22 July 1987, and we confirmed the demand in the letter sent by President Saddam Hussein of Iraq on 6 August 1988, which paved the way for agreement on a cease-fire. We also confirmed it in two letters addressed to the Secretary-General, one on 20 July 1988, following Iran's acceptance of the resolution, and the other on 11 August 1988, after the date for the cease-fire had been set, prior to the Geneva negotiations. Iran's allegation that Iraq has imposed pre-conditions in the Geneva negotiations is a pure lie and deception. What we have demanded is documented in official letters, which have been circulated as part of the records of the Security Council. What we have demanded is just, legitimate and in conformity with the letter and the spirit of resolution 598 (1987) and its objective, namely, a comprehensive, lasting and just peace.
The international community and this Organization are called upon to make a true and fair evaluation of the respective positions taken in respect of the Geneva negotiations. Who is presenting legitimate and logical demands and propositions which are in conformity with the objective of peace, and who is engaging in evasiveness and in attempts to manipulate texts, and wants the situation to remain undecided?
Iraq's wish to reach a peaceful, comprehensive, just and durable settlement of the conflict with Iran is nothing new. This was our position when the war was imposed on us on 4 September 1980 and during the events which preceded and followed that date. Iraq continued to hold firmly to this position throughout the eight years of the conflict. Iraq dealt with the international Organization seriously and sincerely and accepted its resolutions in all circumstances, regardless of the developments of the military situation, beginning with resolution 479 (1980), of 28 July 1980, through the latest resolution of the Security Council, namely, resolution 598 (1987) which Iraq accepted immediately after it was adopted.
We confirm our desire and determination to implement resolution 598 (1987) in good faith, to move forward on the road to a comprehensive and lasting peace and to abide by the principles which govern peaceful and good-neighbourly relations between the countries of the world, particularly contiguous countries, in our time.
While intent on the peace process and the achievement of the objectives sought by the international community in adopting resolution 598 (1987), we must take into account a number of substantive questions if the peace is to be durable, comprehensive and just and if the region as a whole is to return to a state of peace and stability and continue to play its positive role in the international community.
The primary point, which we must always keep in mind, is that the Iranian regime did not accept resolution 598 (1987) willingly and voluntarily as a result of a deep, firm understanding of the necessity for a state of peace with Iraq and the countries of the region. It accepted the resolution only because of a crushing military defeat and in the context of a struggle for power inside Iran. While it is necessary to emphasize the opportunity provided by the cease-fire, all steps towards the implementation of resolution 598 (1987) should be well studied and well balanced so as to form the basis for the attainment of the objective of comprehensive and lasting peace. Any action that might undermine any of these elements would only encourage those who have made war their paramount cause and taken it upon themselves as their sole task to avoid abiding by the requirements of peace.
On the basis of this conception of the true meaning of peace, resolution 598 (1937) should not be regarded as merely a string of timings and procedures. Timings and procedures are necessary for the implementation of the resolution: there is no disagreement on that point. But what is more important is to reach common agreement on the meaning of the resolution, which may facilitate the achievement of lasting peace between the two sides, rather than to make of the resolution and the way it is to be implemented a political, as opposed to a Military, battleground. In the light of these facts, the best way to achieve understanding is to allow the two sides the opportunity to engage in direct negotiations, however prolonged such negotiations might be.
The role of the Security Council and the Secretariat is necessary and vital, and should be a part of the peace process from beginning to end. That role, however, must never be played at the expense of understanding between the two parties, because it is the two parties which will assume the responsibility of regulating their relations now and in the future.
Any pressures, whether created by political means or through the information media, that might disturb the atmosphere in which the negotiations are being conducted would not serve the cause of peace and could only be an expression of either misguided efforts or premeditated designs. We must refer here to the campaign launched against Iraq and timed to coincide with the beginning of the negotiations at Geneva. Zionist circles, which have allied themselves with the Iranian regime throughout the war years and have used all means to ensure continuation of the war, which is considered a gain for Israel - those are the circles that are at the root of the false allegations spread against Iraq. We hope that those peace-loving States that have nothing to do with the motives and aims of those designs will not allow themselves to be lured into the snares of those who have planned that malicious campaign. The aim of such campaigns is to encourage the Iranian regime to refrain from fully abiding by the requirements of peace and peaceful coexistence with Iraq and the countries of the region, as well as to encourage it to reject what is right and rational.
Those who have planned the campaigns have imagined that they could impose on Iraq an atmosphere of pressure and isolation that would force it to abandon its firm stand on its just and legitimate demands and to accept feeble solutions under pressure. They are only deluding themselves. Iraq is an independent State and enjoys complete independence in all fields, political, economic, social or military. Iraq cannot accept pressure from any quarter, especially now that its people have defended its cultural heritage, its humanitarian aspirations and its gains in a war that was imposed upon it, a war that has lasted for eight years, doing so through reliance on its own resources and its belief in the justice of its cause - peace.
Among the roost important foundations for the building of a just and comprehensive peace are the basing of relations between the countries of the region on equality and mutual respect and abandonment of ambitious designs and illegitimate privileges acquired through the use or threat of force, as well as abandonment of positions, tendencies and policies predicated on expansionism, on the implementation of hegemony, on aggression against others and interference in their affairs. Without those foundations there can be no real peace. Peace will remain a transient, nominal state in which matters stay quiet for a while only to explode into conflicts again.
We must state frankly that in the past a number of countries have tried to influence the course of the negotiations, not out of concern for peace, but because of their commercial and strategic interests and aims. They have sent direct and indirect signals to the Iranian regime towards taking certain stands with regard to the negotiations with a view to gaining commercial or strategic benefits in Iran. We knew the secrets of that game and we know who is playing it. We warn them that their game will not serve the cause of peace. We hope that States members of the Security Council and other States interested in peace and stability in the region will make sure that those playing that game will not be allowed to achieve their selfish aims.
The eyes of the world are turned towards the international community and the international Organization to see what they will do with regard to the Palestinian question. The just cause it involves has long awaited a solution that will secure the legitimate rights of the struggling Palestinian people. The world is today witnessing a horrible escalation of Zionist aggression against that people in which they are deprived of their rights, their land is occupied and brutal repression is exercised against them.
The Palestinian "intifada has crowned the 40-year struggle of the Palestinian people to attain their inalienable right to self-determination. That uprising constitutes a living, heroic example of the struggle of peoples for freedom and independence. It presents the United Nations with a unique opportunity to take the initiative and prove that it really upholds the principles upon which it was founded and is now ready to assume its responsibilities with a view to putting those principles into force. The United Nations is called upon, at this decisive stage in the history of the Palestinian question, to support the Palestine Liberation Organization, the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, as well as the decisions of the Arab summit meetings on the Palestinian question, especially those adopted at the Fez and Algiers summit meetings, which were based on international decisions.	'	.
We urge - nay, we demand - that the United Nations deal responsibly and seriously with the proposal of the Palestine Liberation Organization, included among the decisions of the Arab summit meeting at Fez, that the United Nations assume the administration of the occupied Palestinian territories for a specified period after the complete withdrawal of Israel therefrom and pending the achievement of self-determination by the Palestinian people in their own homeland. I should like to emphasize here that Iraq, with all its resources, is determined to stand beside the Palestine Liberation Organization and the brother Palestinian people to enable them to achieve their legitimate national aim of establishing their own independent State with Jerusalem as its capital.
The developments in the situation in Lebanon are causing us great concern. That little Arab country has suffered greatly from Israeli occupation and foreign intervention in its internal affairs. Occupation and intervention have so far prevented- the achievement of the wish of the majority of the Lebanese people to reach agreement on the desired national consensus. The latest result of that situation is the illegitimate and unacceptable outside interference in the presidential elections that has led to the suspension of the election of the President, thus creating an anomalous situation. The Arab countries, in the first place, and the international community, in the second, are called upon to take concrete and urgent step· to enable the Lebanese people to elect a President without outside interference. Such steps are essential to prevent further deterioration in the situation, to move towards national consensus and to restore security and peace to that sister country.
The peoples of the world are contemplating with optimism the atmosphere of détente which has started to prevail in relations between the two great Powers since the summit meetings held between the leaders of the Soviet Union and the United States of America and the agreements readied on limiting the arms race. Iraq has welcomed those encouraging developments. It has also welcomed the indications of improved prospects for the settlement of a number of regional conflicts that have been going on for years, including the situation in Namibia and Angola, the question of Kampuchea and the situation in Afghanistan. Iraq highly appreciates the role of the United Nations and its Secretary-General in resolving those conflicts.
Iraq, which has been a victim of aggression, sincerely believes in peace. It believes it is a necessity that the principles of peaceful coexistence, good-neighbourly relations and the negotiated settlement of disputes prevail in our affairs. It believes in strengthening the United Nations system and the sovereignty of the principles of the Charter and international law.