As my first duty, permit me, Sir, to congratulate you on your election to the important and honourable post of President of the General Assembly at the current session.
We are meeting at a remarkable time. Though it may appear quite unremarkable on the working calendar of our Organization, it is a time filled with extraordinary events - events that can become the norm for the life of mankind if we succeed in turning them into a trend. Such, in our view, should be the main thrust of the current session, which in many respects is a watershed for the world community. I am referring to a new world calendar which is being created by the efforts of States and peoples, by the efforts of the United Nations.
A character in the classical comedy "Woe from Wit" exclaims, "Calendars all lie". However, the calendar that has taken shape today does not deceive us. It tells of change in the world; change that is a product of reason. We find on that calendar the Moscow summit meeting, at which Mikhail Gorbachev and Ronald Reagan exchanged the instruments marking the entry into force of the Treaty on the elimination of intermediate- and shorter-range missiles; the conclusion of the Geneva Accords on political settlement around Afghanistan; the first ever public destruction of nuclear missiles; and the cease-fire in the Iran-Iraq war.
All this is a product of reason, of a new political intellect, which has superseded the dark legacy of the past. It is destroying the reciprocal "enemy images" that have existed and is shaping the image of co-operative partners.
It has made it possible to discuss a world without arms in the emerging context of real disarmament, as was recently demonstrated at the third special session of the General Assembly on disarmament. It offers us a chance for the successful conclusion of the Vienna meeting, which is a major milestone in the process of the Helsinki Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) .
All that has occurred in the year 1988, which has witnessed many other remarkable events. This year has witnessed the four-party talks on southern Africa; the movement towards a political settlement around Kampuchea; contacts to resolve problems existing on the Korean peninsula; dialogue between the leaders of the two communities in divided Cyprus that were until recently irreconcilable; and the positive response to the initiative of the United Nations Secretary-General concerning a settlement of the problem of Western Sahara. I shall permit myself to include among the year's landmark events the Party Conference in my own country. Its main conclusion was that perestroika is irreversible. It is irreversible in both our domestic and our foreign policy. Radical change in our own house - and here I am quoting Mikhail Gorbachev - has engendered new approaches by us to international affairs too. In a sense, the calendar that I have brought to your attention is one of the consequences of that process.
Two years ago we said here that group, bloc or ideological considerations were beginning to give way to an understanding of peace as the supreme value. Only peace, translated from the language of declarations into practical action, can give mankind a chance of survival. The Soviet Union has grasped this world-wide trend and coupled it with its own perestroika, its process of renewal.
Today the world is changing along new lines. Through the joint efforts of States and by implementing the principles of the new political thinking, it has become possible to avert the threat of war. To a large extent this is due to the political will demonstrated by the leaders of States, and here I can only agree with President Reagan's remarks yesterday about the beneficial impact on that process of Soviet-American political dialogue.
We are now moving further ahead - towards comprehensive security. This requires truly international co-operation. This universal international alliance must rise above differences, which, to use the words of Albert Einstein, are infinitely small compared to the danger that threatens us all.
The formation of this alliance is being facilitated by the emergence of mechanisms of interaction among States and peoples, first and foremost through the United Nations and its institutions. Its main working unit, its engine, its heart, is here, in our house of peace, as are the people who have found way to increase the power of the instruments of peace-making, and we thank them for that. There is however, no better way of expressing gratitude than by a collective effort to enhance the role of the United Nations and make it stronger not only as a unique international forum but also as an equally unique global centre for ensuring universal and regional security and the security of each country.
In this capacity the United Nations should, in our view, play a more active and direct role in eliminating the main threat to mankind - the threat of a nuclear catastrophe. We would like to see greater involvement by the United Nations in the process of nuclear disarmament, in reaching a global agreement on the cessation and prohibition of nuclear-weapons testing, and in creating nuclear-free zones in various parts of the world.
Space should become an area for the priority attention of the United Nations. The international community has a vital interest in preventing it from becoming an arena for military rivalry. Today this can still be done; tomorrow will be too late.
The Soviet Union has made the case for setting up a world space organization, which could include a centre for international co-operation in the peaceful uses of outer space, to be established on the basis of the Krasnoyarsk radar, as proposed by Mikhail Gorbachev.
We call upon the Government of the United states to follow that example, and thus allay our concern with respect to United States radar facilities in Greenland and Great Britain. By doing that, we would not only lay the material groundwork for international co-operation in space but also strengthen the ABM Treaty regime.
This Organization could become involved, in practical terms, in resolving the issue of conventional arms limitation. The Soviet Union supports the idea of setting up, within the United Nations, a register of conventional arms sales and transfers, and is ready to take part in developing the parameters of such a register.
The arms race cannot be curbed without putting under control the use of scientific and technological achievements for military purposes. We support the proposal by India and other countries to set up a group, under the United Nations Secretary-General, to provide assessments and forecasts in the area of new technology.
The United Nations will measure up to all these tasks if we take a fresh look at the practical aspects of our work. First of all, the General Assembly, as one of the principal bodies of the Organization, should substantially increase its contribution towards finding ways and means of solving international problems, inter alia, through renewing and improving its methods and procedures.
There is but one criterion here - that decisions be productive and democratically worked out and adopted. A first step in this direction would he to adopt an increased proportion of United Nations decisions by consensus, though it is important that General Assembly resolutions adopted by a vote should not be devalued.
It is also necessary to reinvigorate the work of the Security Council, and to ensure closer interaction among its members. At consultations among the five permanent members of the Council, attended by the Secretary-General, it would be useful to hold periodic reviews of situations in areas of conflict and to identify priority measures to improve the situation. It is felt that there is a need for periodic meetings of the Security Council at the foreign-minister level, as envisaged by the Charter.
The idea of convening special expanded Security Council meetings in regions of tension is worthy of consideration. Such meetings could also be held in the capitals of the Council's permanent members. The Soviet Union confirms its readiness to host such a meeting in Moscow. We all owe a debt to the United Nations, and it is in our common interest to repay our debts. We can repay them in full if, in addition to dollar contributions, we invest innovative thought in the activity of the Organization's institutions, if we revive its main function - as a centre for the settlement of international conflicts through united efforts.
Let there be no lament, then, over the sacred national prerogatives. The Soviet Union is a firm advocate of strengthening national sovereignty, particularly wherever infringements of it are most keenly and painfully felt. We regard as highly objectionable the anomaly of foreign military presence - military bases in other States' territories - as well as violations of national sovereignty by the undeclared arrival of nuclear arms in, or their transit through, ports of other countries. We have stated clearly what we believe: that any military presence must be confined within national borders.
But what we are speaking of now is voluntarily delegating a portion of national rights in the interests of all - paradoxically enough, to strengthen national security, while at the same time strengthening universal security.
The interrelationship of events in an interdependent world increasingly compels us to delegate some national prerogatives to an international organization. In fact, this is happening already. Military activity is ceasing to be taboo. Having cleared the verification barrier, and having initiated the process of real nuclear disarmament, the Soviet Union and the United States, the German Democratic Republic and Czechoslovakia, the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, Italy, Belgium and the Netherlands gave up some of their rights when they permitted the inspection of facilities in their territories. This was done in the interests of universal security. By establishing new, previously inconceivable, rules of openness in the military sphere, the world is undoubtedly moving towards the creation of a common sovereign right - the right to survive. When the United States Secretary of Defence sits at the controls of a top-secret Soviet bomber, and the Chief of the General Staff of the Soviet armed forces tours an equally secret United States base, that is something more than a mere exchange of protocol courtesies in the spirit of the times; it indicates that the elimination of secrecy is becoming a factor of security.
We draw this conclusion from the conviction that, today, it is no longer possible to achieve political goals by means of war. To put it simply, war is ceasing to be - indeed, it has already ceased to be - an instrument of rational policy.
Let us consider this from the perspective of regional conflicts, while they flare up and develop in different ways, they still have one feature in common - they drag on intolerably long, without delivering positive political results.
However, positive political results are not slow in coming when interference in regional conflicts gives way to the efforts of the world community to promote their settlement. No one should hinder this process. In this context we have to speak of Afghanistan.
The Geneva Accords are not just an isolated local instance of the settlement of a regional conflict. They ate the first step in a chain reaction leading to a healthier world. They are a new promising beginning in world politics, attesting to a qualitative change in political thinking. They are a message of good news to other regions. Any violation of the Geneva Accords undermines those achievements.
The Soviet Union and the Republic of Afghanistan are observing their obligations under those Accords faithfully, to the letter. There is no need to prove that. However attempts are being made arbitrarily to alter the formula established by the Geneva Accords, thus significantly changing its meaning.
As soon as the Soviet troops began to withdraw, a non-stop production line of violations was set in motion. The list of them would totally refute the assertion heard here yesterday that bloodshed has diminished in that region. On the contrary, terror has been mounting sharply and is increasingly directed against civilians.
In the circumstances, the fact is that faithful compliance by some with their obligations creates conditions for others to commit new crimes, of which the most heinous is the destruction of hard-won hopes. This must not be allowed to happen. The chain of conflict settlement generated by Afghanistan must not be allowed to break.
We are not complaining to anyone. We have the means to make things fall into place. But we are responsible to the United Nations, and therefore we are appealing to it. We are proposing that a meeting of the permanent members of the Security Council, hosted by the United Nations Secretary-General, discuss the question of compliance with the Geneva Accords. It would also be appropriate to invite to such a meeting representatives of the parties directly concerned.
The deep involvement of the United Nations in the resolution of major international problems has spotlighted the acute need for new mechanisms of verification and control. We propose that consideration be given to the idea of an international monitoring and verification agency within the framework of the United Nations.
That body's terms of reference could be very broad. Disarmament and security in all its aspects are becoming an increasingly multilateral and truly international process. The institution for monitoring and verification should also be international.
Many countries feel the need for it. Thus Japan is proposing an interesting idea for the world-wide seismic monitoring of nuclear explosions. France has what we regard as the reasonable idea of setting up an international satellite monitoring system.
These are interesting ideas, but how could they be implemented? Naturally, the most sensible way is to make their, part of a universal monitoring and verification mechanism that would operate under United Nations auspices or within its structure.
Verification is no longer a preference but an imperative of our time. It is an imperative of our time to search for forms and methods for the development of societies that would be in keeping with modern requirements. Certainly this is true with respect to socialism, but with equal certainty it applies to other socio-political systems. While we are changing in both our own and international interests, we are entitled to expect the same kind of perestroika from others.
Separating the wheat from the chaff, distinguishing the right choice from the wrong, and achievements from deterioration, we are unforgiving in judging the past. To be self-critical is the canonical rule for politicians who believe in their people and want the people to believe them. But we expect certain leaders of States who address the international community to be equally self-critical in assessing the past.
It is appropriate to mention this in the year that marks the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which some are marking by reasserting the supremacy of law, and others by preaching their own faultlessness. We could list numerous international instruments on human rights that have not been ratified by the countries represented here by some speakers. We could talk of the continuous practice of violations of civil rights in those countries. But we prefer to speak of ourselves.
The supremacy of law is the corner-stone of political renewal in our country. Creating a State based on the rule of law also has a direct bearing on our foreign policy.
A constitutionally authorized mechanism for working out and adopting strategic foreign-policy decisions is being put in place in our country. Questions such as military budgets, the use of troops outside the country, and innovations in the development of the armed forces will also be subject to constitutional and legal scrutiny.
For us, the principle of the supremacy of law and the policy of democratising our society ace indivisible. The emergence of a State based on the rule of law links with the world-wide will to assert the primacy of international law as the standard for mankind's existence. Among politico-military, economic, humanitarian and environmental guarantees of universal security, we view its legal guarantees as paramount.
From States based on the rule of law to a world based on the rule of law - such is the logic of the movement. A starting-point on this path could be the elaboration of a major long-term programme for the development of international law. Its thrust could be expressed in the motto "Security, trust and co-operation through law".
We must also work persistently to enhance the effectiveness of the International Court of Justice on the basis of developing a common approach by all States to that main judicial body of the United Nations. Completion of the preparation of a code of crimes against peace and the security of mankind would be a major step.
Probably nowhere is the role of law so important as in ensuring freedom of choice, which is the linchpin of the new political thinking. For how can there be any freedom to choose one's own course in situations in which international law is constantly violated - as in southern Africa, the Middle East, Central America and elsewhere?
Freedom of choice defies confinement within ideological borders or geographical zones. It cannot be stopped by "crusades"; it can only be recognized. It is absolute, and equally -resolute is our respect for it, regardless of the orientation of any particular country.
By defining freedom of choice as the key link in the new political thinking, we hope to use that key to open many doors that until now have been tightly locked. Recognition of the diversity of interests, the priority of universal human values and the supremacy of political means in solving international problems, and replacing confrontation with dialogue - those and other components of the new political thinking have resulted in substantial and, we trust, irreversible positive changes. Yet, the fires of political inquisition ace still blazing in the world, and some would try to bring to the stake entire nations and movements accused of the heresy of having freely chosen their own course. Ideology in the shape of missile projectiles crushes them with the cruelty of a medieval axe. I should like to stress that our sympathy is on the side of those who seek to achieve freedom of choice.
Why, for instance, can the great American people have their own great dream, and why should the Cuban or the Nicaraguan, the Angolan or the Vietnamese people, the Ethiopian people be deprived of the right to have their own ideals? Why cannot the Palestinian people have their homeland? Why should other nations, countries and movements be humiliated by great Power arrogance? While not renouncing any of our values or denying to others the right to have their own, while continuing to respect the yearning of peoples for national self-assertion and liberation from economic subjugation and political dependence, the Soviet Union supports the de-ideologization of international relations and the exclusion of the overwhelming component of ideological differences from foreign policy and diplomacy. It expects and hopes that others will do likewise.
It expects the problem of how to pool our efforts to be recognized as commensurate with the problem of the survival of mankind. It expects the force of peace-making policy to prevail over the policy of force which has run its historical course.
The division of mankind into great and small countries is something which has also run its historical course. And, if the term "great Powers" is to be kept at all, it is only in the sense of great responsibility towards the rest of the world. Divisions and re-divisions of the world into spheres of influence are historically pointless. Today, we must all have only one sphere of influence – our planet. It will perish if our influence on the threatening course of destructive developments is divided and fragmented into blocs and systems. Therefore, the Soviet leadership has attempted to reinterpret more profoundly the idea, originally inherent in Marxism, of the interrelationship between class and universal human values, according priority to the interests shared by all nations. In our vision of peaceful coexistence as the universal principle of international relations, it does not emerge as a special form of class struggle.
A rigid polarization of the world, which is becoming increasingly diverse, must give way to its consolidation, which allows the rivalry of two different systems to take on non-confrontational forms. This, if you will, is also a choice, the freedom of which is born of the new political thinking and of its dialectics- which makes it possible to put policies to the test of real life.
But it would appear that not everyone measures up to this freedom. Obstinately clinging to divisive fetishes, some would try to put a brake on the action of the centrifugal forces. As a result, any red-letter days have not appeared on the new calendar of peace this year. For example, it does not include the date marking the completion of a treaty on 50 per cent reductions in strategic arms. The pace of real disarmament set by the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles is slowing down as negotiations proceed.
We seemed to have dealt once and for all with the issue of verification, but it has arisen again because of the negative position of our negotiating partners. It looks as if the Russian proverb "Trust but verify" is good only when applied to the Soviet Union but is not applicable to the United States.
Once again we call on the United States of America to reconsider its attitude to verification of the process of reducing and eliminating nuclear arsenals. For verification is something more than the technical checking on the parties compliance with their obligations. It is the material expression of sincerity and honesty, without which it is impossible to make policy today. It is also regrettable that an agreement barring weapons from outer space has not been concluded in 1988.
We had every reason to hope that 1988 would see the signing of a history-making global convention on the complete prohibition and destruction of chemical weapons. Indeed, most of the complex fundamental issues have either been settled already or ace close to agreement. But once again, the sticky quagmire of procrastination is thwarting the final step towards victory. Meanwhile, in the absence of progress an alarming trend towards the spread of chemical weapons and what I would call chemical permissiveness is surreptitiously beginning to develop.
We do not object to the exploration of alternative ways. The Soviet Union takes a positive view of the proposal made yesterday by the President of the United States to convene a conference of the parties to the 1925 Geneva Protocol. At the same time we, of course, assume that the drafting of the convention banning chemical weapons will be continued and, of course, completed.
The beginning of the process of nuclear disarmament has brought into sharper focus the problem of conventional armed forces and armaments, including naval armaments. Here, too, great hopes were being pinned on this year. The programme of radical reductions in the military capabilities of the two opposing political-military alliances proposed by Warsaw Treaty countries has put the problem on the track of practical solution.
We have a clear goal - to achieve a situation in which the two sides would . have only the forces and capabilities sufficient for defence but insufficient for launching a surprise attack or conducting offensive operations.
There is also another priority problem. Access to conventional weapons in their most modern modifications is expanding. Their technological sophistication makes it easier to use them. There is now no need to spend much time or money on special training, and anyone can easily operate those infernal devices. In other words, conventional weapons are becoming part of everyday life, a common tool in the hands of too many people. This dangerous situation, which is particularly typical of regional conflicts, calls for joint efforts to constrain international arms markets.
Working out a mandate for the future negotiations is also a collective undertaking. Jointly with our allies, we have been finding solutions which bring general agreement closer.
On the question of unfulfilled hopes, we must mention the lack of progress in settling some of the most pressing problems, such as those of the Middle East, Central America, and certain others.
Today, it is clearer than ever what needs to be done. Elementary common sense enjoins that consolidation of forces must be placed above their fragmentation, and constructive dialogue must be placed above destructive scepticism. None of us can any longer waste our time on mutual fault-finding, on mutual recrimination and reproaches. The growing physical destruction of our planet is the verdict against the existing division of the world. It is because of that division that so many pages in the 1988 calendar have not been filled. It is foe the same reason that this year has had such a generous supply of sombre dates.
It is perhaps for the first time that we have seen the stark reality of the threat to our environment - a second front fast approaching and acquiring urgency equal to that of the nuclear and space threat. For the first time we have seen clearly that, in the absence of any global control, man's so-called peaceful constructive activity is turning into global aggression against the very foundations of life on earth. For the first time we have understood clearly what we had guessed: that the traditional view of national and universal security, based primarily on military means of defence, is now totally obsolete and must be urgently revised.
Faced with the threat of environmental catastrophe, the dividing lines of the bipolar ideological world are receding. The biosphere recognizes no division into blocs, alliances or systems. All share the same climatic system and no one is in a position to build his own isolated and independent line of environmental defence.
Man-made "second nature" - the technosphere - has turned out to be dangerously fragile. The consequences of many of its breakdowns are becoming international and global.
The environmental crisis is being exported on an increasing scale, with toxic technologies, facilities, products and wastes spreading, overtly or covertly, through the channels of economic relations.
Quite deliberate attempts are being made to turn densely populated areas of the third world into toxic waste dumps.
In a situation like this it is suicidal to try economically to rein in progressive national developments, to wear down an imaginary enemy by economic pressure. That is the kind of thinking that belongs to the Stone Age.
It is unreasonable to impede the economic reconstruction of countries that seek to restructure the energy industries and to introduce resource-saving and waste-free technologies, thus making the world less dangerous.
How much more sensible it is, as we ate proposing to the United States and other countries, to abolish some planned or ongoing military programmes and channel the funds thus released towards instituting an international regime of environmental security.
All the environmental disasters of this year have placed in the forefront the task of pooling and co-ordinating efforts to develop a global strategy for a rational management of the environment.
All of us - and I emphasize this, all of us - need an international programme to manage the risks involved in economic activities and to shift to alternative technologies that spare both man and nature.
We need resources to save our planet, instead of destroying it. I believe that the world community possesses such resources. But they have to be supplemented, first, by the will and readiness to act and, secondly, by an effective mechanism for international ecological co-operation.
It is quite clear that in this area, too, nothing can be done without the tools of the new political thinking. In this area, too, it must emphasize the factor of time. We have too little of it - very little - and problems are piling up faster than they can be solved.
Even the implementation of the positive decisions already adopted could take years and years. Just the physical elimination of intermediate- and shorter-range missiles will take three years of continuous daily work and the Treaty's entire sequence of implementation will take 13 years. This makes it incumbent upon us to take responsible decisions today.
What are our liabilities? Tens of thousands of nuclear warheads and hundreds of thousands of tons of toxic agents; mountains of conventional armaments; holes burnt in the ozone layer and the eroding biosphere; the greenhouse effect and the depletion of non-renewable sources of energy; acid rains and deserts devouring the green world; forest fires-and floods; drying up seas and dying fauna; terrorism against the peoples and aggression against nature.
What are cur assets? The world's growing maturity which makes it possible to raise and solve global problems on a planetary scale; a growing world-wide "Green Peace" movement; shared perceptions of environmental scientists and policy-makers who are becoming increasingly active as environmentalists, as demonstrated by the document of the States Parties to the Warsaw Treaty and the recent appeal issued by the peace movement; the report entitled "Our Common Future", prepared by the World Commission headed by Mrs. Brundtland, and the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) models of environmental renascence to counter environmental apocalypse; the experience of the past three years which attests to the possibility of removing corrosive growths from the body of the earth; the experience of pooling the efforts of States in the use of advanced technology, such as thermonuclear fusion and superconductivity, in the interests of human survival.
This year's calendar has also included another event; the inauguration of the Centre for the development of an international experimental thermonuclear reactor by scientists from very many countries who will chart the way towards inexhaustible sources of energy for the coming century and at the same time develop a model for concerting efforts in the interests of all peoples.
Among our assets is the realization that a monopoly of a small number of countries over advanced technologies and attempts at all costs to keep others on the sidelines of the emerging science-and-information world may boomerang against the monopolists.
Among our assets is the United Nations, whose high efficiency has been so graphically demonstrated by the events of 1988. They have also highlighted a simple but very profound truth; when nations, particularly the great Powers, begin to co-operate, the United Nations gains in influence and strength, once again recapturing the spirit of its initial objectives.
It is true that the fable about two elephants stamping our grass is still popular. President Reagan's statement yesterday would seem to indicate that this grass is not being threatened.
We do not want to fight, and love is still a remote possibility.
But speaking seriously, the world community has gained much from the improvement in Soviet-American relations.
In this regard I am pleased to cite a remark by Mr. Perez de Cuellar.
The meeting between Gorbachev and Reagan, he said, has shown the world community an example of voluntary dialogue. Governments have suddenly realized that the United Nations is an entirely appropriate place for negotiations and solving problems. Precisely, but I would say "the most appropriate place". If in the past it has not always been that, the Organization itself is least to blame.
Let us speak frankly and say that many of us, including particularly the permanent members of the Security Council, are to blame for the fact that at some point certain fundamental values of our Organization embodied in its Charter were devalued. Now that they are regaining their initial level, it is our duty to learn the bitter lessons of the past for the sake of the future.
Today, for instance, the Soviet Union is reconsidering its previous attitude to the Organization's economic institutions. In particular, we attach great importance to the activities of the United Nations Economic and Social Council and would like to contribute to enhancing its effectiveness.
No country stands to gain by remaining aloof from the international forums of our Organization. Having drawn this more than obvious conclusion, we are asking: should not some of our partners take a fresh look at their attitude to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)?
The permanent members of the Security Council should set an example in strengthening the authority of the united Nations, enhancing its role and expanding and enriching its peace-making functions. All of us here are witnesses to the beginning of the renaissance of our Organization. At the same time we are architects of this process. We shall enhance the role of the United Nations even more by concerted efforts to combat the threats to our environment. It is, we believe, precisely within the framework of the United Nations that international machinery should be established to formulate urgent decisions on pressing global problems, above all economic and environmental problems.
The Soviet Union proposes a discussion on the question of how to turn the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) into an environmental council capable of taking effective decisions to ensure ecological security. It proposes that a three-event series of emergency meetings be held - of course, under the auspices of the United nations - to co-ordinate efforts in the field of ecological security; a consultative meeting of experts to discuss the health of the Earth, in 1989? a summit meeting of the leaders of, say, 15 or 20 States representing all continents, and the influential force of our time, the Non-Aligned Movement, in 1992 the holding of the second United Nations international conference on the environment, as planned, in 1992, or even earlier, but in any event at summit level.
We have been speaking of a calendar of real achievements, a calendar of ideas as yet unrealised, a calendar of hopes and plans for the future. The review of this year that we have undertaken is not an end in itself. What can be an end in itself is the inner moral objective of achieving progress and acceptance of the political need to identify the moment of truth, which from time immemorial has tended towards movement, towards overcoming inaction.
This year has been full of both movement and slow-downs. It has shown that Mikhail Gorbachev was right when he said;
"A complex and in many respects unusual situation is developing in the world. We are at the beginning of a new, long road that offers new prospects and new problems" Which tendency will prevail? What will gain the upper hand - the tendency towards further movement ahead or the inertia of stagnation?
The answer is to be found in abandoning certain dogmas, even though cast in the form of eternal truths. We have to write a new catechism of international existence, in which the beginning will be thought and reason, followed by deeds for the sake of our common salvation and development. We must stop sermonizing from lofty international rostrums and recognize the principle of equality in international dialogue.
As for the dogma of "peace through strength", let us leave it to those who worship the faded commandments of the past. The keynote of history is peace through reason, and this, too, is a commandment foe the future.
The past has great power over us, but although that is true, the future has an even greater gravitational pull. The poetic metaphor, "to win the affection of space, to heed the call of the future", takes on a lofty political meaning.
Let us not be deaf to that call. Let us respond to it by really uniting to save life on our Earth.
Let us begin now.


In addressing this Assembly, I would like to assure it of the political will of the delegation of Guinea to make its modest contribution to the success of the work of the forty-third session.
I should like to take this opportunity to convey the message of friendship of the people of Guinea, and of its Government, which is courageously led by His Excellency General Lansana Conté.
Your well-deserved election as President of this session, Sir, is a just reward for your laudable efforts and your outstanding human qualities, which give our work a spirit of serenity and expectation of success. Your country, in addition to belonging to the third world and to the Non-Aligned Countries;, has warm and friendly relations with Guinea, which therefore is sincerely gratified by your election. We can assure you here and now of the active support of our delegation.
Furthermore, the forty-second session is still fresh in our minds, and I should be remiss if I failed to pay a sincere tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Peter Florin, Vice-Minister of Foreign Affairs of the German Democratic Republic, who guided the work of the last session with sensitivity and skill.
We should like solemnly to hail our outstanding Secretary-General, whose firm dedication to the cause of pea e and fruitful co-operation among all States has been expressed in the various negotiations he has skilfully guided throughout this year to find just and comprehensive solutions to the various regional conflicts.
The full shouldering of this heavy responsibility is a clear guarantee of the achievement of the legitimate hopes which mankind has placed in the universal Organization. Although, unquestionably, many events have occurred in the past year and a new impetus has been given to the dynamic process of finding solutions to them, it is reasonable to conclude that consideration of the international situation does not justify undoubted optimism. In fact, hotbeds of tension continue to exist throughout the world, and more specifically in the southern hemisphere, which is subject to various political upheavals, aggravated by an extremely precarious economic situation.
Against this backdrop, the alarming situation in southern Africa is of vital interest because of the policy of apartheid and the acts of destabilization carried out by the racist regime of Pretoria against neighbouring States, as well as its illegal occupation of Namibia. We are therefore following with continued attention the four-Power talks that are now taking place with regard to the sensitive area of the African continent. In fact, we remain confident that these talks will lead to the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), on the accession to national sovereignty of the Namibian people under the leadership of the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO). Moreover, we support the Declaration and the Plan of Action adopted by the International Conference on the Plight of Refugees, Returnees and Displaced Persons in Southern Africa, held last August in Oslo.
The South African regime cannot stamp out the internal contradictions which batter at the apartheid regime. The attention of international public opinion cannot be distracted from the imposition, of a state of emergency and from all the other violations, including repeated acts of aggression against the front-line States and the support given to puppet movements.
The permanent members of the Security Council have a particular responsibility and a decisive role to play in bringing Pretoria round to reason. We hope that these countries, which are dedicated to Freedom and to human rights, will assume their share of responsibility for success in the implementation of global and binding economic sanctions as a means of exerting effective pressure on the racist regime of Pretoria.
With respect to the Organization of African Unity (OAU), bold decisions have been taken here by the heads of State and Government, designed to strengthen moral and material support for the fighters of the African National Congress (ANC) and the Pan-Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC), as an essential condition for its intensification in the struggle against apartheid and for the establishment in South Africa of a multiracial egalitarian and democratic society.
Among our concerns, the question of the Western Sahara is of high priority. It is encouraging to see the lifting of the clouds which for a long time have darkened the relations between Algeria and Morocco, two brotherly countries linked by history, by geography and by culture. These events reflect not only an act of faith but also mark an important step in re-establishing confidence and the consolidation of Afro-Arab co-operation and the building of a united and prosperous Maghreb.
My delegation greatly values the commendable efforts made in particular by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. His wisdom and far-sightedness have been important factors in resolving the crisis and in ensuring a return to an atmosphere of mutual understanding.
In this respect I should like also to pay a tribute to the OAU and to all the brotherly African and Arab countries whose contribution has in any way helped to improve the situation.
We note with satisfaction the favourable development of the process of settling the dispute between Chad and Libya under the guidance of the Ad Hoc Committee of the OAU, and my delegation firmly supports its mediation efforts.  The significant results of contacts between the leaders in the Horn of Africa deserve our attention. This resumed dialogue should be encouraged and pursued with a view to establishing unity, fraternity and co-operation, in the sub-region on the ashes of hostility and mutual distrust.
We must also stress the positive development of the situation in the Comorian island of Mayotte. We hope that the talks will lead to a just solution to the question.
The same holds true for New Caledonia, where any initiative likely to eliminate the atmosphere of confrontation should be implemented. Here, the repercussions of the recent visits of the Prime Minister of France to New Caledonia and the new steps undertaken by his Government are clear signals of good will.
The developments in sensitive areas dominated by instability make us think of the continuing crisis in the Middle East. In that region the heroic uprising of the Palestinian people as the expression of the natural right to legitimate defence against foreign occupation. It is as a function of this inalienable right that justice-loving nations demand the recovery of the occupied Arab territories and the creation of an independent Palestinian State under the aegis of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).
The convening of an international peace conference in the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations and with the participation of all parties concerned, including the PLO, now seems a viable means of concerted action to find a lasting solution to the conflict.
Moreover, we cannot but be satisfied today at the happy outcome of the fratricidal war which for eight years has pitted Iran against Iraq and which has caused untold loss of life and damage. The cessation of hostilities will doubtless give vigorous impetus to the work of national building and will lead to progress and stability. Here, we should hail the persevering efforts of the Secretary-General to bring the two parties to a peaceful settlement to the conflict through the proper implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) and as an important stage in seeking a just and global solution to this terrible conflict. For its part, the Government of Guinea encourages the two parties to the conflict to pursue negotiations and to demonstrate political will, given the steps that are being taken at various levels to overcome all obstacles, within the frameworks of a peaceful settlement of this dispute.
Concerning the situation in Afghanistan, we continue to hope that the process of normalization will continue through the proper and systematic application of the Geneva agreements by all the parties involved. This will allow that country in the very near future to decide on its own destiny, free from any foreign interference.
This trend towards the defusing of tensions also holds true regarding Kampuchea, where the withdrawal of foreign troops remains the key to the problem. The direct and indirect talks among interested and concerned parties deserve our encouragement.
Tensions continue however in the Korean Peninsula despite the existence of numerous constructive proposals. Foreign intervention and the policy of over-arming seem to be the two fundamental obstacles to the peaceful and independent reunification of the northern and southern parts. The meeting of the North Korean and South Korean parliamentarians is an encouraging event inasmuch as it provides a possibility for the opening of dialogue, which can lead to conclusive results.
Regarding the crisis on Cyprus, the last meeting between the President of the Republic of Cyprus and the representative of the Cypriot-Turkish community in Geneva gives rise to a glimmer of hope regarding the re-establishment under the aegis of the United Nations of national unity and territorial integrity.
The situation in Central America continues to be of concern to our community. The hope aroused by the Arias Plan for a global political settlement to the conflict is no longer being reflected in facts. The establishment of an atmosphere of good-neighbourliness among all States of the region and the return to democratic principles, as laid down in that Plan, could, however, have created the necessary conditions for a return to peace and security. There is, therefore, reason to encourage the Contadora Group and the States of the Support Group to continue their efforts with a view to for the integral application of this Plan.
Regarding disarmament and the growing threat which the build-up of nuclear arsenals represents for mankind, the third special session of the General Assembly devoted to Disarmament had the task of assessing and adopting corrective measures. My delegation keenly regrets that the session was unable to adopt a final document because the defence of national interests dominated over the categorical imperative of global security. Benefiting from a favourable international climate, that session could, through a process of consensus - which to be sure is difficult to achieve on a question as thorny as that of disarmament - have supplemented the positive gains achieved in the bilateral negotiations between the Soviet Union and the United States of America.
However, throughout this period the arms race has been continuing, devouring enormous financial and material resources which could have contributed to the process of socio-economic development throughout the world. In my delegation's view it is impossible to maintain peace without a consistent policy of general and complete disarmament under effective international control, just as it is unrealistic to attempt to establish a balance in international relations in an environment characterized by non-military threats to security.
A new·/ vision has emerged over these last years in dealing with crucial questions linked to security, following the progress achieved in the disarmament field - in particular, nuclear and chemical disarmament. It is up to multilateral disarmament forums to pursue that work in order to achieve even more substantive results. In addition, the rather positive geo-political environment of the last few years, characterized by a definite will to go beyond political and ideological divergences, is a manifestation of a progressive awareness of leaders and peoples of the virtues of frank dialogue and serious concerted action.
Concerning the zone of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic, the Government of Guinea will support all efforts likely to promote achievement of the objectives of the declaration in resolution 41/11. It was in this spirit that my country participated in the meeting at Rio de Janeiro, whose final document symbolizes the determination of the States of the South Atlantic to make of their region a genuine zone of peace and co-operation.
Paradoxically, these recent encouraging and positive developments are in contrast to the rather gloomy picture of the international economic situation, given the continuous and increasing difficulties experienced by the developing countries in general and by the African States in particular. Indeed, despite the great sacrifices made by the latter in their various programmes of structural readjustment, they have not yet been able to enjoy the advantages that they have the right to expect, even if, on the domestic front, they have had a slight rise in their gross domestic product and some growth in food production.
In any case, we note with some concern that financial flows are dwindling. The tendency rather is for a transfer of capital from the South to the North. In fact, foreign investment, which represents for our economies a life-saving breath of oxygen, which can achieve certain national growth for development, is drying up. A glimmer of hope appeared when the international community demonstrated understanding and political will by adopting the United Nations Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development. The assessment of the implementation of that Programme has not yet shown prospects for specific measures, although certain international institutions have demonstrated some readiness to take action.
The situation regarding debt-servicing is unfavourable, while inequalities in international terms of trade are worsening. There are reasons for satisfaction at the conclusions of the seventh session of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), which, although of limited scope, stressed these problems while urging rich and poor to pursue negotiations, which at the moment are deadlocked, in order to promote continued and lasting growth of the world economy.
In the Sudano-Sahelian region of Africa, natural disasters, such as locust invasions and floods, are, first and foremost, endangering food production and are decreasing the volume of exports, which have suffered already from unequal terms of trade. That is why it is essential to have an overall view of these various economic and social trends and to emphasize the ever-growing interdependence in international economic relations, ultimately, in the multipolar world in which we are living, balance can be achieved only through political will, linked to a realistic approach on the part of the international community.
It will be recalled that a positive initiative was undertaken by the Secretary-General in 1986 regarding the setting up of a strategy to enable us to cope, through the United Nations Programme for the Environment, with the damage caused to the environment. This decision was based specifically on the attention given to environmental problems throughout the world and, in particular, in the African countries confronted with a most alarming advance of the desert because of deforestation, the practice of large-scale cultivation and other factors contributing to deterioration.
Another ecological phenomenon, which is even more ominous, is threatening the developing countries. If I take the liberty of stressing this, it is precisely because my country, like many others, has been considered a dumping-ground by certain groups of countries and companies·, which find yet again in Africa a favoured place for casting out all the evils and ills of this world. Energetic measures must be taken by the international community to do away with such attitudes, which seriously endanger biological diversity and the ecosystem, and are in violation of all international conventions in this field.
Above and beyond its will to co-operate with all well-intentioned countries, the Republic of Guinea, for its part, will adhere to all legal guarantees that are in conformity with international norms and to the recommendations of the Organization of African Unity concerning prohibition of a recurrence of this type of situation in its national territory. We consider that these inhuman actions contribute to the sowing of disorder and dismay among our peaceful peoples and that they are a serious threat to present and future generations.
The promotion of respect for human rights and their universal application, by encouraging co-operation among States, is one of the fundamental objectives of the world Organization. In keeping with the spirit and the letter of the Charter, the events of today are an acknowledgement of the close relationship between respect for human rights and the maintenance of peace and international security- The fact that, through zealous efforts, the United Nations has succeeded in establishing a set of human-rights principles and rules that are internationally recognized should be noted among its most outstanding successes. For us, one of the essential tasks of the United Nations is to take effective measures against mass and flagrant violations of human rights, violations which are indeed a threat to peace and international security. Lack of respect for the right of peoples to self-determination, as well as humiliating practices and policies inspired by racism or apartheid, or existing for any other reason, require of our Organization, and of each of the Member States, the adoption of a firm position and adequate measures. The principle that there must be respect for, and implementation of, human rights is, we are convinced, the corner-stone of our civilization - a value shared by all mankind, a value that we have all set, and one that we must preserve and allow to grow.
The United Nations has demonstrated that it is an irreplaceable universal forum, whose central role has enabled us to resolve certain conflicts and to expand the foundations of democracy, peace, security and development. Its Charter includes rules and general principles that must serve as permanent reference points in our collective and individual actions. Any concept that is opposed to multilateralism undermines the idea of the interdependence of nations and sabotages the will to co-operate. It is by that will that all States - large or small, rich or poor - can effectively contribute to the establishment of a world free from distrust and terror, so long as its structure and means of functioning are adapted to today's realities.
While the uncertainty of a better future makes some sceptics view happiness on this Earth as a mirage, or as the horizon which recedes as we advance towards it. My delegation, for its part, nevertheless dares to hope that with the dawn of the third millennium the human race will provide the necessary surge of awareness to achieve - burning and eternal in all disillusioned hearts - the basic prerequisite for man's existence which is the thirst to live free and in peace.


I warmly congratulate Mr. Dante Caputo on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-third session. I am confident that his vast experience and reputation will ensure that our work at this session is greatly facilitated and enhanced.
The Secretary-General has been an untiring champion of peace. I wish to common him highly for the tremendous strides made in the past year in his efforts to resolve the problems of long-standing areas of conflict.
Much has transpired since I last addressed the Assembly that gives cause for optimism. It may be that a glorious era of peace is about to bless the generations of our time. The super-Powers have reached accord on the elimination of a whole class of nuclear weapons. The international common is on the verge of negotiated settlements affecting Afghanistan and the Iran-Iraq war. Within the grasp of the United Nations is the potential for the resolution of other intractable problems of the decade, which include those of Kampuchea, Cyprus and Namibia. It is encouraging also to hear that southern Africa may have set its schedule for peace. A new international convention against narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances is near completion. All of this indicates vitality and purpose and makes it imperative that Member States renew their commitment to the United Nations and to multilateralism.
Further, the soldiers who are deployed around the world in the United Nations peace-keeping force, ensuring armistice and reinforcing the peace structure, ate to be warmly congratulated on the recognition they have received by winning the Nobel Peace Prize. The Secretary-General is to be thanked and commended for his great efforts, and the United Nations may feel justly proud of this achievement.
The question of arms limitation and disarmament is timely today and will be much discussed in the foreseeable future. May I point out three examples that show the process of multilateralism at work. First, at the 1988 session of the Disarmament Commission, last May, the Commission was able to make specific consensus recommendations on two of its eight substantive items: verification and guidelines for confidence-building measures. Secondly, later in May the members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, meeting at Havana, Cuba, continued the process by adopting a consensus appeal to the two major Powers to reach agreement on disarmament. Thirdly, although a consensus text could not be produced at the third special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament, last June, a spirit of co-operation governed the deliberations of the working groups.
That success in arms limitation and disarmament holds the key to reducing military confrontations and minimizing the danger of nuclear war cannot be denied. This fact has provided the impetus for the role that the Bahamas played in the negotiations at those several meetings and as Chairman of the Disarmament Commission.
Today, the confidence of the Bahamas in the United Nations is as strong as it was the day we joined the Organization in 1973, and our commitment to the United Nations has not faltered and will not falter. Indeed, we hope to translate this commitment into specific action by serving on the Economic and Social Council and the Committee for Programme and Co-ordination, for which out candidature is known, and on the Security Council, for which we will be a candidate during the forty-fifth session of the General Assembly. This action will be reinforced by the experience of more than 15 sovereign years of stability, moderation and prosperity, a record unmatched by any State of similar size and natural resources.
The recent momentum in solving some of the globe's most pressing problems has served to underscore inconsistencies that may challenge the solution of others. The AIDS (acquired immunodeficiency syndrome) epidemic has escalated to alarming proportions, while unabated drug abuse and addiction defy the powerful and baffle the weak. Internal and regional conflicts have been experienced on every continent, resulting in catastrophic casualties. Natural and created disasters have taken their crippling toll. It could be salutary were the diplomacy and enthusiasm brought to solving problems between the super-Powers in military matters to be applied and paralleled, with similar understanding, to these other problems, which are just as important to the survival of mankind.
Over a year ago there was much cause for optimism when the countries of Central America signed the peace accord. The Bahamas is convinced that Esquipulas II remains the most effective mechanism for achieving lasting peace in Central America. We join the international chorus in calling upon all parties to continue to search for peace, and challenge all States to support their efforts, encouraging but not pressuring them as they seek to find their own paths to lasting peace.
In our region, Bahamas wishes to encourage the parties to territorial disputes to continue to work towards a negotiated settlement. In welcoming the new initiatives, the Bahamas reiterates its support for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Belize and Guyana.
As the international common confirms its commitment to democracy and human rights. South Africa remains the bastion of racism and apartheid. The racist policy has as its foundations discrimination, denationalisation and the brutal repression of the black majority.
The rising tide of black resistance to apartheid is evidence that the black majority is undaunted by the brutal and savage repression of frequent and lengthy states of emergency such as the present one. Democracy, racial desegregation, social justice and the abolition of apartheid are now considered by many to be indispensable life-and-death issues.
Economic pressures have forced South Africa to offer the black majority only trivial concessions thus far. What is required is a range of economic sanctions that are sufficiently costly to compel South Africa to initiate the process of dialogue with representatives of the African National Congress and other legitimate organizations of the black population with a view to establishing a non-racial democratic Government. The sovereign States neighbours of South Africa ought to be protected from incursions and bombing by the South African military, which murder innocent civilians and wreak havoc on their societies and economies.
The Bahamas continues to encourage the United Nations and all Mender States, especially these with significant economic relations with South Africa, to implement effective economic sanctions in an effort to abolish apartheid, for its part, the Bahamas will continue to lend full support to all efforts leading to the eventual dismantling of apartheid.
In the midst of international despair regarding the apartheid regime of South Africa there is a glimmer of hope. Recent developments in Namibia increase our optimism that Namibia may at last achieve its independence. We encourage all concerned to continue to strive for the achievement of that noble objective at the earliest date possible.
The cease-fire is most welcome in the war between Iran and Iraq which has for eight years threatened international peace and security. The Bahamas was therefore pleased to note the recent developments which may at last lead to peace in that region. It is our fervent hope that all parties to the dispute will continue to search for a negotiated settlement in accordance with Security Council resolution 598 (1987) which would end the war and the attendant loss of life and destruction of property. The Bahamas wishes to record its appreciation for the mediation efforts of our Secretary-General and hopes that all States will lend him their full co-operation and support.
The Bahamas has always supported Israel's right to exist. The Bahamas also strongly supports the right of peoples to self-determination. Self-determination should be guaranteed to the Palestinian people. The Bahamas therefore supports the convening of the international peace conference on the Middle East, with all the parties to the conflict being represented. Although the Palestinian issue is complex, we are satisfied that until it is resolved the chances of peace may be remote.
Narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances remain a burning issue for our region and for the entire international community. The threat that drug abuse and drug trafficking pose to the security, stability and socio-economic viability of many States continues to elicit an unprecedented multilateral response. With the necessary political and diplomatic will, a plenipotentiary conference could adopt a new convention against the illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances later this year. last year more than 130 States represented at the International Conference against Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, convened on the initiative of the Secretary-General, unanimously declared drug control to be the collective responsibility of all States.
The United Nations efforts for drug control are paralleled by standing bodies in virtually all regions of the world. In our own Latin American and Caribbean region, the Inter-American Drug Control Commission has taken up the challenge to co-ordinate a comprehensive hemispheric response to the phenomenal illicit prediction, traffic and abuse of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances in the Americas. The activities of the Caribbean Community (CARIOOM) accurately reflect the critical concern of Member States in reducing the vulnerability of the region to the illicit transit traffic in narcotic drugs. CARIOOM's initiatives are substantially focused on protecting the people of the subregion from the scourge.
Also of concern to the Bahamas are the increasing interventionist attitudes, pronouncements and measures adopted in the region, which arise from the war on drugs. Although regional Governments agree on a common vigorous course of action against the drug trade, overzealous and unilateral measures are nevertheless taken which threaten the stability of co-operative Governments themselves. The pursuit of such attitudes, pronouncements and measures is a blatant abuse and is not in the interest of peace and security in the region and particularly of small States such as the Bahamas, which ensure vulnerable because of their geographical locations.
The antidote for such interventionism is the strengthening of multilateral co-operation. Small States, such as the Bahamas, with a stable economy, low inflation level, balanced budget and one of the highest per capita income in its region, must rely on the multilateral approach which this world Organization alone affords. The progress made toward solving some of the world's most serious problems are indicative of what can be achieved if more support for and less bashing of the United Nations is encouraged. The Bahamas takes positive note of and applauds recent decisions to deal with the troubling question of arrears in contributions.
The Bahamas is heartened by the fact that, after months of discussion about Africa  crushing debt burden, the major Western creditor countries have finally agreed to ease the plight of the world's most indebted nations. At their summit conference in Toronto on 19 to 21 June the leaders of the leading Western industrial States - the Group of Seven - agreed in principle to a set of options to alleviate the debt-servicing burden. That breakthrough may be considered the result of pressure which the February report of the Secretary-General's Advisory Group on Financial Flows to Africa brought to bear upon the creditor nations.
Equally encouraging is the fact that preparations are in the final stage for an in-depth review of the United Nations Programme of Action for African Recovery and Development 1986-1990, just two years after its adoption by the General Assembly, in June 1986. The review will focus on the economic policy changes undertaken by African Governments and will also spotlight the role of the international common and the United Nations in supporting Africa's recovery and development efforts.
Before closing, I should like to join with those of my colleagues who have expressed caring concern over the human suffering, loss of life and serious damage to property caused by natural disasters in our fellow Member States of Bangladesh, Jamaica and Mexico. Bahamas is encouraged by the wide expressions of sympathy by, and commitments of support received from, the  international common. We are hopeful that the support of the international community will assist those Member States in the immense task of their reconstruction.
I conclude by referring to a view which I quoted from a leading national journal of a Member State some years ago. It said: "... the sad, even bitter, truth is that the United Nations is no longer in the mainstream of world politics". At the time I stated my opposition to that statement. Years later the United Nations has undeniably vindicated itself.
We owe it to present and future generations to establish a legacy of peace and security which can be realized only through an effective United Nations.


After a period in which the United Nations was seen by many as marginal to the great issues of the world, events during the past year have demonstrated quite the contrary. The Organization can play a key role in the solution of serious international conflicts. In particular, after years of tragic and bloody wars in Afghanistan and between Iraq and Iran, the United Nations has made crucial contributions, in co-operation with the various parties, towards bringing them to an end.
The painstaking end meticulous efforts of the Secretary-General and his Personal Representative with regard to Afghanistan were brought to fruition with the conclusion of the Geneva Accords in April; and in August, Iran and Iraq finally agreed to a cease-fire, on the basis of Security Council resolution 598 (1988), after years of careful diplomacy by the Secretary-General and the Council. Much remains to be done, of course, but firm bases for bringing these international conflicts to an early end have been formed.
Let me take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to the Secretary-General for his skilful and quiet diplomacy, as well as to those military officers from various countries who have selflessly volunteered to serve as United Nations observers in the two areas.
The United Nations and its Secretary-General have also, in varying degrees, important roles to play in finding comprehensive, just and lasting solutions to other regional conflicts; Cyprus, Kampuchea, southern Africa, the Arab-Israeli conflict, Lebanon, Western Sahara, Central America. While the political will to find peaceful solutions on the part of the partiers concerned is indispensable, impartial United Nations mediation provides an essential ingredient in helping these parties to overcome their differences and implement agreements reached. All Member States must support such efforts. My Government welcomes this resurgence of confidence in multilateralism. It is testimony to an increasing awareness that regional conflicts affect us all and that commonly agreed solutions are therefore called for.
With these substantial achievements in mind, one can hardly believe that the United Nations is at the same time struggling financially. The fact is, however, that the very existence of this Organization is at stake owing to withholdings of assessed contributions from Member States.
It is evident that it is time - indeed, more than time - for all Member States to live up to their financial commitments to this Organization. It is not only a Charter obligation, but also, as illustrated recently, in the clear interest of all Member States, both individually and collectively, to have a strong and effective United Nations, while statements of political support are important, \.hey must now be followed by the necessary action from those Member States which have not paid their dues. In this connection we welcome the recent first steps taken by the United States Administration.
At the same time this Organization must be efficient and rational. The reform process decided upon two years ago has already shown much progress, in particular owing to the follow-up action undertaken by the Secretary-General.
However, with regard to the study of the United Nations intergovernmental structure and functions in the economic and social fields undertaken by Member States, the results were highly disappointing. Denmark believes that renewed efforts towards achieving major reforms in the economic and social fields are necessary in order to make the United Nations more effective and thus to strengthen its work in these areas.
The international situation facing us today is filled with signs of hope and promise, and in some cases also with remarkable achievements. It would be incorrect, however, if I tried to imply that all issues on which the East and the West do not see eye to eye have disappeared over the past year. That is still far from being the case. But even in this field we have witnessed developments and results which make us believe that the community of nations is on the right track in coming to grips with many of the outstanding problems.
The achievement of President Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev at the summit meeting in Moscow, where for the first time in history agreement was finalized on the dismantling of a whole class of nuclear weapons, sent a message of hope to people all over the world.
Regular and constructive dialogue at the highest level is a positive factor in its own right and gives us great encouragement.
The agreed solution to end the tragic occupation of Afghanistan is another sign of improved international relations. Those are only examples, albeit very important ones. I venture to believe that developments will not stop here, that the process of improving East-West relations will go on, that both sides know the agenda ahead of us and that there is a willingness to move forward. We are aware that many of our partners in the East are deeply engaged in transforming their own societies in fundamental ways. We are following their efforts with interest and we are hopeful that these efforts, if successful, will in themselves serve to lessen tension and to promote understanding and co-operation among countries in both East and West. Still, we must get on with the work between us.
An early conclusion of the Vienna Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) follow-up meeting with a balanced and substantial result will be a major contribution to consolidating the improvement of East-West relations in Europe. A successful conclusion of the Vienna meeting will pave the way for East-West negotiations on conventional stability. It will also open up possibilities for major progress in the human rights field of direct relevance to ordinary human beings in all Europe.
Possibilities for achieving substantial progress in negotiations on disarmament are favoured by the prevailing political climate in the world. Against this background we regret that it did not prove possible to reach consensus on a final document from the third special session on disarmament. It would, however, be wrong to classify the session as a failure. The discussions and negotiations took place in a positive and co-operative atmosphere, and valuable work was done during the session. On many issues the session succeeded in narrowing differences and in reaching new grounds of consensus.
One of the tasks of this session of the General Assembly will be to recognize and affirm the progress made in individual areas and to continue the pressure and encouragement towards further agreement in the disarmament field. We must strive to maintain confidence in the multilateral negotiating system.
Many have been the calls over the years for a ban on chemical weapons. We appreciate the progress made at the Conference on Disarmament. The abhorrent use of chemical weapons has made even more urgent the task of reaching agreement on a global convention prohibiting such weapons. All sides must take an active part in the negotiations towards this end.
Denmark has signed the 1925 Protocol without conditions. We do not have any chemical weapons. We do not want any. This has always been our policy and we have declared it openly. It would be a sign of confidence and an important political signal if all countries declared their policy towards chemical weapons and whether or not they possessed those weapons.
We note the call made yesterday by the President of the United States in his statement for an international conference to consider actions which can contribute to prevent the use of chemical weapons as an important initiative, which is of particular attraction after the horrible use of chemical weapons which we have witnessed in the Gulf war - a use for which not even the slightest excuse can be found and which we strongly condemn.
The Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) remains one of the most important arms control agreements reached to date. Since its entry into force 20 years ago, it has made a significant contribution to world stability. Reports of nuclear ambitions of certain countries in various parts of the world are extremely worrying. The nuclear option must never become an attractive solution to perceived security needs. Suspicion and mistrust must be countered by openness and trust. The non-proliferation regime is a crucial part of building that trust. We therefore urge all States at present outside the NPT to accede to the Treaty.
Increased concern over the complex issue of conventional disarmament has been manifest over the last years. All States have a direct responsibility in this field, and the issue of conventional disarmament should also be kept at the forefront of the multilateral debate on disarmament in the United Nations. This would serve to stimulate and support efforts and negotiations at the regional level.
Among regional conflicts, one area which suffers from particular tension and armed violence is the Middle East. Lately, however, we have seen the beginning of a dialogue take the place of armed confrontation in perhaps the most brutal conflict of our times. Denmark has consistently supported the efforts of the United Nations to bring about an end to the war between Iran and Iraq, and we rejoiced when it became clear that a termination of the hostilities is no longer a distant hope but a reality at hand.
It is understandable that eight years of warfare does not create an atmosphere of mutual confidence conducive to a peaceful settlement of the dispute. The road to permanent stability may be long and arduous, but we must do whatever possible to ease and shorten it. Peace and security will not only bring immense benefit to the peoples of Iran and Iraq; it will make the world a safer place to live in.
I pledge our wholehearted support to the Secretary-General and his Personal Representative, Ambassador Eliasson, in their further efforts in this conflict. The Danish participation in the United Nations Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group (UNIIMOG) bears witness to our commitment to contribute to a peaceful solution. It is a source of deep concern to the international community that, in the aftermath of the war, arms have been turned against Kurdish civilians. Not only is this brutality evidenced by the presence of a huge number of refugees in a neighbouring country, but we have even received reliable reports that chemical weapons have been applied. This is despicable. The use of illegal weapons and violations of human rights are not internal matters but a legitimate concern of the international community.
Dialogue has regrettably not replaced confrontation in the Arab-Israeli conflict. An atmosphere of violence and mutual mistrust prevents the creation of an environment of mutual trust which is indispensable for getting negotiations between the parties off the ground. The tragic events in the territories occupied by Israel bear this out only too clearly. We appeal to all parties to exercise restraint. The repressive measures taken by the Israeli forces are not in conformity with international law and must stop.
The declaration of 31 July by His Majesty King Hussein to the effect that Jordan no longer claims sovereignty over the West Bank has created a new situation. I implore all parties to exercise moderation and take only steps which will further the cause of peace.
An international conference under the auspices of the United Nations seems at present the only way to bring about a just and lasting settlement of the conflict.
In Lebanon, mutual mistrust has had disastrous consequences in terms of disorder, civil strife and human suffering. The constitutional crisis over the election of a new President has highlighted the problems, and we appeal to all parties to exercise restraint and good will to save the very existence of Lebanon. It is obvious that the serious situation now existing in southern Africa is to a very large extent the result of South Africa's policy. Through acts of destabilization in the form of military aggression, economic pressure and direct support to armed rebel movements in the neighbouring countries. South Africa has severely undermined social and economic development in the region, thereby adversely affecting the daily lives of millions of persons.
In South Africa itself the abhorrent apartheid system continues without major changes in sight. Apartheid remains a flagrant violation of the fundamental human rights laid down in the United Nations Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Many thousands are gaoled for political offences. Others are forced to seek refuge abroad. For the millions of victims of apartheid that remain in South Africa the situation is constantly deteriorating. There is an urgent need for a genuine national dialogue in South Africa across lines of colour, politics and religion. It goes without saying that it is incumbent on the Organization to reflect and act upon the deep concern and indignation of the entire international community at the persistence of such serious violations of fundamental human rights as those being perpetrated by the apartheid regime. Apartheid cannot be reformed. It must be abolished.
In Namibia the South African illegal occupation and the oppression of the population continue. Namibia's independence is long overdue and should be pursued by all peaceful means. The ongoing negotiations between the United States, Angola, Cuba and South Africa have established the basis for some hope that the South African Government will withdraw its forces from Namibia and that Security Council resolution 435 (1978) will be implemented. Denmark hopes that the negotiations can stop armed interventions by South African troops inside Angola and lead to the establishment of peace in Angola.
The Danish Government has for many years actively supported the struggle against apartheid and assisted the countries of southern Africa in their development efforts. Pending mandatory sanctions by the Security Council, the Danish Government has taken unilateral measures in order to terminate trade with South Africa and Namibia and to limit other relations with South Africa to an absolute minimum. Our diplomacy is engaged in a systematic effort to encourage their countries to increase their contribution to reinforced and more effective international pressure against apartheid.
In March this year Denmark and its Nordic partners adopted a revised Nordic programme of Action against Apartheid. The Programme calls for increased assistance to South Africa's neighbouring countries in order to alleviate the factors of destabilization, to strengthen their power of resistance and to reduce their dependence on South Africa. Many of the countries of southern Africa are major recipients of Danish development assistance bilaterally as well as regionally through the Southern African Development Co-ordination Conference (SADCC). Our joint efforts are geared towards promoting economic, social and human-resources development. Such
development is also of prime importance to enable these countries to handle the racial problems of the region brought about by apartheid, political disturbance, and natural catastrophes.
My Government welcomes the successful conclusion of the Afghanistan talks with the signing of the Geneva agreements on 14 April, paving the way for the withdrawal s Soviet forces after more than eight years of occupation. We congratulate the Secretary-General and his Personal Representative on the success of their untiring his skilful efforts; and we pay a tribute to Pakistan for its readiness to accept ш lions of Afghan refugees over the years. These agreements represent an important step towards a solution of the Afghanistan crisis. We hope this will lead to a comprehensive political settlement, including the voluntary return of the refugees, the opportunity for the Afghan people to exercise its right to self-determination, and the re-establishment of a sovereign, independent, neutral and non-aligned Afghanistan. Major aid efforts under United Nations auspices are under way, and Denmark will not fail to make its contribution in this regard.
The people of Kampuchea has suffered untold hardship, first at the hands of the notorious Pol Pot regime, then because of the Vietnamese occupation. Kampuchea must be free both from foreign troops and from any prospect of a return to the appalling brutality of the Khmer Rouge, The Jakarta Informal Meeting in July offers glimmerings of hope that all parties concerned now realize that a political solution is called for. We urge that the dialogue be vigorously pursued, and we hope that it will lead to the re-establishment of a sovereign, independent, neutral and non-aligned Kampuchea in accordance with resolutions of the United Nations. The right to self-determination of the Kampuchean people must be fully respected.
With regard to the Korean peninsula my Government has been encouraged by initiatives in recent months, in particular President Roh's declaration of 7 July and his proposal for a meeting of the Presidents of the North and the South. A resumption of the suspended direct dialogue between the two parties is the only way to reach a solution by peaceful means. Denmark is on record as being a firm supporter of the principle of universality; it is our hope that, in keeping with that principle, the people of Korea may soon gain full membership of the Organization. My Government extends its best wishes for the success of the Olympic Games in Seoul.
A year ago there was a feeling of satisfaction and relief in the Assembly after the conclusion of the Guatemala peace plan. During the autumn of 1987 we saw a number of measures taken by the Central American countries in implementation of that agreement. However, genuine peace and true democracy have not yet been achieved in the whole of Central America. And recent developments, unfortunately, point in the wrong direction. Respect for freedom of information and opinion and other fundamental liberties, intended by the Guatemala accord to be the corner-stone of the process, are again being gravely infringed. Violence and disrespect for basic human rights go hand in hand with attempted coups and other disturbances. Genuine peace and true democracy again seem a distant hope.
The Danish Government continues to believe that without democracy, allowing for full public participation in the political systems, and without respect for basic human rights no lasting solutions to the manifold problems of the region can be found. Thus we remain convinced that it is vitally important for the countries of Central America to continue their efforts in accordance with the agreement reached in Guatemala. At the same time, all countries with links to and interests in the region must co-operate constructively in that process. Together with our partners in the European Community, we are ready to continue our active support for these efforts.
Denmark's support of United Nations peace-keeping operations has always been an important part of our United Nations policy. We have actively demonstrated our support by participating in peace-keeping operations and observer missions in the Middle East, Kashmir and Cyprus, as well as in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Most recently, Denmark has placed officers at the disposal of the United Nations Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group. We have also reiterated our willingness, in principle, to participate in the United Nations Transition Assistance Group in Namibia. Denmark has time and again stressed that all United Nations Member States carry a joint responsibility for the peace-keeping activities o' the United Nations and for the financing of these activities. Regrettably, some peace-keeping operations are still faced with serious financial problems, especially the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon and the United Nations Force in Cyprus. In these two cases the financial burden is carried by the troop-contributing countries to an unreasonable degree. If the United Nations Transition Assistance Group is decided upon as planned, it will no doubt add a new and even more difficult dimension to the already existing problems.
Against this background we find it imperative that agreement among Member States be found on the financing of ongoing and forthcoming peace-keeping operations in order that the financial burden will no longer be carried by the troop-contributing countries alone. Should efforts to this effect, however, prove fruitless, Denmark might feel compelled to reconsider how best to allocate its contributions to peace-keeping operations.
Turning to international economic questions, I wish to emphasize the crucial importance of a common understanding of the challenges confronting us. Improved macro-economic co-ordination is necessary in order to correct the major imbalances. Another important element is the successful outcome of the Uruguay Round. We all share the responsibility for securing and strengthening the open, liberal, multilateral trading system. Protectionist tendencies must be curtailed, and solutions must be balanced with increased benefits to all participants, including the developing countries. While respecting the principle of differential and more favourable treatment, the newly industrialized countries should gradually and in accordance with their ability be encouraged to integrate themselves more fully into the open, multilateral systems of international trade and monetary and financial matters.
It is hardly possible to speak on a number of economic development problems without also underlining the necessity of such development being sustainable. Short-term solutions which undermine the environment and the natural resource base upon which longer-term economic and social development must build are - where at all avoidable - cynical and an affront to coming generations, which do not have a voice to speak out against today's decision-makers.
Recent incidents of illegal exports of dangerous waste to other countries are but one of many examples of practices that have to be corrected. It is to be hoped that the ongoing process of study, review and implementation of recommendations set forth in the report of the World Commission for Environment and Development and in the Environmental Perspective to the Year 2000 and Beyond will gradually take us a large step in the right direction. There is a need to strengthen the concessional assistance to the low-income countries in support of the efforts to revive social and economic development. Resources, however, remain scarce. It is of serious concern that the level of official development assistance lags far behind the internationally agreed targets. In fact the ratio of official development assistance to gross national product is declining, and I therefore urge all industrialized countries to increase their official development assistance.
A few years ago Denmark decided on the basis of a broad political consensus to increase the development assistance gradually so that it will reach 1 per cent of the Danish gross national product in 1992. In 1988 our development assistance has reached 0.88 per cent of our gross national product.
Many of the economically and socially strained developing countries are facing serious environmental disruption. The problems have assumed such dimensions that often they are beyond the financial and administrative capacity of those countries. Therefore it is important through multilateral and bilateral assistance to strengthen their capacity to solve the environmental problems so as to support sound and sustainable development. The United Nations system has a leading role to play in these efforts. Politically the need for action has been acknowledged. This understanding must be transferred into operational and concrete action.
Women play a decisive role in the development process. Therefore it is imperative to continue and to strengthen development efforts for the advancement of women economically, socially and legally.
The consensus adoption in 1986 of the United Nations Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development was a recognition of the need for strengthened and concerted efforts in tackling the problems of the sub-Saharan countries. The Programme has proved its success by the concrete initiatives which have been taken during recent years by the African countries themselves and by the international community. The outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Committee on Review of the Programme of Action underlines the continued mutual commitment to the Programme of Action and clearly demonstrates the need for further action by all parties.
We are on the eve of a fourth United Nations development decade. Unforeseen changes in the international environment have drastically altered the realities of the present decade. We have learned that a strategy cannot address all development problems in general. A new development strategy for the fourth development decade should be flexible in its targets. A fresh approach is necessary, it must be pragmatic and realistic, committing developing as well as developed countries.
The fortieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which we shall all celebrate on 10 December this year, reminds us that one of the basic duties of this Organization is to promote and encourage respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion. After 40 years this duty is, unfortunately, still relevant.
Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration this Organization has been engaged in intensive work of standard-setting. One of the important tasks for us in the years to come is to implement these standards. My Government is therefore concerned that the implementation of various instruments is weakened by the fact that some Governments do not fulfil their financial obligations under these instruments, thereby hampering the monitoring systems, if the United Nations is to be more effective in combating human rights violations, it is necessary that all States adhere to these instruments and meet their financial obligations.
A sad consequence of the many abuses of human rights is that millions of people have been forced into fleeing their countries out of fear for their life or liberty. Although we have witnessed some encouraging developments in the world refugee situation over the past year, the international community is still faced with the enormous challenge of finding durable solutions to the plight of these millions of refugees.
We recognize and commend the efforts carried out by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), but at the same time we realize that these efforts will succeed only if his Office can count on the full support of all members of this Assembly. Over the years my Government has been a staunch supporter of the Office and would like to see its role further strengthened and developed. To this end my Government launched two years ago in this Assembly some ideas aimed at strengthening the role of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, inter alia through a global scheme of resettlement places at the disposal of the Office and through additional financial resources to countries of first asylum. In Europe the outline of a structure to deal in a humanitarian spirit with this problem is beginning to emerge. My Government feels confident that only through such concrete action, and with the active involvement of the UNHCR, shall we be able to work towards a comprehensive approach to the international refugee problem.
It is my hope that the elements contained in this undertaking can be further developed and employed in other regions where the refugee situation is presenting an equally distressing picture.
This session of the General Assembly will have to deal with numerous complex issues of peace and human progress. Bearing in mind the important progress made on several questions over the past year, it is my earnest hope that further headway will be made in the months to come.