Mr. President, it is indeed a pleasure for me to associate myself with previous speakers in congratulating you on your election to the high office of the presidency of the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly. Your election is a tribute not only to you but also to your great country, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, whose role in world affairs is crucial, especially in the region from which you hall. Your assumption of office comes at a time when our Organisation is poised to gain a greater say in the management of world affairs. I should like at the outset to say that my country subscribes unreservedly to the view that the United Nations should assume broader responsibilities in global governance and must be given the financial, legal and political means to do so. We are confident that with your long political experience and extensive diplomatic skills you will provide welcome guidance and leadership to our deliberations in a period of global changes, which, however, remain fraught with uncertainties.
Your predecessor, Mr. de Marco of the island State of Malta, deserves out unreserved admiration and appreciation for the effective and wise manner in which he steered the United Nations General Assembly through a trying period. His contribution towards the strengthening of the Organization is highly commendable. During his term of office his initiatives in bringing the process of revitalization of the economic sector of the Organization to the forefront created a timely momentum for reform in an era when the United Nations is enjoying regained prestige.
I should also like to extend our warmest welcome and felicitations to the Governments and peoples of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands and the Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania on their accession to membership of the United Nations.
Permit me here to say a special word in respect of the two Koreas The path to the seats they proudly occupy in this family of Nations has been long, arduous and. often trying but they have found it possible to look far beyond and to set in accordance with the changing pattern of the times. Let me formulate the fervent wish of my Government and of the people of Mauritius to see them united, in the not too distant future, in accordance with the wish of their peoples.
If our Organisation is held in renewed respect today, it is In great part due to the ceaseless efforts of the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Peres de Cuellar, who, during the final tense years of the cold-war era, managed to keep vital channels of communication open in many areas of conflict and confrontation. As Mr. Peres de Cuellar arrives at the end of his second term we wish to tell him how grateful we all are for the excellent manner in which he has discharged his not always gratifying duties during his term of office. We wish him well in his future endeavours.
As we become engaged in the task of selecting the right man to step to the helm of the Organisation, it would perhaps be proper to remind ourselves that ours is a new era and that the first few steps therein have already been taken. The new Secretary-General will therefore have to tackle a different agenda and face new challenges as we move closer to the twenty-first century. At a time when one of the major concerns of mankind is to bridge the gap between the rich North and the poor South, it is fitting that the new Secretary-General should be a personality of the South and indeed from the African continent. It would perhaps have been more judicious for our continent to present one candidate but let us say that the multitude of candidates it has presented is an indication of the winds of change that have of late been blowing across the world. Be that as it may, the Organization deserves the best, for the challenges ahead are daunting and will require from our choice an elevated degree of excellence.
The attributes of the Secretary-General will require our attention. In effect, the present international context should enable the Secretary-General to assume greater autonomy and authority on any matter which may constitute a threat to the maintenance of International peace and security. We should be allowed to play a more active role in crisis-monitoring and preventive diplomacy, with the support and cooperation of the Security Council in accordance with Article 99 of the Charter, and thus enhance the effectiveness of the United Nations in dealing with international security problems and threats to peace, whether by mediation, enforcement measures or peace-keeping operations.
At the same time, judicious action is required to set in motion a reform programme for the Organization. Besides the support which the reform should provide for the expanding nature of the Secretariat's activities, the changes should also be such as to satisfy the aspirations of all Member States and be representative of their interests, particularly at the level of the Security Council.
The changing pattern of our times demands that such a reform be undertaken to consolidate the essential role of the United Nations in international issues, in the same way as the Non-Aligned Movement is readjusting itself to better address the challenges that face the world today. Its importance is crucial. Foremost among those challenges, in the view of my delegation, is the one issue on which global peace and security hinge - disarmament - an issue which, until very recently, some had the tendency to relegate to a lesser priority. However, like others who have preceded me in this Assembly, I hold the view that disarmament should continue to occupy the forefront of our concerns and not be pushed to a back-seat position. Disarmament is not an easy objective, but it is one that demands re-invigorated attention, one that calls for new thinking and fresh initiatives, like indeed those we have had the immense pleasure in witnessing these past few days.
Here I would like to pay special tribute to the Plan of Action proposed by the late and sorely missed Rajiv Gandhi to the Third United Nations Special Session on Disarmament in June 1988, advocating a calendar of actions that would have culminated in the elimination of all nuclear weapons in 22 years from then, that is, effectively in the year 2010.
I should also like to recall the fillip given to the process of disarmament by President Mitterrand last June, when he rightly stressed in his plan for global disarmament the need for new thinking regarding the nuclear-weapons board in response to the events overrunning the world. His call then for the formulation of new rules to guarantee global security should not be left unheeded.
And then, in these last few days, this issue has been given a breath of fresh air by the courageous and highly commendable announcement by President Bush. His initiatives to reduce the nuclear weaponry of the United States are built on a new defence strategy that, as he himself put it, shifts the focus of the United States away from the prospect of global confrontation. No sooner had this significant and most positive stride been made than it was matched by an equally formidable announcement, made by President Gorbachev last week-end, which clearly demonstrated that a turning-point in the peace process had been reached. With this good news for the whole world, as President Bush put it, we fervently hope that is the days to come further events will confirm that a disarmament race is now on. These announcements, coming so soon after the recent historic, although limited, START agreement has indeed rekindled the flame of hope in one and all, and this is why we insist that the disarmament issue should continue to occupy a prominent place on our agenda.
More than anything else, three recent events this year had helped to strengthen my conviction in this regard even before President Bush and President Gorbachev had made their initiatives known to the world.
Firstly, never since the Second World War has the threat of regional nuclear conflagration been so much in the realm of reality as during the Gulf war. At that time, we learned in a very matter-of-fact manner that nuclear warheads from cruise missiles that had been off-loaded at Clark air base in the Philippines had to be shipped out through Subic Bay naval base in all urgency as Mount Pinatubo erupted violently, and not only sounded the death-knell for the air base, but also made a nuclear accident more than a remote possibility.
And, even more recently, during the unfurling of the dramatic and tense events in the Soviet Union, when a group of ill-advised persons tried to halt and indeed reverse the march of history, doubt was expressed as to whether control over the Soviet nuclear weaponry was still in the rightful hands. International peace and stability appeared to rest with a group of adventurers, as President Gorbachev and President Yeltsin of Russia termed the perpetrators of the failed coup attempt in the Soviet Union.
Clearly, the world needs to be reassured that it can lead its God-given life fully and not be held to ransom by possible man-made disasters. And that is why, while we welcome most heartily President Mitterrand's call for a meeting of the four nuclear Powers that have a presence in Europe, we believe it is equally important that the nuclear arms reduction talks should involve, as soon as possible, all five permanent members of the Security Council, and that they fix as their goal complete nuclear disarmament. That goal is indeed already provided for in the preambles to both the 1963 partial test ban Treaty and the 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
In the same breath, let us commit ourselves not to take the nuclear arms race into outer space. Already, we shudder at the mere thought of so many nuclear warheads dispersed across our planet. Let us therefore contain ourselves and not export into space what we pride ourselves in calling our mastery of scientific technology, but which can as well be described as our propensity to self-destruction.
While on the subject of disarmament, may I refer again to that most important pillar of the present nuclear non-proliferation regime, the NPT, which will come up for renewal in 1995. My delegation takes great satisfaction in the knowledge that at long last both France and China have declared their intention to accede to the Treaty, and we commend them for this commitment, the more so as France stated in this very forum only a few days ago that it will deposit the necessary instrument of adhesion before this year is out.
Hearer Mauritius, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia have already acceded to the Treaty. But then, our concerns over the loopholes in the Treaty have been further accentuated by the evidence brought to light recently in Iraq, confirming the fact that certain countries continue to contravene their treaty and safeguards obligations in order to embark on a hidden agenda of nuclear activities. My appeal is that we should all strive hard to plug all loopholes and to give the Treaty the non-discriminatory universality it calls for. To that end, the Assembly will recall that Mauritius has proposed, together with Egypt, an informal dialogue between the States parties and the States not parties to the NPT before it comes up for renewal in 1995. He should, however, like to appeal urgently to set the ball in motion as of now. He cannot afford to waste any time.
Impassioned as we are with the objective of complete nuclear disarmament, my country, Mauritius, has also proposed a South-West Indian Ocean and Southern Africa Nuclear-Free-Zone Treaty along the lines of the 1985 South Pacific Nuclear-Free-Zone Treaty. Already, we have obtained the full support of some of the countries directly involved in the area identified, among which I should like to mention Zimbabwe, Madagascar, Seychelles and the Comoros. Mauritius looks forward to discussing this proposal soon with post-apartheid South Africa. While the declaration of nuclear-free-zones per se is no universal panacea to the ills that are engendered by nuclear weapons, it is our firm belief that such momentum in the creation of these zones around the world, for example, in the Middle East, in our region and in the Korean peninsula, is conducive to global security, which remains our ultimate goal.
As regards chemical weapons, my delegation supports the views already expressed here to the effect that every effort should be undertaken to meet the target data of 1992 for the completion of a comprehensive chemical weapons treaty. In this context, I should like to endorse Australia's proposal for a meeting of the Geneva Conference on Disarmament at the ministerial level so as to resolve outstanding Issues and provide the impetus required for the negotiations.
I should also like to welcome the positive conclusions reached a few days ago in Geneva at the Third Review Conference of the Biological Weapons Convention. Such conclusive actions augur well for the future.
Finally, one last item on this issue that calls for our attention is the stockpiling and production of conventional weapons. Mauritius endorses the call for a register of sales of arms to be kept at the United Nations.
While we also subscribe to the call that the developing countries should reduce military budgets as appropriate, it is equally my strong view that the major arms-producing and developed countries should restrain their weapons production and likewise reduce their military spending. The peace dividend will increase and, on both counts, it will mean a release of funds and resources that can thus be channelled towards the economic and social well-being of those in need around the world.
Secondly, the new order should address the problem of the economic and social development of all countries. It therefore becomes Imperative to address the glaringly visible gap between the North and the South, reflecting affluence on one hand and abject poverty and deprivation on the other.
A fundamental goal of the United Nations is to bring about the peaceful resolution of conflicts. Its efforts in that regard were long encumbered by the cold war, which more often than not fanned the flames of war in various regions. The conflicts in those regions made it attractive for massive quantities of sophisticated weapons to be transferred, by all camps, to fragile States and areas of tension in the third world. Arms transfers became lucrative business for the developed countries which have the technology and resources to produce weapons. The readiness of the developed countries to provide developing countries with armaments contrasts very sharply with their response to similar requests for the transfer of financial resources and technology for the purpose of development. It is our hope that, in the light of recent developments, that trend will be reversed and that our appeals for economic transformation will be responded to with vigour and imagination.
Many speakers have supported the proposal for a register of international transfers of conventional weapons. That proposal is appealing. In our view, for such a register to be meaningful it must be balanced and transparent. It must also cover the producer countries and provide a country-by-country inventory of all armaments produced, stockpiled or transferred. Furthermore, transparency should encompass information on state-of-the-art technology in the military field, as this would engender confidence and alleviate the fear of surprises. It should also be possible to set up an inspection mechanism for verification of such a register.
I need not repeat that my country's concerns for the preservation of the environment encompass the absolute necessity of ensuring that nothing is done that will continue to bring about the ecological deterioration of our coastal areas and our oceans, which provide a means of livelihood to millions of people across the world. Indeed, we should show no mercy to those who irresponsibly and deliberately pollute our planet on land, at sea or in space.
We have witnessed that collective action in many fields bears positive results, no matter how tough the problems may appear. Similarly, on the economic front, it is my country's firm belief that concerted action between the North and the South is imperative if the developing South can ever aspire to emerge from the economic morass in which it has been struggling for ever so long. For let us not forget that economic stability is also a fundamental prerequisite of global security. The debt-ridden countries need to be given more than a breathing space. Yet again, some new thinking will have to go into how best to bridge the gap between the rich North and the poor South.
When one talks of debt, the main focus of attention automatically turns to Africa. The plight of millions of our brothers and sisters on that continent can be described as one of gloom if not yet of doom. The breakthrough in food production that was expected during the 1980s has eluded Africa. Population has continued to grow despite some courageous attempts at initiating population control programmes and at sensitizing African public opinion to the burden an unbridled population growth imposes on the economy. The United Nations Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development has not lived up to expectations. The 1980s have indeed been a lost decade for Africa.
What then needs to be done? Or, to look at it from another angle, has everything that needs to be done been done? Is it sufficient for us to participate in conferences and seminars and go back home happy to have made a resounding speech or indeed content with the fact that we have placed the blame for our problems squarely at the feet of others? Indeed no. Our intentions and pronouncements need to be translated into concrete action. We owe it to future generations to leave behind a world free from want, a world free from disease, a world where peace, liberty, social justice and economic well-being will be the basic ingredients of life.
I believe that it is within our grasp to achieve this kind of world. All we need to do is to look to ourselves and start by taking the bold steps that the circumstances dictate. While the rich North should act beyond its present commitment to alleviate the burden of the South, the developing countries should start by cleaning their doorsteps and putting their houses in order. Economic waste and corruption need to be eradicated. Debtor States need to have the courage to implement economic reforms and to strive for the most efficient management of their resources. My country believes that, in this respect as well, the United Nations can play a fundamental role in harnessing all the ideas and possibilities that abound for improving the situation.
On the political front, the innovative operations pioneered over a year ago during the elections in Namibia have set the pace for United Nations involvement in other parts of the globe. The United Nations has made positive contributions, particularly in Central America, Afghanistan and Cambodia. It is now engaged in preparing a referendum in Western Sahara, where Mauritius, along with other Member States, is honoured to have been given the opportunity to serve the cause of peace and democracy. Mauritius will not hesitate to condemn any attempt to forestall the implementation of the United Rations plan of action for Western Sahara.
Talking of democracy brings me to the fact that we in Mauritius, less than a month ago, went to the polls for the fifth time since our independence in 1968. If I venture to mention this here, it is to emphasize how we in Mauritius are firm believers in the process of democracy, a system the shortcomings of which are negligible in the face of the multifarious advantages it brings to the people in the conduct of State affairs and indeed in the economic well-being of our nation globally. We are staunch proponents of the philosophy that there is no meaningful and fruitful development without democracy. And I would like to make so bold as to appeal to those of our sister nations which are still hesitant about the democratic adventure not to resist the thrust of history but rather to give it a try and enjoy its thrills. The system has worked marvellously well in my country and elsewhere. There is no reason why it should not bear the same fruits universally. With it comes the added dividend of peace.
The end of the cold war has created new opportunities for the resolution of conflicts in which the United Nations will be associated in one way or another. We are pleased to see that Cambodia has resumed its seat in the General Assembly and that one of the long-standing regional conflicts may soon, we hope, be resolved under the aegis of the United Nations.
With this trend of successes, it is but highly desirable that our Organization be allowed to play its rightful role in the Middle East peace process. I have no doubt in my mind that the United Nations will play a catalytic role in bringing about a just and peaceful solution to the area and thus, on the one hand, alleviate the plight of the Palestinian people, and on the other resolve the security problems of the region. I must commend here the untiring and ceaseless efforts being deployed by the United States to bring all parties concerned to the conference table. The position of Mauritius is very clear. We recognize the right of Israel to exist within secure boundaries just as we uphold the struggle of the Palestinians for a State of their own. In this regard we have noted with satisfaction the decision of the Palestinian National Council for effective Palestinian participation in the peace process. Genuine Palestinian representation in this process cannot but be conclusive. In keeping with the evolution of the situation, Mauritius is prepared to go along with a move to rescind resolution 3379 (XXX) equating Zionism with racism on the strict understanding that the Palestinian people's right to statehood be recognized and that Arab lands are not "up for grabs" in the name of any expansionist ideology. It will indeed be to the credit of the leaders of the region to sit at the conference table alongside the other interested parties and the United Nations and to remove from the international agenda the major remaining area of tension and conflict.
Similarly, my delegation will continue to support all moves by our Organization aimed at finding an equitable solution to the Cyprus issue in strict respect of its sovereignty. The issue o£ sovereignty brings me to the fact that Mauritius is itself still struggling to regain its sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, a cause which I believe should be supported by the Assembly in its entirety, considering the stand taken by the world community in the recent Gulf Crisis on, precisely, an issue of sovereignty. With the advent of the new era to which I have already referred, it should be possible for the past colonial Power to come to terms with the present situation and acknowledge the sovereignty of Mauritius over the Chagos Archipelago. It is also the fervent wish of my Government that nothing should be done by any party concerned to aggravate this issue any further, especially as concerns the extension of territorial waters.
At the same time, let me reiterate the faith of my Government in the efforts being made by the Ad Hoc Committee on the Indian Ocean for the convening of a United Nations Conference on the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace. In this respect my delegation would like to place on record its deep appreciation for the selfless dedication and untiring determination of the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka. The prominent role played by this sister-island State in such a laudable venture is all the more appreciated considering that it is itself caught in an unfortunate web of violence which continues to take its toll of human lives in the conflict involving the Tamil minority. My Government hopes that a peaceful political solution to the problem will be found very soon.
Nearer us, in South Africa, Mauritius welcomes the recent peace accord signed by the De Klerk Government, the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC), Inkatha and others to curb violence in the country. In effect we see this move as a major step forward towards an end to the ongoing violence thereby creating the right conditions for the ultimate eradication of apartheid. Mauritius expects President de Klerk to do everything possible to stop this violence and ensure the impartiality of the security forces
I should like to stress that the major event we in Mauritius expect to take place shortly in South Africa is the multiparty Conference which will pave the way for a post-apartheid constitution. Mauritius will establish full diplomatic relations with South Africa once a post-apartheid constitution will have been adopted, and we believe that this should be sooner rather than later.
But is it not a paradox that at a time when apartheid is being dismantled at one end of the world, a constitution with racist attributes unfortunately continues to prevail in Fiji? Mauritius has no intention to interfere in the internal affairs of any State and it is not in our habit to do so. However, at the risk of sounding self-praising, let me say that Mauritius is a multiracial country where everyone has his rightful place under the sun and where everyone enjoys his civic rights indiscriminately. This harmony works wonders for our prosperity. We believe the same could be achieved in Fiji and we would therefore like to appeal to our brothers there to redress the situation by amending the present Constitution as required and in a manner that would no longer warrant the boycott by any political force of general elections. Fiji, this otherwise gem of an island in the Pacific, owes it to itself and to its image to rectify its path and make it possible for us to welcome Fiji anew and with open arms in such forums as the Commonwealth.
There still remain, across the world, quite a few pockets of tension and conflicts. It is the hope of Mauritius that peace will be brought to bear in such places as Mozambique, with which Mauritius so proudly has blood relations, and the countries in the Horn of Africa, so that resources, both human and material, could be fully geared towards their economic advancement.
I cannot close this chapter without adding the voice of Mauritius to those who have condemned in the strongest possible terms, the coup d'etat perpetrated by the army in Haiti and appealing to those responsible to restore the country to its legitimate rulers.
In all the political issues I have just mentioned, an active role can be perceived for the United Nations. Some would dispute such a view but since our Organization is being called upon to assume greater importance in a changing international environment and an increasingly interdependent world, the extent of its new role should be reassessed, inasmuch as we are prepared to challenge the established doctrines of power politics - which have dictated so far how global affairs were regulated - and consider a more appropriate framework for relations among nations.
Recent events in the Gulf have demonstrated that the United Nations remains the optimal recourse for restoring stability and peace. If indeed the end of the Cold War has brought about new identity of views and interests between major Powers, thus removing the greatest obstacles to global cooperation, then the ability of the United Nations to promote peace and security through collective measures should be strengthened.
The stage has been set for such a course of action to be taken. I believe that time is of the essence and we should act accordingly.


I offer my warm congratulations to Ambassador Samir Shlhabi and to his country, Saudi Arabia, on his election to the office of President of the General Assembly. We are pleased that his experience and skill will guide our deliberations at this session as the United Nations enters a particularly crucial stage in its history.
I should like also to pay a tribute to our Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Peres de Cuellar, whose statesmanship and wise leadership have guided the United Nations over the past tumultuous decade.
At this session we welcome seven new Members to the United Nations: the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have, after more than 50 years, regained their sovereignty and independence. We in Ireland have sympathy and admiration for the courage they have shown in seeking, by peaceful means, the realization of their aspirations. We are happy that these efforts have borne fruit.
A year ago, as the crisis mounted in the Gulf, many of us who spoke from this rostrum wondered if the United Nations had the capacity and the will to meet the challenge. We feared that the things that had hampered the Organization in the past and prevented it from making and keeping peace might do so again; that the new determination to make the United Nations work, and the spirit of cooperation evident in recent years, might break under the strain of conflict. It did not happen. The will of the international
community prevailed over one State's aggressive and expansionist ambitions. The price was tragically high in bloodshed and lives shattered. One lesson is clear. A united international community acting on the precepts in the Charter can overcome acts of aggression. But there is another conclusion and a more fundamental challenge: to eliminate the causes of conflict, to build confidence, to prevent aggression; to avoid the dreadful parades whereby lives are lost in the pursuit of peace.
Twelve months later we can say that our Organization is in a stronger position to take up this task. He can hope and work for a system of collective security that will protect the weak against the strong, for a system of law and justice and order between nations. That this is possible is due in the first place to the end of the cold war. For all of us who welcomed the end of the wasted and dangerous years of East-West confrontation and the potential this offered for international cooperation, the attempted coup in the Soviet Union presented a grave threat. It put at risk not only the future of democracy and human rights in that country but our hopes for a new era of international solidarity. Thankfully, the effort was unsuccessful. He salute the determination of the people of Moscow, St. Petersburg and other cities throughout the Soviet Union to defend, with their lives if necessary, their new liberties and their hopes for the future. I believe, too, that the international community, by calling for the restoration of legality and by affording moral support and encouragement to those who opposed the coup, also contributed to its defeat. I wish the peoples of the Soviet Union well in their efforts to evolve new political and economic structures founded on the Charter of Paris, including democracy based on respect for human rights, the rule of law and social justice. They have asked for our support and our help. We must respond.
We are at the beginning of a new era in international life. The building together of a better future is more clearly before our eyes than at any time in the history of the United Nations. We know what we want to achieve. Our objectives are there In the Charter agreed almost half a century ago - to end war, to protect the dignity and worth of the individual, to ensure freedom and the rule of law, and to promote economic development. Simple and clear precepts. How can we give them effect?
First, we must harness the new mood and dynamism in international life and bring it to bear on the great global challenges facing mankind: disarmament, human rights, the environment, development. These, too, are essential for international peace and security. They are areas in which all of us have a vital interest and where none can act alone.
Secondly, we must ensure that the fullest use is made of the peace-making and peace-keeping potential of the United Nations to resolve regional conflicts. We have seen what can be done in Angola, Cambodia, Namibia and Western Sahara. Our successes and experience there should encourage us to persevere elsewhere.
Thirdly, we must make this Organization more responsive and more efficient in its working. What the Secretary-General, in his eloquent report, describes as the renaissance of the United Nations must be consolidated. We should now begin a process of analysis and consultation designed to ensure that the United Nations system as a whole functions with maximum efficiency. Without respect for human rights other achievements can hold little value. The starting point of all political activity has to be the recognition of the dignity and worth of each individual human being. It is on this that true freedom and democracy rest. He have seen in Eastern Europe and elsewhere how indomitable the human spirit can be and how irresistible is the pressure for change when a whole people acting in solidarity with each other demand an end to the needless sacrifice of individual human lives to a State system or a political ideology.
The growing willingness to use legitimate pressure at the international level to protect and promote human rights is based in the first instance on a concern for the victims. But it is also a matter of common interest to all nations. We are coming to appreciate that wherever there is tyranny, it is impossible to conduct international relations in a spirit of openness, confidence, and trust.
Human rights are indivisible. To be a victim of hunger, illness, illiteracy is to be deprived of basic economic and social rights. In recent times we have become more aware, I believe, of the link between respect for human rights and economic development, which flourishes best in a context of individual creativity, responsible government and social justice. Repression is no recipe for economic and social progress.
The realization by many of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe of their aspirations to freedom and democracy has brought to the fore the question of how in turn the aspirations of minorities are to be addressed. This is a complex question to which there are no simple answers. Clearly, there is a duty incumbent on Governments to ensure that members of minorities can enjoy in full the basic human rights common to all. Where special protection is needed it should be forthcoming. But beyond this, there is an urgent need for the international community to work out principles to serve as a framework within which conflicting aspirations can be resolved peacefully and through negotiation.
Ireland welcomes the opportunity to review developments in the field of human rights at the World Conference in 1993. An essential foundation for further progress is that the major human rights instruments should be accepted and implemented by all States.
No issue more clearly illustrates our mutual interdependence than the environment. We have a shared responsibility for the ecosystem on which life on this planet depends. The agenda here is truly daunting. We must promote sustainable development based on equal partnership with developing countries. We must tackle the issue of climate change. We must protect our natural resources, such as forests and water. These issues are highly technical, but their resolution will require political leadership of the highest order.
Ireland, with its partners in the European Community, is determined to make the fullest contribution to next year's United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Brazil - the Earth Summit. We are glad that as part of the preparations, Dublin will be the site for an international Conference on Water and the Environment to take place next January.
I know that some developing countries are concerned that recent events in international life, in particular the war in the Gulf and the revolutions in Eastern Europe, could turn our attention away from the challenge of development. But development is essential to peace and security and requires our dedicated efforts. We must give priority to the alleviation of poverty, to the elimination of famine, to equitable economic relations, to the relationship between the environment and development, and to the problems of indebtedness.
Next year's eighth Conference of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) will give the international community a valuable opportunity to form an over-all picture of the global economic situation. Ireland believes that the approach must be comprehensive and based on consensus. UNCTAD provides a forum for the achievement of these aims.
In the meantime, we look to an early and balanced agreement within the Uruguay Round.
The 12 member States of the European Community will submit proposals at this session of the General Assembly aimed at strengthening the capacity of the United Nations to respond with emergency assistance to situations of the kind we have seen, for example, in the wake of flooding or drought. We see this as part of the wider effort to empower and update the United Nations.
Events in the past year have again underlined the urgent need for progress in disarmament and arms control. We are fortunate that with necessity goes opportunity. As divisions end in Europe, and in the aftermath of the Gulf War, the outlook is more promising.
The signature by the United States and the Soviet Union of the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty and the recent announcements by France and China of their intention to adhere to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, as well as the accessions to it of South Africa, Tanzania and Zimbabwe, greatly strengthen the international regime of nuclear non-proliferation.
The recent undertakings given by several countries to abolish their chemical weapons stocks are welcome. They will encourage developments in the field of conventional arms control and will underpin the belief that there is a new political will to achieve progress in disarmament. My Government believes that fresh and more urgent consideration should be given to the proposal, which Ireland has long supported, for a comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty. We hope there will be widespread support from Member States of all regions for the proposal to establish a United Nations arms register, which the 12 member States of the European Community are presenting at this year's session.
Human rights, the environment, development and disarmament are some of the areas in which, designing on a broad canvas, we hope to foster a world order more accountable to reason and more responsive to considerations of justice. There are also many specific situations in which we must try to bring to bear the spirit and experience of the United Nations.
The Arab-Israeli conflict involves two great historical traditions - noble peoples that have been blown before the winds of history. It is hard to imagine any single development that would be more welcome to the international community than a just and comprehensive solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian question on the basis of United Nations Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and the principle of land for peace. The end of the Gulf War has given a strong impulse to the search for a settlement. Ireland supports the dedicated efforts of United States Secretary of State James Baker. As a member of the European Community, we will actively contribute to the success of the peace conference.
We want to see full respect for the human rights of the Palestinian people and an improvement in their economic and social conditions. The establishment of settlements in the occupied territories is illegal and must be ended. For the first time in 15 years there is hope of progress in Lebanon. We rejoice at the recent release of hostages and renew our appeal for the immediate release of those still bald captive.
In Iraq, we expect the authorities to respect fully and to comply with the resolutions of the Security Council. They must not obstruct the efforts of the United Rations teams to carry out the mandate given to them by the international community.
In South Africa, the apartheid system is an affront to reason and human dignity. The removal of the legislative pillars of the system has opened the way for substantive negotiations on a new constitutional order. These important measures must be followed by the elimination in practice of all racial discrimination and by an improvement of the position of the disinherited. It is now for the parties to bring about the context in which negotiations will have the best prospects for success. Among other factors it will be important for all parties to implement in full the national peace accord signed on 14 September. I look forward to the day when a new, democratic, united and non-racial South Africa plays its full part on the stage of African and world affairs.
The United Nations plan for peace in Cambodia offers the best guarantee of a just, durable and comprehensive settlement of that conflict. The ultimate goal must be to ensure for the Cambodian people a future in which they enjoy true peace and security, free from any threat of a return to past policies and practices and above all of the genocide which has outraged the conscience of mankind.
We welcome the admission of both the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea to membership of the United Nations as well as the reopening of direct political dialogue between North Korea and South Korea. I urge North Korea to implement all Non-Proliferation Treaty obligations without delay, notably the International Atomic Energy Agency Safeguards Agreement.
The past year has seen significant developments in Central America, not least because of the invaluable role played by the Secretary-General. There are now excellent prospects for an end to armed conflict in El Salvador and Guatemala. The day is approaching when all the countries of Central America will be able to focus their political energies on the strengthening of democracy and of economic and social progress, in a context of increasing regional cooperation and full respect for human rights.
For some months the European Community and its member States have sought a peaceful and lasting solution to the crisis in Yugoslavia which would protect the rights of all in Yugoslavia and take full account of their legitimate concerns and aspirations. To this end the Community has negotiated cease-fires in Slovenia and Croatia and has dispatched a monitor mission to oversee their implementation. Host recently the European Community has convened a peace conference under the chairmanship of Lord Peter Carrington with the participation of the Yugoslav parties. Ireland has fully supported these moves and is participating in the monitor mission.
Our involvement in the European Community's efforts underlines our long-standing commitment to the peaceful resolution of conflict and our readiness to assist, in ways that are open to us, in reaching a peaceful solution of crises in the international arena.
With its partners in the European Community and other Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) participating States, Ireland is willing to look at additional steps that might be taken in concert with the parties to the Yugoslav conflict to create a stable background to the peace conference. We welcome in particular the measures adopted on Wednesday by the Security Council which give the backing and authority of this world Organization to the effort we are making to resolve this dangerous and complex conflict.
In his report the Secretary-General has said that never before have so many new insights been gained about the varied tasks of keeping, making or building the peace in areas given or threatened by conflict. The experiences in Namibia, in Haiti, and in Central America, as well as the new operations in the Western Sahara and Angola, would have been beyond the reach of the United Nations in any other era. Of the 22 United Nations peace-keeping operations launched since its inception, almost half have been established in the past three years.
Since Ireland's first involvement, in 1958, it has contributed over 33,000 personnel to United Nations service. Our soldiers currently serve in nine operations and our civilian police are preparing for service in two of them. We believe that the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon still has a vital contribution to make to stability in South Lebanon.
Last year I said that proper funding of United Nations peace-keeping operations was essential. That is a point widely understood and accepted. Let us find a solution and ensure that it is no longer an issue of contention among us.
In our approach to the problem of Northern Ireland we seek the peaceful and voluntary reconciliation of two conflicting traditions. It follows that we are opposed, as a matter of fundamental principle, to all recourse to violence, and we will continue to use all the resources at our disposal to counter the efforts of those who resort to it. Such methods are deeply undemocratic and morally repugnant. They cannot succeed because they are based on the mistaken assumption that a solution can be found through coercion. The aim of the Irish Government is rather to build on what unites both traditions in Ireland and on the shared interest of the Irish and British peoples to bring peace and reconciliation. In this it has the support of the vast majority of the Irish people.
It is common ground between the Irish and British Governments that a solution must be based on the totality of relationships within Northern Ireland, between North and South in the island of Ireland, and between the islands of Ireland and Great Britain. The Anglo-Irish Agreement, signed in 1985, was a development, of this approach. Since coming into force it has provided a valuable mechanism of cooperation between the two Governments on a wide range of issues relating to Northern Ireland. These include the eradication of discrimination in whatever guise it may exist, but particularly in employment practices; even-handedness in the behaviour of the security forces and in the administration of justice; respect for human rights and the rule of law; and equality of esteem and treatment for both traditions.
We attach importance also to the role of the Anglo-Irish Agreement in the economic and social sectors. It has enhanced cross-border cooperation in these areas in recent years. Overall, progress has been made, even if much still remains to be achieved. He will continue to utilize fully the structures of the Agreement to this end in the period ahead.
The Anglo-Irish Agreement has been of particular value in identifying common elements in the approach of both Governments to Northern Ireland and in formalizing cooperation between them. These achievements must be preserved. However, the Unionist community in Northern Ireland has continued to reject the Agreement which it sees as a threat to its interests. Our concern now is to promote a political dialogue which will involve it as well as the two Governments and all those political parties in Northern Ireland which are committed to progress exclusively through political means. We have made clear that we are willing to work for a new agreement which would give full expression to all of the relationships of which I have spoken and which would therefore transcend the existing Agreement.
During the past year, tentative steps were taken towards getting such a dialogue under way. Last March the two Governments and the elected leaders of democratic parties in Northern Ireland agreed on a sat of negotiating structures corresponding to the three critical relationships. In the event the opportunity eluded us. There was soma progress. But despite all efforts to offer reassurance, the mistrust which for so long has corroded relationships on our island once again prevailed.
There is now a general concern, which we fully share, that whatever fragile progress was made in recent months should be preserved. For its part, the Irish Government is determined to seek to move forward as imaginatively as possible in the period ahead, and we are ready, if necessary, to envisage new avenues of approach. Our openness is conditioned only by the requirement that the common objective must be not to undermine what has been achieved but to build a durable settlement. He do not underestimate the complexities but we believe that the search for a solution must be sustained. There can be false pessimism no less than false optimism.
There are, I believe, factors at work for progress. The strong tide of public support in both communities for the process of dialogue is a sign of hope. The relationship between the Irish and British Governments, always a critical factor, is one of increasing cooperation and commitment to address this difficult remaining legacy of our common past.
The European Community provides a positive, wider context. It is at once a model of how ancient enmities can be overcome and a practical arrangement which will progressively diminish the impact of political borders within its ambit. Elsewhere in Europe, far-reaching attempts are under way to confront other historical legacies of great complexity. The prevalent mood of change must encourage those in Ireland who wish to escape from the entrenched attitudes of the past and who seek, as we do, a transformation of relationships which will bring lasting peace.
The Foreign Minister of the Netherlands has already spoken in the name of the 12 member States of the European Community of the major challenges confronting our world today. I fully endorse his statement. It is his earnest hope - and my earnest hope - that this Assembly can move forward in unison, casting aside the division and recrimination of yesteryear. As President Roosevelt so eloquently said in March 1945, the United Nations:
"Ought to spell the end of the system of unilateral action, the power and exclusive alliances, the spheres of influence, the balances of power and all the other expedients that have been tried for centuries - and have always failed."


I should like to congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly. Apart from being a tribute to you personally, to your diplomatic talent and your sense of reason, your election honours the representative of a country whose prominent role and place in the Arab world and on the international scene are known to all.
May I also express our gratitude to the Secretary-General, Mr. Peres de Cuellar, whose indefatigable energy in the service of peace has given so many peoples grounds for hope, and which will have made its mark on our time.
The Organisation is welcoming seven new Members. This is a momentous event, one which is cause for celebration. Welcome to Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Their return to our midst redresses an injustice that had no equal and effaces the criminal act committed against these peoples.
Welcome to the great Korean people, heir to an ancient and distinguished civilisation, who come to the Organization through the separate admission of two States. We hope that they will thus find occasion for friendly dialogue, which will enable them to recover the unity to which they aspire.
Welcome to the Marshall Islands and to Micronesia. These two States will bring to the Organization the benefits of the ancient wisdom of the Pacific Islands.
The years 1989 and 1990 rang with the sounds of liberation - moments of historic happiness rarely encountered - and 1991 has seen the movement continue and amplify.
History has suddenly accelerated. A real revolution has radically altered our points of reference and swept away old habits. A new world is emerging. It will be based, members can be sure, on freedom, solidarity, security and the rule of law.
In the course of the past year, freedom has continued to gain ground. Let us rejoice, for freedom is the sun that shines on our peoples: freedom for Kuwait, which was reinstated to sovereignty and independence - admittedly at the price of the use of force - thanks to the new capacity of the United Nations to further the rule of law; burgeoning freedom in South Africa, where the barriers of apartheid have at last been dismantled - may this impetus not be slowed; and hope of freedom and peace in Cambodia. Speaking from this rostrum in 1988, the President of the French Republic proposed an international conference to help this martyred country regain unity and peace.
	It has taken three years for the realities of the situation to prevail, three years of patient negotiations, three years of persistence; for the inevitability of discord seemed to impinge on the slightest progress. The convening of a conference on Cambodia will at last set the seal on a peace agreement. I should like to pay a tribute to Prince Sihanouk, President of the Supreme National Council, who is sitting in our midst at the head of the Cambodian delegation. His patience and sense of dialogue have once again revealed his qualities as a Head of State capable of reuniting a people and reconciling it with itself. I should like to wish a happy future to the people of Cambodia, whose suffering I shared and whose aspirations I hope to share.
- Freedom of choice offered to the peoples of Western Sahara through a referendum organised by the United Nations in accordance with the wish of all the parties concerned.
- Hope in the Middle East. After so many years of conflict and absence of understanding, the prospect of the convening of a peace conference provides the opportunity for a settlement based on law and justice, a comprehensive peace settlement, it should be recalled, which should therefore enshrine the right of all to live in peace within secure and recognized borders, by giving the Palestinians a land and a state. Yes, freedom for the Palestinian people.
- Freedom for Lebanon, which is dressing its wounds and putting an end to its strife. Let it affirm its sovereignty over the whole of its national territory by the disarmament of militia forces, the withdrawal of foreign troops and the implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978), Let it boldly address its task of reconstruction and quickly return to the path of democracy by holding free elections. Those are France's wishes for Lebanon, which is so close to it in heart, in mind and in history.
- Freedom too for Moscow, where democratic forces have swept away factions which thought they could use violence to impose the return of an order that had been driven from the scene but remains present in our memories, an order that has been overturned and condemned. Let us pay a tribute to those who threw up the barricades of freedom and confronted the threat so that the will of the people could prevail. Hai1 to the defenders of the White House of Moscow.
In Kuwait, in the Soviet Union and in the Baltic countries, freedom is gaining ground everywhere and democracy is smiling on peoples. The points marked with a cross on the map of oppression and tutelage are gradually fading, and as they fade the old world order, with its compromises and deadlocks, is disappearing. This transformation is taking place before our very eyes. Let us look directly at it. Hope is replacing threat, dialogue is being set in train beyond all expectations, and the world rings with the sound of statues being toppled.
But new clouds are already appearing on the horizon. Will we see those who are gaining their freedom and independence take the path of blind nationalism and make anachronistic territorial claims? Will the clash of interests take the place of ideological confrontations? Roads and struggles of this kind lead nowhere, as experience and history have taught us. Dictatorship, poverty, exodus and war are their end result. To avoid these dangers, we must devise formulas and solutions appropriate for our times. Let us begin by building new solidarities, and use the opportunity to turn towards the future.
With regard to building new solidarities, let us first speak of Europe. It is experiencing on its own soil the world's last great phase of decolonisation. I wish to state here that France will be at one with all peoples which choose to make their voice heard on the international scene and which peacefully and democratically express their resolve to accede to independence. For self-determination is indivisible; and it cannot be an object of bargaining. Let us recall a few simple rules that may help these movements to mature in harmony:
First, every people that wants it has the right to self-determination and sovereignty. Secondly, this presupposes a clear definition of the rights of minorities; we should think about the role the United Nations could play in this respect. Thirdly, it is essential to ensure respect for international treaties, and hence recognition of borders. Fourthly, borders may be changed only through dialogue or, failing that, through arbitration. Lastly, good neighbourly relations can be governed by freely accepted agreements.
What France has proposed for Yugoslavia holds true in a general way for everyone.
Let us spare ourselves a return to empires and opportunistic alliances in the twenty-first century. Let us note our regional complementarities, derive advantage from them and give them a context.
Is this, after all, not the purpose of the Community construction in Europe so well described just a moment ago by my colleague Mr. Van Den Broek? Why have we spent 40 years building a European Community - first of six, then of nine, and now of 12? Because we were convinced that peace, prosperity and our identity would be established in a lasting manner only through the sharing of our national sovereignties. Those who had doubts must now bow to the evidence. The European Community has become a benchmark for some and for others a source of admiration. The European Community owes it to itself to continue to astonish the world by pursuing its integration, planned for the end of 1991. Strengthened by a Germany at last reunited, the European Economic Community will continue its progress towards unity.
The new democracies of central and eastern Europe have understood this necessity of union and cooperation and have turned eagerly and hopefully to the Community. Within the Twelve, France in turn understands this request, this expectation, which it hopes will be answered as soon as possible by preparations for these countries' admission to the European Economic Community. This will of course take time. That is all the more reason to get down to the task right away.
But are we to do nothing during this period, leaving these democracies, which are so close to us, uncertain as to their future? Of course not. Europe needs a new pact right now.
Aware of the danger that still threatens it, can our continent - our ancient continent - rally to preserve the gains of the past few years and go forward? This is the essence of the confederation France has proposed. Our aim is to go beyond the logic of aid, which out of necessity has been the reason for most actions so far, in order to arrive at a real political, economic and social community on the continent, in the spirit of the founding fathers of a free Europe in the immediate post-war period.
It would be a paradox if just as this Europe - which will become more and more confederal - was taking shape, a parallel but contrary movement towards dismemberment and break-up were to prevail elsewhere. That is why we hope that the republics of the USSR succeed in exercising their new responsibilities and organising their relations as they intend to do, and succeed in defining, at the international level, as reason and the course of events dictate, the expression of their common interests and resolve. We hope they can do so with due respect for the principles and norms of security and stability accepted in Europe.
Yugoslavia, which is being torn apart, represents the other example of a necessary transformation. May the legitimate aspirations for freedom which are being expressed there take into consideration the interests of all. May the rights of minorities be preserved and the advantages of a space shared by ill the peoples of Yugoslavia be maintained and guaranteed. That, it seems to me, is the road to peace and regained prosperity. But none of this will be possible so long as the fighting persists. The conflagration is building and threatens to spread. Time is running out. Yugoslavia is heading deeper into an impasse. France believes it is incumbent on the United Nations to bring the parties to their senses by demanding compliance with the cease-fire, by showing them the way to dialogue and to negotiation that has been mapped out with their consent by the European Community, by saying to all that peace has its requirements, theirs and others'. France, which is the current President of the Security Council, will leave no stone unturned to achieve this end.
Can I fail to refer to the solidarity between the North and the South? No. The planet is one. Who can believe in a future in which less than one quarter of the world's population enjoys the benefits of progress while the remaining three quarters are abandoned to despair?
In the course of the past five years, Africa's gross national product has grown less quickly than its population. Today's 500 million Africans will be 1.5 billion in the year 2025, while the sources of financing are drying up. Net capital input fell in real terms from 1986 to 1990. World Bank and International Monetary Fund transfers are currently negative, with African countries paying back far more than they receive.
Without wishing to sound like an oracle, France has consistently spoken of this intolerable and inevitable trend in order to seek a greater effort of solidarity from the rich. My country senses it is being better heeded now, and I hope that is true. It welcomes this especially as another danger is threatening the developing countries: the danger of a society exploding in response to excessive demands.
It is appropriate, certainly, to ensure that the assistance to developing countries is well employed. That is the best way to generate official and private resources and to promote regional integration, which is still in its early stages.
In this respect, the Treaty for the Constitution of the Common Market of the South - the MERCOSUR Treaty - signed in March 1991, which groups Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay in a common market, is a good example of what has to be done. It should not remain an isolated instance. I am thinking it particular of Africa, where plans to set up a large common agricultural market should be pursued. The franc zone, with its single currency, offers a favourable terrain for such a market.
France, together with its European Economic Community partners, intends to support these efforts. It does not intend to render them useless by imposing requirements that go beyond what is reasonable.
Lastly, one cannot speak of solidarity without mentioning the environment. The international community has already held debates on and carried out research into this important subject. It has launched significant concrete programs. France welcomes, for example, the success of the initiative on the decision to protect Antarctica, which it took in 1989 together with Australia, subsequently joined by Italy and Belgium. The Madrid protocol, which will be signed on 4 October 1991, declares Antarctica to be a "natural reserve devoted to peace and science". This responds to the wishes of all those who desire to safeguard our common heritage, our planet. It should inspire other actions.
I believe that everything I have said is of a conservative nature. Yet the exacerbation of risks and the emergence of new dangers require us to think on a new scale and give free rein to our ambition.
Thus, we warmly welcome the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, which is to be held at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and to which France is lending its assistance and support. That Conference will be preceded by the meeting in Paris at the end of the year, called by the President of the French Republic, which will be attended by all the non-governmental organisations concerned.
The efforts to combat desertification, to preserve and harness the resources of the great forests and to protect the ozone layer, biological diversity and the seas and the oceans: these are subjects of pre-eminent interest to all mankind.

It. would be pointless to speak of the future of mankind without referring to security. The end of the cold war provides an exceptional opportunity, so let us seize it by pursuing disarmament world wide. In that sphere my country's policy is consistent with a number of principles that I would like to enumerate briefly.
The most important agreement on conventional arms reduction in Europe was signed at the Paris summit in 1990. Its ratification can wait no longer. Prance is committed to this and hopes that all the signatories will proceed to ratification, thus making it possible to move on to a new phase in these negotiations.
France duly welcomed the signing in Moscow of the strategic arms reduction Treaty - the START Treaty. The reduction of the strategic arsenals of the United States and the USSR, which will take several years, should be followed by new commitments now. France will join in the negotiations once those arsenals have been reduced to a level warranting our participation, under the terms set forth in this very Hall by the President of the French Republic in 1985.
For Europeans, the existence and availability of nuclear armaments raise specific problems which have emerged with the changes in the Soviet Union. France has asked that the four Powers concerned meet as early as possible to examine these problems together.
On a more general note, France is in favour of global disarmament. In June 1991 it made public its plan encompassing all aspects of security. It announced its decision to adhere to the nuclear non-proliferation Treaty. My country will submit the instruments of accession before the year's end.
Already, we are taking steps to exercise complete control over exports related to nuclear energy. France is in favour of finalising at an early date the convention on the final elimination of chemical weapons. It hopes that the convention will be signed next year. The treaty banning chemical weapons should be accompanied by appropriate means for monitoring compliance, without which its effectiveness will be compromised.  For while treaties prepare the way for security, it is confidence that creates it. There is no real confidence without control. The example of Iraq shows this only too well.
Strict compliance with accords and monitoring are the keystones of disarmament, and it is, in my view, for the United Nations to promote accession to these treaties, to monitor their implementation and impose penalties, where necessary, when agreements are violated. Let us, therefore, give the United Nations the means to carry out this task.
My concluding comments will concern strengthening the role of the United Nations. How can this be accomplished? Our Organisation, which is the universal expression of our solidarity, has done more in these past years than reflect our concerns. It has done more than it had done in past decades. With the backing of its Secretary-General and the determined support of the five permanent members of the Security Council, the United Nations has been a driving force. It has affirmed the law on numerous occasions and enforced compliance where necessary.
The United Nations perseverance on behalf of human rights prompted South Africa to move towards abolishing apartheid. The efforts to help restore democracy in Haiti, the part played in the peace process in El Salvador, the Secretary-General's peace plan of 21 May for Afghanistan are all initiatives that have marked for history the growing role of the United Nations.
But it is undoubtedly in regard to the Gulf crisis that the progress has been the most spectacular. The main point was to stop aggression and to lay the often innovative foundations for order through law.
The United Nations could not remain passive in the face of the tragedy which threatened the very existence of the Kurdish people. For the first time, through a Security Council resolution, the United Nations affirmed that the sufferings of a population justified immediate intervention. My country is proud to have proposed the adoption of resolution 688 (1991).
Yet, as members are aware, none of this could be taken for granted. Today the foundations of a new legal order, a new humanitarian order, have been laid. Why not adopt a code of conduct affirming the right to humanitarian assistance every time the integrity and survival of a people is threatened?
However, we must not lose sight of the fact that the progress that has been made is not sufficient to offset the reversals where these exist. If tomorrow, in the conflict between Israel and the Arab countries, the United Nations were to give up its efforts to require compliance with the principles which have earned it its success, it would quickly lose in credibility what it has earned in prestige. The Organization is too much a grande dame now to tolerate disrespect.
At a time when France holds the presidency of the Security Council, it is pleased and proud to contribute to the adoption of two important resolutions, which I hope will be adopted, on Yugoslavia and Cambodia.
More than ever before, the values which underlie the principles of our Organization are a benchmark. New States have joined us and others will follow. National minorities are claiming the right to preserve what constitutes their identity and cohesion. What are they doing? They look to the United Nations. Individuals are thirsting for justice. What do they do?
They invoke the United Nations moral jurisdiction. Never have democracy and human rights - the former thought by some to have been superseded and the latter considered by others the product of an impoverished mind - constituted such important guidelines for a world urgently seeking peace and prosperity.
Let us therefore prepare, clearly and with enthusiasm, for the great rendezvous of 1993s the World Conference on Human Rights, which will also be the rendezvous of democracy victorious.
It is there that, half a century after the cataclysm that shook the world, and the long night that deprived too many peoples of the light of freedom, our generation will finally be able to say: We have been worthy of mankind.


Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I extend to you, my dear brother, the sincere felicitations of the Pakistan delegation on your well-deserved election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-sixth session. Your election to this high office is a befitting tribute to the outstanding role played on the world stage by your great country, from where the light of Islam spreads to the entire globe. It is also a recognition of your diplomatic skills and qualities of statesmanship
that have won admiration in many parts of the world, and, is particular in the councils of the United nations. We in Pakistan recall with great fondness the time when we had the privilege of having you as the Ambassador of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Pakistan is bound to Saudi Arabia in close brotherly ties which encompass common faith, shared values and common history. We are confident that, with your vast experience and consummate skills, you will successfully guide the deliberations of this important session of the General Assembly.
I should also like to convey our deep appreciation and esteem to your predecessor, Mr. Guido de Marco, Foreign Minister of Malta, who conducted the proceedings of the forty-fifth session of the General Assembly with great distinction and success.
I take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, for his unceasing efforts to promote international peace and harmony and uphold the principles and purposes of the United Rations Charter. He has addressed world problems with a deep sense of purpose. The world community owes him a profound debt of gratitude for his untiring endeavours in strengthening the foundations of peace and security around the world.
It is a matter of particular happiness for my delegation to welcome seven States as new Members of the United Nations. The presence of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of Marshall Islands in our midst is indeed a historic occasion. This is a testimony to the universality and the growing strength of our Organization. On behalf of the Government and people of Pakistan, I would extend our warm congratulations to the delegations of those countries as they assume their membership of the world body.
The historic transformation sweeping the globe has generated a blend of sanguine expectations and serious concerns. While the world has witnessed the end of the ideological confrontation between the two super-Powers, heralding
an era of mutual collaboration and accommodation, it has also experienced a devastating military conflict in the Persian Gulf. The security of small States continues to be threatened and armed conflicts continue to fester in various regions of the world. There is no justification, therefore, for complacency.
Real peace and progress can be ensured only if States, big and small, abide by the principles of the United Nations Charter, settle their disputes peacefully and advance international cooperation to accelerate the economic progress of the developing countries. The major Powers have a special responsibility to respect and promote the principle of sovereign equality. It would indeed be tragic if the end of the cold war witnessed the birth of another era of international tensions on account of the hegemonic ambitions of major regional Powers. He should work for a new world order based on equity, justice and progress reflecting the collective aspirations of mankind.
The United Nations has a central role to play in such a world order by ensuring respect for the principles and purposes of its Charter and the faithful implementation of its resolutions. We espouse a faith which stands for peace and forbids wars of aggression. The Holy Koran says:
"Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you; but do not begin the hostilities; for Allah does not approve of aggression". (The Holy Koran, II:190)
Pakistan will continue to make its contribution to the promotion of peace and the strengthening of the United Nations in the realization of its objectives.
Pakistan welcomes the relaxation of international tensions, the universal movement towards democracy, the upsurge of economic liberalism, the serious pursuit of arms control and the growing respect for the deep-seated urge of peoples for the exercise of their right to self-determination. These fundamental changes have created a salutary environment for resolving conflicts that still persist as a legacy of the cold war and the colonial period. Unfortunately, Pakistan's own sincere quest for durable peace and stability in South Asia has foundered on the un-constructive attitude adopted by India on the Jammu and Kashmir dispute.
The people of Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir have risen to demand their inalienable right to self-determination - a right solemnly pledged to the Kashmiri people by India, Pakistan and the international community in the various resolutions adopted by the United Nations. It is with a deep sense of anguish that I report to this Assembly that occupied Jammu and Kashmir remains in the throes of a profound human tragedy.
The United Nations Security Council and the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan have prescribed in their resolutions that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir must be decided in accordance with the will of the people, expressed through a free and impartial plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations. I should like to draw attention, in particular, to Security Council resolution 47 (1948), adopted on 21 April 1948, and the resolutions adopted by the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan on 13 August 1948 and 5 January 1949. Both India and Pakistan, as parties to the dispute, are bound by those resolutions, which continue to be valid and operative. The Simla Agreement of 1972 between India and Pakistan categorically acknowledged that Kashmir was an outstanding issue that remained to be settled.
Since January 1990 the situation in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir has greatly deteriorated. The sufferings of innocent Kashmiri men, women and children at the hands of Indian security forces have increased beyond measure. Even Indian human rights organisations and media have acknowledged the grave human rights violations by Indian forces In the occupied territory. During the last 21 months over 5,000 innocent civilians have been killed. A determined effort is under way to terrorize and suppress the people. Dawn to dusk curfews, house-to-house searches, torture, arbitrary detention and gang rapes of women are daily occurrences in the valley. Despite the deployment of nearly half a million Indian military and paramilitary forces in Kashmir, the indigenous, widespread uprising continues to gather momentum, reflecting the resolve of the people of Kashmir to secure their inalienable right to self-determination. Pakistan cannot remain a silent spectator of the sufferings of the Kashmiri people, a people with which we are linked by unbreakable bonds of religion, history, kinship and culture.
Human rights violations do not take place in a vacuum. They stem from failure to find a peaceful solution to political problems. Human rights violations that have occurred in Palestine, South Africa and other parts of the world are a result of the inability of the international community to redress the political problems inherent in these situations. This also applies to Kashmir, where the political problem continues to fester because of the failure of the international community to implement the relevant United Nations resolutions.
The uprising in Indian-occupied Kashmir is entirely indigenous and spontaneous. India's attempts to attribute the turmoil to interference by Pakistan are both self-serving and misleading. As an earnest of our good faith, we had proposed to India the establishment of a neutral mechanism, such as the stationing of impartial international observers, along the Line of
Control to monitor, survey and investigate the situation and reach independent conclusions. India has not accepted this offer - thus exposing the hollowness of its allegations.
While we rejoice with those who have gained freedom, we cannot ignore the plight of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. The international community must exert moral and political pressure on India to desist from the use of force and allow the people of Kashmir to exercise freely their inalienable right to self-determination. It is only through the uniform enforcement of the decisions of the Security Council that faith in the United Nations as an instrument of international peace and security can be preserved. A selective approach to the settlement of disputes would impair the image and stature of the world body.
Pakistan is committed to a peaceful settlement of the Jammu and Kashmir dispute on the basis of the relevant Security Council resolutions and in the spirit of the Simla agreement. For that purpose, we have consistently expressed our willingness to engage India in a constructive and meaningful dialogue.
The Prime Minister of Pakistan sent a special envoy to India in August 1991 conveying the hope that Pakistan and India would settle all bilateral disputes peacefully. It is our conviction that the resolution of the Kashmir issue would pave the way for a new era in which tension and confrontation would be replaced by harmony and cooperation between the two neighbouring countries.
The heroic struggle of the Afghan people succeeded in freeing their homeland from foreign occupation. It also contributed to the current resurgence of freedom and democracy in the world. But Afghanistan remains in the grip of a continuing armed conflict. Recent developments in the region have, however, brightened the prospects for a just political settlement. Efforts must now be intensified so that peace can be restored in Afghanistan and so that millions of Afghan refugees can return to their homes in safety and honour. The essential element of any settlement in Afghanistan must necessarily remain the transfer of power from the present dispensation in Kabul to a broad-based government representing the will and aspirations of the Afghan people.
Pakistan has emphatically reiterated its commitment to a comprehensive political settlement of the Afghanistan problem and has embarked on a series of initiatives. He have held extensive consultations with the countries concerned, namely Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United States and the Soviet Union.
We have also fully supported the efforts of the Secretary-General. Pakistan and Iran have also resolved to work together with the Afghan mujahidin in a trilateral framework to promote the peace process.
The Secretary-General's five-point proposal, announced on 21 May 1991, provides a set of guiding principles which could form the basis of a possible settlement in Afghanistan. He favour a package plan of understandings on all the elements of the proposal. While we welcome the recent United States-Soviet decision to terminate weapon supplies to all Afghan parties by 1 January 1992, it is important that the intervening period should be utilized to facilitate agreements on the remaining points, especially on a transition mechanists, which is the heart of the Secretary-General's proposal. Understandings should also be worked out on arrangements for the election of the future Government of Afghanistan, a cease-fire and the return of the Afghan refugees.
Pakistan has been providing shelter and succour to over 3 million Afghan refugees for more than 12 years. They have chosen to face the privations and rigours of exile rather than expose themselves to the insecurity and uncertainties caused by the conflict in their homeland. The recent decline in international humanitarian assistance has not only exacerbated the hardships for the Afghan refugees, but has also put an unusually heavy strain on our already meagre resources. He call upon the international community to continue to fulfil its humanitarian obligations until favourable conditions have been created for the voluntary return of the refugees to their homeland.
I would like to express our deep appreciation for the ceaseless efforts undertaken by the Secretary-General and his Personal Representative in the quest for a comprehensive settlement of the Afghan problem. I would also like
to commend the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for the important role he has played in providing relief and assistance for the Afghan refugees.
The conflict in the Persian Gulf dealt a grievous blow to the cause of regional peace and cooperation. Pakistan took a principled position on the issue consonant with the relevant Security Council resolutions. At the same time, we made serious efforts for a peaceful and honourable solution of the problem. For that purpose, the Prime Minister of Pakistan undertook visits to 12 Islamic countries and sent special envoys to 13 other countries. The armed conflict extracted a heavy toll in human losses and caused colossal material destruction. Pakistan believes that it is time to put the bitterness of war behind us and open a new chapter of friendship and cooperation.
Pakistan adheres firmly to the belief that there can be no stable peace in the Middle East without the withdrawal of Israeli troops from all Arab and Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, including Al-Quds A1-Sharif, and the restitution of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, especially their right to establish a State of their own in Palestine.
The courageous and valiant uprising of the Palestinian people in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip has demonstrated clearly that a people determined to secure its freedom and independence cannot be held back through repression.
We hope that the recent initiatives for the convening of an international peace conference on Palestine, with the participation of the parties concerned, including the Palestinians, would lead to a just and comprehensive settlement in the Middle East.
The problem of Cyprus remains a matter of concern for all of us. We support the efforts of the Secretary-General to resolve the Cyprus question in accordance with Security Council resolution 649 (1990).
Pakistan has been following with keen interest the initiative of the five permanent members of the Security Council on the issue of Cambodia. He are confident that their efforts, and those of the countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), will prove fruitful in resolving this issue on the basis of the free exercise of the will of the Cambodian people. He welcome the fact that Cambodia is represented in the General Assembly by the delegation of the Supreme Rational Council headed by His Royal Highness Prince Norodom Sihanouk.
Recent developments in South Africa constitute steps in the right direction, but fall short of the complete elimination of apartheid. The international community has an obligation to extend wholehearted support to the struggle of the people of South Africa for self-determination and majority rule. The sanctions imposed against the Pretoria regime should continue to be applied until the complete elimination of apartheid and the establishment of majority rule in South Africa have been achieved.
The changed global situation has underscored the importance of regional economic cooperation. Pakistan is resolved to give further depth and substance to regional cooperation through the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation and the Economic Cooperation Organization.
Pakistan has consistently promoted the cause of international peace and security and the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. He are therefore gratified at the conclusion of the strategic arms reduction Treaty (START) between the United States and the Soviet Union. Pakistan particularly welcomes the recent announcement by President Bush of bold and far-reaching measures encompassing, inter alia, the elimination of land- and sea-based tactical nuclear weapons.
These measures represent a major advance in the process of nuclear disarmament and call for an appropriate response from all concerned Powers. It is our expectation that this process will eventually lead to the total elimination of nuclear weapons. Until then, effective and legally binding international arrangements must be worked out to assure all non-nuclear-weapon States against the use or the threat of use of nuclear weapons.
He support the early conclusion of a comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty. Pending the conclusion of such a treaty, nuclear-test-ban agreements could be arrived at among regional States in different parts of the world. Those regional agreements would not only act as important confidence-building measures but would also facilitate the conclusion of a comprehensive nuclear-test-ban treaty.
Pakistan supports the early conclusion of a comprehensive convention on the total prohibition of chemical weapons. He also stand for the prevention of an arms race in outer space.
Global disarmament efforts should be supplemented by disarmament measures at the regional level. A regional approach offers the most realistic prospect for meaningful progress towards disarmament, since threat perceptions and security concerns vary from region to region. This approach is steadily gaining ground, as evidenced by the adoption of a resolution on regional disarmament by an overwhelming majority at the forty-fifth session of the General Assembly.
Negotiations for conventional disarmament at the global and regional levels must also be pursued vigorously, especially because of the increase in the sophistication and destructive power of conventional weapons. Naval disarmament has become an equally important objective, because of the rapid augmentation of the naval power of some States. The acquisition of aircraft carriers and nuclear-powered submarines by some regional States is a cause of grave concern to their smaller neighbours.
Pakistan has proposed a number of disarmament measures to strengthen peace and stability in south Asia. He believe that a regional approach to non-proliferation, based on the principles of equality and non-discrimination, is the most feasible and effective means of resolving the nuclear issue in south Asia. In addition to several proposals made to India since 1974 to keep our region free of nuclear weapons, including the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free some, the Prime Minister of Pakistan recently put forward three important proposals for arms control and nuclear non-proliferation in south Asia. These proposals call for: first, consultations by the United States, the Soviet Union and China with India and Pakistan to ensure nuclear non-proliferation in south Asia; secondly, bilateral arrangements or a regional regime for the prohibition of all weapons of mass destruction in south Asia; and, thirdly, a mutual and balanced reduction of forces in south Asia consistent with the principle of equal and undiminished security at the lowest level of armaments.
He are encouraged by the positive response to our proposals by many countries. He hope that India will also respond positively, particularly to the proposal for five-nation consultations for a nuclear non-proliferation regime in south Asia.
Nuclear non-proliferation in south Asia is a vital condition for regional peace, security and progress. The proposals made by our Prime Minister are in keeping with the spirit of the times and reflect our genuine desire that the south Asian countries should concentrate their efforts on economic development through the diversion of resources currently allocated to defence to developmental purposes.
The question of arms transfers should be considered within the overall context of conventional arms control, taking into account the indigenous defence production capabilities of different countries as well as their legitimate security concerns.
Each country has the sovereign right to determine its own legitimate defence needs. Many small and medium-sized States, lacking indigenous defence production capabilities, are obliged to depend upon international transfers of arms to meet their essential security needs. In some cases, threats to their security emanate from neighbouring States with large indigenous defence production capabilities. Obviously, the denial of the acquisition of arms through international transfers would endanger the security of such small and vulnerable States. This would have a destabilising effect on international peace and security. It is essential, therefore, to ensure that controls on arms transfers do not create or perpetuate dangerous regional imbalances.
The world stands on the threshold of an era of great promise and hope. The prospects of lasting peace are more real today than at any time during the past many decades. But for many people in the third world this peace is distant and irrelevant. While the incidence of death by bullets may have declined, the number of victims of deprivation continues to rise. Illiteracy, disease, malnourishment, unemployment and destitution are on the increase. We see in painful detail, day after day, the horror of human poverty. This is not real peace.
The 1980a have been described as the decade lost to development. If corrective action is not taken, it may well spawn a lost generation by the year 2000. According to some estimates, the industrialized world today consumes S6 trillion more of income annually than at the beginning of the 1980s. Over the same period it reduced its annual aid to the developing world by $4 billion. Worst still, its net resource transfers to these countries, taking account of interest payments, became negative. In 1990 alone the negative transfer of resources from the developing to developed countries amounted to $39 billion.
The Declaration (S-18/3) adopted at the eighteenth special session of the General Assembly provided an agreed platform for common action. It encompassed commitments by the developed and developing countries to enhance international economic cooperation and to revitalize growth and development. In the spirit of the Declaration, many third-world countries have taken wide-ranging measures to enhance efficiency in economic management. Concrete steps have been taken by their Governments to liberalise their economies, roll back State intervention and promote trade and investment.
In Pakistan, too, the Government of Prime Minister Muhammad Hawas Sharif has launched a programme of comprehensive economic reforms involving privatization and deregulation with a view to encouraging economic activity in a liberal framework. These reforms, unprecedented in Pakistan's history, are aimed at stimulating and encouraging market forces as the main engine of economic growth. In accordance with its policy of self-reliance, the Government is focusing on the promotion of exports and foreign investment in the country.
Regrettably, the International economic environment remains heavily weighted against the developing countries. The industrialised countries have not matched with concrete steps the reform measures being taken in the third world. Our efforts at fostering growth and development continue to be stonewalled by the denial of market access, dwindling resource flows, absence of foreign investment and a crushing debt burden. Rapid action aimed at resolving these problems is imperative. A special effort will have to be made to ensure a successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round, which remains deadlocked on a number of key issues.
Close partnership is also necessary to counter the escalating threat of environmental degradation. The international community must evolve a comprehensive strategy for addressing this grave problem. The responsibilities and obligations of both the developed and the developing countries were clearly spelt out in resolution 44/228. A truly universal compact on the environment will have to incorporate the developmental dimension. The commitments involving the transfer of additional resources and Environmentally sound technologies to the developing countries will, therefore, have to be honoured in full. It is the sincere hope of the Pakistan delegation that preoccupation with short term gains will be resisted and that the course which we had set before us at the forty-fourth session of the General Assembly will be pursued earnestly.
The current session of the General Assembly is taking place at a crucial moment in the history of the United Nations. The role of the world body in achieving the independence of Namibia, promoting peace in Central America, reversing aggression in the Gulf and settling regional disputes has earned for it the respect and gratitude of the international community. While we rejoice as at these successes, we expect a more forceful contribution from the United Nations in fostering economic growth and development in the third world. This is clearly not a task beyond our reach. If bitter adversaries of yesterday can become willing partners of today, it is not too much to hope that the immense resources of the world will be utilised for mankind's collective well-being. Only thus will we be able to lay the foundations of everlasting peace and universal prosperity.