Allow me at the
outset to congratulate Mr. Freitas do Amaral on his election
to the prestigious office of President of the General
Assembly at this fiftieth session. His distinguished career in
Portuguese politics serves as an assurance that his tenure
will be very workmanlike and fruitful, in addition to
celebratory. I wish also to thank the outgoing president,
Ambassador Amara Essy, for the excellent job he did last
year.
It is particularly auspicious to address the General
Assembly this week — a day after the signing, in
Washington, of a bulky, carefully crafted and
long-argued-over agreement between Israel and the
Palestinian Authority on the second stage of Palestinian
autonomy; and a few days after the signing, here in New
York, of a much slimmer, much more tentative and much
more general set of additional principles for peace in the
South Slav States, which, nevertheless, we hope,
represents the next step towards peace in that area as
well.
On 24 October, the United Nations will celebrate its
jubilee. This indicates that the objectives and ideals of
this Organization, as set out in the Charter, are still valid
and still at the forefront of the interest of the international
community. This fills us with joy, all the more so since
one of the founding Members of the Organization was
Czechoslovakia.
The founding of the United Nations was the logical
outcome of the efforts of countries which, having been
affected by the most terrible war in the history of
mankind, wanted to ensure that a new organization would
prevent any repetition of a similar conflagration.
Guaranteeing global peace, however, has never been
the sole objective of the United Nations. The United
Nations constitutes a unique forum for all countries,
without distinction, to present their opinions and pursue
their international interests in all areas of concern,
including not only security and disarmament but also
social and economic development, protection of the
environment and other issues that are particularly pressing
nowadays, including drug trafficking and terrorism. The
United Nations thus offers a platform for solving global
problems.
The United Nations efforts to implement the
principles of its Charter enjoy the full support of the
Czech Republic. Mr. Václav Havel, the President of the
Czech Republic, will no doubt underline the importance
we assign to it when he speaks from this rostrum next
month. Nevertheless, in view of the changes that have
taken place since the inception of the United Nations,
there is an urgent need to adapt the Organization to new
challenges, to thoroughly reform it and to turn it into a
better and more effective instrument of multilateral
international relations.
The most important task is that of creating a more
efficient and more cost-effective system. We need a
practical system, one which, even with limited means,
would guarantee global security, uphold human rights and
9

contribute far more effectively to development in less
privileged parts of the world. We need an Organization that,
on the basis of the principle of universality, is open to all
those who are willing and ready to participate in this
endeavour.
The United Nations cannot spend a penny more on
programmes that duplicate one another or on programmes
that have become ineffective or even unnecessary. Many
programmes can be consolidated, or indeed even
eliminated, without any adverse effect on their
beneficiaries. The message is clear: many of our national
Governments are implementing cost-control and efficiency
measures, and a similar approach must be taken by the
United Nations as well. We recognize the important role
that the Advisory Committee on Administrative and
Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) plays in the process of
managing the United Nations finances and the importance
of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, created last
year. These organs must control United Nations
expenditures even more strictly.
The Charter of the United Nations devolves the basic
responsibility for maintaining international peace and
security to the Security Council. In this role, the Council is
irreplaceable. It is perceived as a compact, efficient,
transparent and alert body that should guarantee rapid and
effective United Nations action, wherever necessary, to
maintain or restore peace anywhere in the world.
Although it is currently perhaps the most efficiently
operating organ of the United Nations, there is room for
improvement. The Council must put greater stress on
preventive diplomacy, and it should further improve the
flow of information between its members and other United
Nations Members, as well as its cooperation with the
Secretariat. Greater transparency of the Security Council in
its decision-making would also be desirable. These are steps
the Council can pursue by itself.
A broader issue is that of restructuring the Council,
which requires our special attention. We support, and
actively participate in, the Open-ended Working Group on
the reform and restructuring of the Security Council, and
we anticipate that the proposals that eventually emerge from
it will actually be implemented. The number of permanent
and non-permanent members of the Council should increase
to about 20. Any substantially greater number would affect
its effectiveness. It should, as far as possible, include
representation by all regions, and the Group of Eastern
European States should be allotted an additional seat. We
oppose any new categories of Security Council members.
Participation in maintaining world peace and meeting
financial obligations to the United Nations are some of
the criteria that should be considered in determining the
expansion of the permanent membership. We believe
Germany and Japan to be suitable candidates, and
advocate expanded representation of Latin America,
Africa and Asia.
Logically, non-permanent members, and small States
in particular, cannot play the same role as permanent
members with the veto. Nevertheless, non-permanent
members have a positive role to play in the Council’s
activities and in its decision-making. During its current
tenure on the Security Council, the Czech Republic has
been contributing constructively to the Council’s
activities. Our own active policies demonstrate, on the
one hand, the unmistakable place of the Czech Republic
among traditionally democratic countries and, on the other
hand, our independent analyses and attitudes, in which we
are beholden to no other Power. Our Security Council
activity has also demonstrated — if such a demonstration
were indeed necessary — our commitment and
involvement not only with respect to Europe, but also in
seeking solutions in far-away conflicts which at first
glance may not affect us.
The Czech Republic supports a more active role of
the Security Council in various aspects of conflict
management and in delving even deeper to the roots of
conflicts. Such a role, exemplified for example in
preventive diplomacy, aims at creating conditions and an
atmosphere for parties in dispute to enter into serious and
sincere negotiations, thus restoring stability and peace in
the regions where tension prevails. When it comes to
implementing the results of negotiations, active and
complex peace building and peacemaking have been our
primary vehicles. We do not share one-sided negative
evaluations of the results of United Nations peace-keeping
operations. In some regions normalcy has been restored
precisely because of the United Nations and its peace-
keeping activities. But there are also regions where
tragedies unfold unchecked despite the United Nations
best efforts, including tremendous financial, material and
personnel contributions.
In its extent, depth and consequences, the crisis in
the former Yugoslavia amounts to the greatest and most
tragic conflict in post-war Europe. The inability of Europe
and of the international community in general to stop the
conflict has undermined the confidence of the world
public in a number of international institutions. Gaps in
existing security arrangements have become apparent, and
10

the European integration process has slowed down and
became more complicated. The Balkan conflict is also
frequently linked with the crisis of the United Nations and
with the perceived need to create a more effective
international security mechanism for resolving regional
conflicts. In this strange way, the war in the former
Yugoslavia might thus eventually assist in forming a new,
more effective security mechanism.
It transpires that the international community was not
ready for the conflict. It underestimated its complexity and
its potential for escalation. Its length and its chronic
character are linked with the military-strategic equality of
the antagonists who, despite international pressure, have
been refusing to negotiate. They believe, quite erroneously,
that they can attain more of their objectives by fighting than
by negotiating and signing a peace agreement. The latest
developments indicate that it is impossible to attain any
significant success in solving conflicts of this type without
the determination of the international community and the
combination of strong political pressure, sanctions and the
appropriate use of military force. But it is still more
obvious that a final, just and lasting solution can be attained
only by peaceful negotiations.
The fate of the innocent civilian population lies at the
heart of our concerns. The victims of ethnic cleansing, the
still-concealed tragedy of the men and boys of Srebrenica
and Zepa and the exodus of Croatian Serbs from their old
homes all evoke fears for the fate of civilians. We should
help monitor the observance of human rights for civilians
on all sides of the conflict.
The United States initiative regarding Bosnia and
Herzegovina, as well as Croatia, amounts to an effort to
create a joint peace project of Contact Group members and
other interested parties. This effort should be fully
supported by the international community and presented to
the belligerent parties as the basic framework for solving
the crisis. The de facto recognition of the territorial
integrity of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina by the
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and of the Srpska Republic
by the Sarajevo Government, as well as the acceptance by
Bosnian Serbs of the Contact Group plan dividing the
territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina in a 51:49 ratio, should
certainly facilitate the next phase in peace negotiations.
The changing approach of the Serb party to peace
initiatives of the international community, especially to the
latest United States plan, confirms the more cooperative
approach of Belgrade to finding a peaceful solution
acceptable to all sides. This is definitely a positive. By the
same token we supported the joint North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO)-United Nations operation, even
though we realize that in and of themselves, air strikes
would not resolve the conflict. Effective cooperation
between the United Nations and NATO in implementing
relevant Security Council resolutions has demonstrated
that NATO has a very important role to play in the
region.
Solving the problem of Eastern Slavonia should also
be on the agenda of current peace efforts.
The Czech Republic is ready to continue its active
participation in peace missions in the former Yugoslavia,
whether under United Nations auspices or under some
regional arrangement according to Chapter VIII of the
Charter. Needless to say, the Czech Republic will
continue to the best of its abilities to provide
humanitarian assistance, and intends to participate in the
post-war reconstruction of the war-ravaged areas.
There has been a great increase in the number of
peace-keeping operations since the end of the cold war.
In the last five years, more peace-keeping operations have
been launched than during the entire previous existence of
the United Nations. In 1995, 16 peace-keeping operations
were functioning, compared to eight in 1988, with almost
70,000 personnel. Expenditures rose about five times.
This issue is inextricably connected with the critical
financial situation of the United Nations. The United
Nations is almost $4 billion in the red. The Czech
Republic supports not only the reform of financing peace-
keeping operations, but of the entire system of United
Nations financing. The system should be based on
economic indicators — per capita national product — and
should correspond to a given country’s ability to pay. Let
me assure you that the Czech Republic takes its
responsibility very seriously.
We are prepared to pay our fair share of the burden
immediately and in full, as soon as this share is decided
and we receive formal notification from the
Secretary-General.
Czech authorities are right now drafting legislation
which, if adopted, would create a legal framework for the
Czech Republic’s participation in the United Nations
stand-by arrangements. The system should be as effective
as possible. Similarly, initiatives aimed at the
establishment of United Nations rapid-reaction units to be
based on this system — including, for example, the recent
11

Canadian proposals to this effect — have our
understanding. Resolving all political, organizational and
financial issues will take time, yet we feel that this is a
promising way of addressing the critical question of getting
peace-keeping operations started in time.
We hope very soon to become a party to the
Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated
Personnel. We share the burden of peace-keeping operations
by sending troops, military observers and other personnel,
and therefore have a keen foreign-policy interest in
strengthening their status and security.
Strengthening regimes of non-proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction is high on the agenda of the United
Nations. It is our view, shaped by, among other things, the
recent horrific discoveries of the United Nations Special
Commission in Iraq, that the Security Council should play
a more important role in this regard.
The unlimited extension of the Non-Proliferation
Treaty attained earlier this year in this very building is a
success of truly historic importance. An important task is
the preparation of an agreement on a complete and
comprehensive ban of nuclear tests. We hope that the
intensive negotiations at the Conference on Disarmament in
Geneva will reach a successful conclusion in 1996. And let
me make one point: nuclear tests undertaken despite vocal
protests from around the world do not contribute to the
objective of global denuclearization.
The expectation of an early ratification of the 1993
Convention on the Prohibition of the Development,
Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and
on Their Destruction has not yet been realized.
Nevertheless, we hope that in 1996 the Convention will
enter into force.
Existing regimes of export and import controls for
dual-use material, equipment and technologies are also very
useful. They complement or expand on international
agreements, conventions and treaties concerning the
banning, elimination and non-proliferation of weapons,
especially those of mass destruction. I have in mind in
particular activities of the so-called Australia Group, the
Nuclear Suppliers’ Group, the Missile Technology Control
Regime and the emerging New Forum, the new multilateral
arrangement on export controls.
The importance of the topics of this year’s United
Nations conferences, the Social Summit in Copenhagen and
the Beijing Fourth World Conference on Women, attracted
broad public attention — which, for that matter, was one
of the objectives of their organizers. As we reflect on
these conferences, evaluate their final documents and
review the fate of the documents that emerged from
earlier conferences, we are contemplating the very future
of such meetings.
Notwithstanding all the expectations and enthusiasm
that accompany them, we note the increasing
disenchantment from the moment a conference is over
and its conclusions are to be implemented. It then
becomes obvious that large parts of its declarations fail
the litmus test of practicality. One wonders: do the
tremendous efforts and the very considerable outlays
involved in organizing such activities really have the end
effect we would all desire? We are not sure that we can
answer in the affirmative.
The Czech Republic is a candidate for membership
in the Economic and Social Council at this year’s
elections. The successes of our economic transformation
have already proved to be of interest to other economies
in transition. And they have allowed the Czech Republic
to become an emerging donor country in the
economic-assistance equation. These are some of the
arguments I would submit to support our candidature. We
of course realize that the Council is as badly in need of
reform and streamlining as other segments of the United
Nations body, and maybe more. We are prepared to offer
our analytical skills in suggesting improvements and to
support reasonable proposals leading to such reforms.
Allow to me say a few words from the perspective
of another high office I currently hold, that of the
Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Council of
Europe. The United Nations and the Council of Europe
have a number of points in common. These common
points should be further explored with a view to
eliminating duplication even across organizations,
economizing expenses and leveraging our resources.
Some ideas about cooperating in the triangle of the
United Nations, the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe and the Council of Europe have
recently been shared in Strasbourg. I have full confidence
that any ideas that are deemed useful will be further
examined and implemented by our organizations.
The Czech Republic wishes to demonstrate its
continued emphasis on multinational diplomacy and on
assuming its proper role in the governance of world
affairs. We have been doing so in the Security Council
these past years; we do so by sending our troops, military
12

observers and other personnel to far-flung corners of the
world; and we do so by offering multilateral and bilateral
assistance. Putting our shoulder to the wheel, we join others
in moving this organization of ours into the next
millennium and into its next 50 years.


It is a great honour to represent
Canada here today as we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary
of the United Nations during this general debate.
Canada has always been among the strongest
supporters of the United Nations, not only in word but
also in deed. In 1945 we were, through Canadian Prime
Minister Mackenzie King, an original signatory of the
United Nations Charter. Ambassador John Humphreys
helped write the 1948 United Nations Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. Successive Canadian
Ambassadors to the United Nations have distinguished
themselves in the service of the Organization, as have
countless Canadian negotiators in areas ranging from
disarmament to trade to development. In addition, Lester
B. Pearson won a Nobel Peace Prize for his contribution
to the success of the United Nations in establishing the
first peace-keeping operation, in 1956.
All these Canadians had a unifying purpose: to
promote progress in implementing the United Nations
Charter, which enshrines the commitment of the people of
the United Nations to the advancement of humanity.
Of course, there have been criticisms of the
Organization; many are legitimate and require attention.
It is clear, however, that the international community
remains committed to the goals of the Charter and to the
United Nations as the primary instrument for global
problem solving.
The United Nations deserves our continued support.
If we look at the record of just the last few years, the
United Nations has conducted successful peace-keeping
operations in Cambodia, Mozambique and Haiti. Thanks
to the United Nations, in this decade alone 5 million
children will grow up normally, children who would
otherwise have been paralysed by polio. This year the
United Nations is working, as it does every year, to
ensure a better life for the almost 23 million refugees in
the world.
Global resolve to support the United Nations and to
advance the interests of the international community has
recently been underscored by such successes as the
indefinite extension of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation
of Nuclear Weapons. At the Halifax Summit in June,
chaired by our Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, the P-8
(Political Eight) leaders reaffirmed their strong
commitment to the United Nations system of international
institutions and added their ideas for revitalizing it.
The central message is clear: we must take this
momentous opportunity to confirm and renew our
commitment to the United Nations. To do so, we require
a renewed vision for the next 50 years. This vision must
5

be centred on not just striving for, but achieving, human
security on the basis of the freedom of people everywhere
to live in peace and without fear, to be prosperous and
enjoy equality, justice before the law and knowledge. The
Members of the United Nations must work together now to
renew the Organization and its agencies and programmes
and to help make this vision a reality.
In Canada’s view pursuing this vision requires a focus
on three interlinked objectives: preventing conflict;
responding quickly when conflict occurs; and supporting
peace-building efforts on an ongoing basis. I will address
each objective in turn.
(spoke in French)
The first priority must be to help the United Nations
better protect people from conflict. The United Nations has
had important successes in the past few years but,
unfortunately, there have also been set-backs. If the United
Nations is to adapt to a changing world, if confidence in
the Organization is to be restored, we must learn from the
failures of Bosnia, Somalia and Rwanda and build on the
successes of Cambodia, Namibia and El Salvador.
Preventive action, as the Secretary-General has laid
out so well in “An Agenda for Peace”, takes many forms,
from economic development programmes to mediation, to
the preventive deployment of personnel — as, for example,
in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia — from
the investigation of human rights violations to the
conclusion of agreements limiting the spread of weapons of
mass destruction. Prevention saves lives, forestalls untold
human suffering and makes the best use of limited
resources.
Last year I announced at this podium that Canada was
providing a list of Canadian experts available to the United
Nations for preventive diplomacy missions. We are also
taking advantage of our membership in La Francophonie,
in the Commonwealth and in regional organizations such as
the Organization of American States (OAS) and the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE) precisely in order to work towards enhancing the
ability of these organizations to prevent conflicts. Our
Prime Minister, Jean Chrétien, is currently pressing for an
expanded Commonwealth role in democratization and good
governance, which are two key elements of conflict
prevention. I recently convened a meeting of La
Francophonie in Ottawa to generate recommendations for
it to strengthen its role in conflict prevention, particularly
in Africa. These recommendations will be presented to the
leaders, the Heads of State and Government, gathered at
the Francophone Summit to be held in Cotonou, Benin, in
December of this year.
Prevention also means deterring crimes against
humanity. Canada strongly supports the early
establishment of an international criminal court, which
will, we hope, deter such crimes in the future but, should
they occur, would punish the perpetrators. The recently
approved Platform for Action at the United Nations
Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing lends
further impetus in this area.
Our recent experiences in the former Yugoslavia and
in Rwanda emphasize the link between security and
human rights. The United Nations many human rights
mechanisms produce a wealth of information that could
help us identify and understand potential areas of conflict.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights has a role to play in enhancing the early warning
functions of the United Nations. The experience of the
Human Rights Field Operation in Rwanda revealed the
need for the more effective coordination of United
Nations field missions. Canada has commissioned work
on the human rights components of field operations and
on stand-by arrangements for them. This work will yield
recommendations on ways to integrate human rights into
United Nations field operations, in a way consistent with
the approach outlined in “An Agenda for Peace”.
One of the priorities of Canada’s foreign policy and
one of the best ways to renew commitment to the United
Nations consists of adopting a coherent approach to the
prevention and management of complex emergencies.
Averting crisis requires more flexibility and speed in
decision-making and in implementation. In this regard
Canada supports the proposal for a conference on
security, stability and development in the Great Lakes
region of Central Africa. We also reaffirm our strong
support for the United Nations Department of
Humanitarian Affairs.
(spoke in English)
Another major focus of Canada’s preventive action
is arms control and disarmament, especially concerning
nuclear weapons. The historic decision to extend the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT) indefinitely provides a foundation for further
important gains on nuclear disarmament. We must now
complete the comprehensive test-ban treaty negotiations
as early as possible in 1996 in order to permit its
6

signature at the General Assembly next September. An
agreement to begin negotiations on a treaty to ban the
production of fissionable material for nuclear weapons is
currently held up. We squander such opportunities at our
peril. Canada calls on all members of the Conference on
Disarmament to proceed urgently with the cut-off
negotiations.
Regrettably our efforts to take preventive action are
eroded by the continued global imbalance between spending
on armaments and spending on human development.
Multilateral institutions should take trends in military and
other unproductive spending into consideration. All States
Members of the United Nations should comply with the
United Nations Register of Conventional Arms which will,
we hope, be expanded soon to include military holdings and
national procurement activities. Together, interested
countries could develop criteria to identify excessive
military expenditures and appropriate international
responses. Canada has taken some initiatives in this regard
in recent months and we look forward to productive
negotiations with many Member States here.
When a United Nations preventive diplomacy
operation stumbles and efforts to prevent conflict fail,
Member States all too often criticize the United Nations.
But much of the blame for the failures of the Organization
lies with the Member States themselves who do not provide
it with the tools needed for success. These tools are never
needed more than when a crisis erupts.
Last year I discussed the problems the United Nations
has encountered in mobilizing its peace operations to
respond to crises. Canada’s long experience with peace-
keeping has convinced us that improvements are possible.
The international community’s slow response to the horrible
and deeply distressing events in Rwanda was very much in
our mind. It was in this context that I announced that
Canada would examine ways to improve the capacity of the
United Nations to react quickly to such events.
Today I have the honour of presenting to the
Assembly Canada’s report entitled “Towards a Rapid
Reaction Capability for the United Nations” as a special
Canadian contribution to the United Nations during its
fiftieth anniversary year. It presents practical proposals for
enhancing the United Nations rapid reaction capability in
the field of peace operations. I believe the proposals will
both help save lives and conserve scarce resources.
The report expresses the view of the Government of
Canada, but considerable care was taken to consult with
other Governments, non-governmental organizations and
intergovernmental institutions. We are also deeply grateful
to the many experts from many countries who have lent
us their time and wisdom.
The main proposal of the report is the "Vanguard
Concept". This concept will permit the United Nations to
assemble, from Member States, a multifunctional force of
up to 5,000 military and civilian personnel, and, with the
authorization of the Security Council, quickly deploy it
under the control of an operational-level headquarters.
This operational headquarters would be responsible for
the advance preparations that are crucial if rapid reaction
is to work. Forces will be provided under enhanced stand-
by arrangements with Member States. Our other proposals
seek to enhance training, to create more efficient logistics
and transportation, and to strengthen the planning efforts
of the entire United Nations system. Let me say that none
of the 26 recommendations in the report requires Charter
reforms.
But the search for immediate, practical solutions
must not preclude more visionary possibilities. In this
regard, the report looked at longer-term questions, such as
advanced technology in support of the United Nations
peace operations, the feasibility of a permanent group of
civilian police, the idea of a United Nations Standing
Emergency Group, a permanent force as has been
considered by our colleague from the Netherlands; and
the question of independent sources of revenue for the
United Nations system.
(spoke in French)
I believe that the recommendations in the report, if
implemented, will strengthen the United Nations capacity
for more rapid, effective and successful peace operations.
They will help restore confidence in the ability of the
United Nations to respond to crises.
We are conscious of the fact that words are not
enough. In the words of a former military adviser to the
United Nations:
“We can’t deploy studies.”
For Canada this report is only the first step in
translating ideas into action. To meet the growing need
for civilian personnel during crises, Canada will offer the
United Nations secondment or the loan of civilian
personnel on a short-term urgent basis to help in the
development of a fully trained capacity in the areas of
7

human rights, legal advice, humanitarian assistance, and
other aspects of a rapid civilian response to crises.
Last week Canada sent the Secretary-General an
updated inventory of Canadian personnel and equipment on
stand-by to the United Nations, including technical
information that would be crucial to rapid response. We are
now prepared to negotiate with the United Nations a more
detailed memorandum of understanding on stand-by
arrangements, which would include more information on
readiness and capability standards.
Our report devotes special attention to the creation of
an operational-level headquarters as the heart of the
“Vanguard” concept. Canada is prepared to help in
establishing its headquarters should the United Nations
decide to accept this recommendation. We have already
made a significant number of military personnel available
to the United Nations on secondment or on loan. We are
prepared to make available additional personnel, both
civilian and military, in order to bring this idea closer to
realization.
The time for moving towards fundamental
improvements in the way the United Nations responds to
crises is now. A number of countries have advanced
proposals similar to Canada’s and there are many new and
interesting proposals for change coming also from the non-
governmental sector.
Follow-up is of key importance. We need to marshal
our energies, to determine the most promising areas of
action, and to move quickly towards putting words into
action. Over the coming weeks and months, Canada intends
to work closely with like-minded countries from around the
world, and, of course, with the United Nations Secretariat
to this end.
The ongoing work of peace-building must continue
alongside preventive diplomacy and now rapid reaction
operations. Indeed, peace-building involves a wide range of
activities. Much of the work needed for articulating a broad
vision of human security has already been done in the
series of United Nations conferences in the economic and
social fields, culminating in the Platform for Action
recently adopted at the United Nations Conference on
Women. It sets out a comprehensive view of sustainable
development, which balances economic and social agendas
for the purpose of promoting the well-being of society. This
global consensus offers an opportunity to restore confidence
in the work of the United Nations system in these fields,
and to dispel the perception of aimlessness and drift. The
United Nations can continue to play an invaluable role in
forging global agreements on development goals, in
advocating core values, and in responding to humanitarian
and development needs.
We must seek to anchor change in a commitment to
people-centred sustainable development. A strong
emphasis must be placed on the reduction of poverty and
on the integration of the poorest countries into the world
economy. However, no single country, or even group of
countries, can achieve global results alone. We are,
therefore, determined to work with all Member States to
pursue these goals sufficiently and effectively. Let me
take this opportunity to set out some ideas on the way to
renew commitment to the economic and social work of
the United Nations.
First, there is a need to achieve the right balance
between wide-ranging debate and decisions on which
programmes should be adopted. The justified breadth of
debate does not mean that United Nations programs
should be established to address every problem. There are
many other actors who play important roles. The United
Nations should focus on what it is uniquely equipped to
achieve.
Secondly, there is a need for a fresh sense of the
real goals of development. The outcomes of the major
conferences are at the core, and their distillation and
coordinated follow-up should be a touchstone for the
United Nations in the economic and social fields.
The roles and functions of organizations and
agencies should be examined and refocused to ensure that
they are oriented to future needs. The Agenda for
Development is an important opportunity to initiate the
institutional change required.
Improving cooperation with and among specialized
agencies is essential to give limited resources some
impact. The Economic and Social Council must take more
responsibility for policy coordination within the United
Nations system. A start was made this summer in Geneva.
The recent establishment of the United Nations
Programme on AIDS is a promising example. There, the
executive heads of agencies and programmes must
demonstrate leadership, particularly in coordinating the
follow-up to international conferences and ensuring that
duplication, overlapping and needless spending are
eliminated as far as possible.
8

We must effectively harness the complementary roles
of the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions.
To ensure a smooth transition from emergencies to
rehabilitation, improved cooperation in crises must be an
immediate priority. I urge the Secretary-General and the
leaders of the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) to propose new arrangements for post-crisis
assistance. They could also establish a high-level working
group to consider how to strengthen cooperation, both at
the Organization’s Headquarters and elsewhere, in areas
such as data collection, analysis and reporting. The World
Trade Organization (WTO) should also participate in
relevant aspects of this work.
We have all come to understand the extent to which
human security is indivisible from environmental security.
More and more conflicts are arising following disagreement
over the use of finite natural resources. The United Nations
therefore has a key role to play in promoting sustainable
development. Canada welcomes the recent success of
United Nations conferences in some areas of international
resource-management operations, such as the United
Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly
Migratory Fish Stocks. Our goal is concrete, internationally
sanctioned conservation measures. The same objective
applies to our efforts to ensure the sustainable management
of forests and arable land.
The Rio Summit achieved landmark agreements on
climate change and biodiversity. Canada welcomes the
progress made by the Commission on Sustainable
Development and by the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP), in clarifying their respective roles in
following up these agreements in collaboration with
Member States.
(spoke in English)
In speaking about the three elements — preventive
action, rapid reaction and peacebuilding — I wish to
emphasize the need to see them as mutually reinforcing.
United Nations Member States must be committed to all
three in order for any one to be successful.
To ensure a renewal of the United Nations vision
through these actions, we must also reassert our
commitment to assuring the effectiveness of its key bodies.
Although I could speak of many United Nations agencies
in this regard, because of its critical role in promoting the
vision of the next 50 years, I will limit my remarks to the
Security Council.
The Security Council’s mandate to help prevent
disputes and to resolve conflicts confer on it unique
responsibilities. The binding nature of some decisions
adds further weight to its deliberations.
In recent years the Council has experienced a period
of intensified activity. It has also experienced setbacks
from which we can all learn. One lesson of particular
importance is that members of the Security Council,
especially the permanent five, need to demonstrate a firm
commitment to the implementation of their own decisions.
For Canada, the need for more open, transparent and
collegial decision-making is crucial. There must be closer
consultations with countries contributing personnel and
equipment in order to help implement Council decisions.
Here, real progress has been achieved of late, which
Canada warmly welcomes. This progress needs to be
institutionalized.
The credibility and effectiveness of the Council in
promoting international peace and security is also a key
element. Although we do not regard expansion of its
membership as a panacea, it is clear that composition
plays a role in fostering credibility and effectiveness. The
Council is no longer as representative as it once was. Its
legitimacy,and perhaps also the quality of its decisions,
would be greatly enhanced by more representation from
those countries that contribute the most to the
maintenance of international peace and security and to the
broad purpose of the Organization — that is, the key
criterion for non-permanent membership enshrined in
Article 23 of the Charter.
Perhaps it is time to reflect together on those
purposes to which Article 23 refers. They would surely
include participation in United Nations peace operations,
commitment to arms control and disarmament, support for
good-neighbourly relations, humanitarian assistance,
human rights, development cooperation and the promotion
of civil society. An understanding among Member States
along these lines would help in the selection of
non-permanent Council members, whether on the existing
basis or on a modified basis.
A recurring theme throughout my remarks has been
the need for the United Nations to marshal its scarce
resources more effectively. There is simply no other
option if we are to restore confidence in this Organization
and in the specialized agencies. As the Secretary-General
has stressed, the Organization’s financial crisis is
9

crippling its effectiveness and its credibility. We cannot
allow this to happen.
The answer lies in addressing both expenditure and
revenue. Many Governments, including Canada’s, are
facing difficult budgetary decisions. We have had to live
with expenditure reductions in real terms while maintaining
priority programmes. International organizations must
respect the same pressures as domestic Governments. The
United Nations and its agencies must focus on key
objectives and reduce overhead spending in order to protect
priority programmes. In fact, there are many steps that chief
executive officers can take to increase efficiency and to
reduce costs without impairing programmes, and we should
all insist that they do so. Similarly, many agencies’ budgets
should be held at present levels, wherever possible, if not
reduced. Member States must work collectively to this end.
Canada strongly supports the proposal put forward by the
Secretary-General for an efficiency task force to address
these issues. We are prepared to contribute both expertise
and personnel to get it started soon.
While the United Nations needs to do more to limit
spending and to promote efficiency, its financial crisis
would be significantly alleviated if its Member States were
to meet their financial obligations in full, on time and
without conditions. Canada calls on all Member States to
do so. We cannot accept that Member States, some of
which rank among the richest countries in the world, fail to
meet their financial obligations to this institution. This is
even more difficult to accept when we consider that a
number of the poorest countries in the world meet their
payments in full and on time. Indeed, among the merely 60
Member States that had met their regular budget obligations
to the United Nations fully by 31 July of this year, 32 were
developing countries. Unfortunately, 71 other Member
States had made no payment at all. Almost 100 countries
still owe money from previous years, including, I have to
say, several members of the Security Council. The majority
of Member States appear content to approve programmes,
appropriations and assessments without honouring the
obligations to which they are committed. This is
unacceptable and cannot be allowed to continue.
The General Assembly’s High-level Working Group
considering the United Nations financial plight should begin
looking at the establishment of incentives to pay. It should
also agree on an equitable method of sharing the burden,
free of the distortions that characterize the present scale of
assessments.
In conclusion, let me say that I have sought to pay
tribute to this Organization’s achievements, and to
emphasize that Canada strongly supports the United
Nations. We are prepared to contribute concretely and
actively to its revitalization and renewal. But confidence
will be restored and commitment renewed only through a
partnership in which Member States live up to their
commitment and focus on key priorities that respond to
human-centred goals for sustainable security and
development. If we are successful, and frankly I truly
believe that we will be successful, I have no doubt that 50
years from now our successors will be able to praise,
without hesitation or qualification, the record of our
Organization’s first 100 years.


Please permit me to
offer you, Mr. President, our congratulations on your
election to your high office and to assure you of our
support and cooperation.
To the Secretary-General we wish to express our
highest regards and admiration for his leadership; and to the
President of the General Assembly at its forty-ninth session,
our deep appreciation for his contribution.
This is also a most fitting occasion for me personally
to congratulate our brother and neighbour in the Pacific the
Republic of Palau on becoming a full Member of the
United Nations. My delegation eagerly looks forward to
working closely with that country.
Today, as we celebrate the passing of 50 years since
the creation of the United Nations, we must also reflect on
the events associated with the purpose for which this body
was created. The havoc wreaked upon humanity by the
Second World War prompted the founding fathers to devise
an instrument to ensure a stable world and a better future.
My purpose today is, first, to recognize those areas
in which this body has undertaken some major initiatives
in various sectors that are of great and direct significance
to us in the Marshall Islands. I also will state briefly
some of our concerns with respect to our membership in
the United Nations, and then I intend to raise those issues
whose implications have critical consequences for our
survival in our country. As members will note, some of
these have been raised a number of times in this forum
during the past sessions of this body.
This year, the completion of the United Nations
Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly
Migratory Fish Stocks is of particular importance to my
country, and my Government intends to sign and ratify
the agreement, which was finalized this summer. We are
indebted to the very able leadership of the Chairman,
Ambassador Nandan, from Fiji. The Marshall Islands has
given its full support to the Ambassador in his
candidature to the post of Secretary General of the
International Seabed Authority.
I wish to acknowledge the support we have received
from the Intergovernmental Panel of Experts of the
Climate Change Convention. The scientific evidence we
received from them in order adequately to address the
Convention confirmed our belief in the existence of such
phenomena as sea-level rise in many of our low-lying
islands and in our region.
We are particularly concerned by the strong
possibility that the Alliance of Small Island States

(AOSIS) Protocol, now known as the Berlin Mandate,
might be derailed because of intransigent short-term
economic interests. Such a possibility, arising solely from
the desire to facilitate the selling of more oil, if real,
imperils our very survival. We will not accept such a
condition and we urge that interference and delaying tactics
that hamper the work of AOSIS and other concerned
countries should cease. The increasing level of destruction
caused by hurricanes and storms is a clear signal that the
matter is urgent. We have deep sympathy with our friends
in the Caribbean countries and in the United States who
were recently struck by this devastation.
The follow-up of the Global Conference on the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States
that was held in Barbados last year will be looked at during
this General Assembly session. The comprehensive and
ambitious programme involved has received the
wholehearted endorsement and support of the Marshall
Islands Government. In this regard, may I extend our warm
thanks to the Chairman of AOSIS, Her Excellency
Ambassador Annette des Iles of Trinidad and Tobago, for
all her efforts.
My Government also looks forward to receiving the
recommendations of the Fourth World Conference on
Women held in Beijing last month. We will work closely
with the United Nations to ensure that the recommendations
articulated in the Conference are appropriately addressed.
Mr. President, we endorse without hesitation the
concern expressed in your statement in September of this
year, in which you stated: “Efforts must be made to ensure
that all States that are not yet Members should seek to be
admitted in the near future” (Official Records of the
General Assembly, Fiftieth Session, Plenary Meetings,
1st meeting, p. 7)
In the light of this view, the reasons underlying the
inability of many of these nations to become Members of
the United Nations should be examined. My delegation
feels that the unfair burden that is borne by many of the
less developed countries with respect to the current system
of assessing the scale of contributions to the regular budget
and for peace-keeping operations deters others from seeking
their rightful place in this community of nations.
The Marshall Islands participated actively in the High-
level Open-ended Working Group on the Financial Situation
of the United Nations, and we concur fully with the
recommendation that the current floor rate should either be
abolished, reduced substantially, or be designed according
to a formula by which a country is assessed on the basis
of its capacity to pay. A decision to that effect by the
General Assembly at this session will undoubtedly help
expedite the realization of the goal that you,
Mr. President, envisioned.
The current inequities with respect to the existing
floor rate have also been noted in a number of reports,
including that of the Committee on Contributions. My
delegation strongly urges the United Nations to take
action on the recommendations made by that Committee
as soon as possible.
The need to undertake certain structural reforms
within the United Nations in order to make it more
efficient and responsive to the changing needs of present-
day society is critical. One such area which should be
closely looked at is the Security Council, where the
concept of permanent membership does not, in our view,
constitute fair democratic representation. We are,
however, aware of the differences in capabilities which
exist among nations. We are aware, too, of the need for
this issue to be carefully weighed and believe that
possible solutions, including Italy’s proposal for a more
formal set of subgroups or constituencies, should be
seriously studied. This would be particularly helpful
within our own regional group. We are hopeful that the
High-level Working Group on the Security Council will
act with wise expediency to devise viable and acceptable
solutions to this important issue.
We are also carefully studying the various reports
and proposals developed by different groups on the work
of other agencies of the United Nations. One aspect which
we consider to be of great importance is the need to
determine whether the existence of some of the agencies
realistically justifies the resources provided for their
support. We must arrive at a frank assessment of whether
the tasks entrusted to an agency are actually carried out
in a meaningful way, and what that work produces in
terms of results. As long as this issue remains
inadequately addressed, the climate of resentment and
suspicion will persist and may give rise to adverse effects
on the level of contributions needed to support the work
of the United Nations. We must make urgent progress to
complete this task of reform.
The Convention on Biological Diversity and its
fundamental tenet regarding the conservation and
sustainable use of our resources is under serious threat
from human activities. Evidence derived from data
gathered in our country suggests in no uncertain terms
2

that nuclear contaminants resulting directly from nuclear-
weapons tests conducted in our country have entered our
basic food chain, upon which our very livelihood depends
causing, among other things, extensive health risks.
We must also pause and reflect on the plight of those
groups of victims who, while the rest of the world was
enjoying the benefits and freedom of the post-war period,
were themselves caught between the crossfire of super-
Power rivalries. One such unfortunate group was the people
of the Marshall Islands.
We are steadily unravelling the large amount of
information now available to us on the nature and
consequences of nuclear testing activities carried out in the
Marshall Islands. We are deeply disturbed and alarmed at
what we are uncovering. For in addition to the unfortunate
nuclear tests, we unearthed something just as horrifying as
the nuclear tests themselves, if not more so. It grieves me
immeasurably to report today that in one of the Trusteeship
documents we discovered it was confirmed that in a
meeting held in New York on 10 May 1954, the Secretary-
General of the United Nations agreed at the urging of the
then United States Ambassador, Mr. Lodge, to withhold
from circulation to Member States a petition from the
Marshall Islands. The Marshallese petition, which pleaded
with the United Nations to put an immediate halt to the
tests was to be withheld by the Secretary-General pending
the completion of the test series. In this petition, the people
of the Marshall Islands, through their leaders, had expressed
their genuine fears and concerns to the only world
institution they believed could help them. In return,
however, the high executives in this institution not only
failed to consider this a matter of any significant
importance, but actually engaged in an act most unbefitting
the integrity of this august body.
The ethical implications of this act, unimaginable as
they may be, are obvious. Nevertheless, I am raising the
issue, and I can assure the Assembly that we shall continue
to do so in various United Nations and other international
forums. We shall do so until the international community
takes action to address our concerns and until this
Organization acknowledges the support lent by high
officials to nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands.
We want to bring to the attention of the international
community the reality and the magnitude of the effect of
these tests on our health, our environment and our future
development as a nation. We also want it to become aware
of our daily struggle to cope with a situation whose
radiation-induced nature continues to haunt us, whose
complexity in terms of solutions is far beyond our
capacity to handle and whose conception was solely for
the purpose of countering hostilities and tensions that bore
no relationship whatsoever to the Marshall Islands.
And so I ask Member States, when they hear us
speaking out about the perils of radiation, to think about
these in terms of human suffering and to try to visualize
Marshallese children being born faceless, with no bones,
or with missing or extra limbs — the jellyfish babies, as
some have come to call them — and the irreparable
damage wreaked upon the reproductive health of their
mothers.
It would be remiss of me, however, not to
acknowledge some of the efforts made by the former
Trustee in addressing our health and environmental
problems caused by radioactive contaminants. We also
feel that the international community has an obligation to
take serious note of our concerns, as well as to undertake
a leading and active role in ensuring that an acceptable
process, designed to restore the Marshall Islands to
habitable conditions, is effectively and expeditiously set
in motion. We were, after all, entrusted by the United
Nations itself, and so this body had the moral obligation
and the irrefutable responsibility at the time of testing to
oversee these activities and to make our safety its primary
concern. The same moral obligation, in our view, remains
binding even today.
Perhaps one of the most gratifying things
occurring — which, I might add, is giving us a ray of
hope — is that there is now a growing consciousness of
the fact that nothing short of a collective effort is needed
in order to focus on this issue. That some nations are
beginning, although slowly, to understand and sympathize
with our plight is most encouraging. This consciousness
is clearly reflected in their willingness to incorporate our
concerns into pertinent and relevant international texts. I
should like to cite some examples.
The Review and Extension Conference of the States
Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons, for example, took special note of the
international community’s responsibility to assist the
inhabitants and restore the environment of the former
United Nations Trust Territories that were adversely
affected by nuclear-weapons-testing programmes.
The Fourth World Conference on Women, held this
year in Beijing, recognized that the concept and practice
of environmental degradation are incongruent with
3

development and that the use and testing of nuclear
weapons are undeniably one factor in the destruction of the
environment, the displacement of people and the creation of
high health risks.
The South Pacific Forum, held last month in Papua
New Guinea, called upon all Governments and international
organizations with expertise in the field of clean-up and the
disposal of radioactive contaminants to give appropriate
assistance for remedial purposes when so requested by
affected countries. The Forum also noted the existence of
a special responsibility towards those peoples of the former
United Nations Trust Territory administered by the United
States that had been adversely affected by nuclear-weapon
tests conducted during the period of the Trusteeship. This
responsibility includes the safe resettlement of displaced
human populations and the restoration to economic
productivity of affected areas, the provision of adequate
health care and compensation for the loss of life, land and
health.
During the post-Forum dialogue in Papua New Guinea
our former Trustee — the United States — took the
position that it would not stand in the way of the Marshall
Islands’ exploring the question of or soliciting assistance
from other countries or organizations for the purposes of
the disposal of radioactive contaminants, the resettlement of
affected populations and the economic restoration of the
environment. Our sincere hope, however, is that the United
States will not take its advocating of such a position as an
opportunity to bow out of its obligations. It is our hope that
it will, instead, redouble its efforts and, with the assistance
of other nations and international bodies, lend its full
support for the goal of making our country free of
radioactive contaminants.
I should also like to take this opportunity to thank the
current Administration for its willingness to acknowledge
the United States Government’s role in using human beings
for radiation experiments, including at least two confirmed
instances of medical research, which did not provide any
direct benefit to Marshallese subjects.
The unearthing of these horrendous activities is an act
of political courage on President Clinton’s part. For the
Marshall Islands, the White House Advisory Committee on
Human Radiation Experiments uncovered vital information
about the effect of radiation on people and the environment.
The Marshall Islands appreciates the United States
Government’s recognition that the now infamous Bravo
blast was not the only weapon that exposed the Marshallese
people and environment to radiation. It is worth bearing in
mind that, while Bravo was the equivalent of 1,000
Hiroshima bombs, the total megaton equivalent of
weapons tested in the Marshall Islands exceeded 7,000
Hiroshima bombs.
It is an important step in our countries’ bilateral
relations that we can now begin to broaden our discussion
of exposure. Exposure will never again be defined in
terms of fallout from Bravo alone, but will now
incorporate the cumulative effects of all the tests and the
effects of residual contamination in the environment. The
Marshall Islands looks forward to continuing to work with
the United States Congress and the Clinton
Administration to ensure that the recommendations of the
Advisory Committee are fully implemented — including
the recommendation concerning whether it would be
appropriate to add the populations of other atolls to the
south and east of the blasts that have shown excessive
thyroid abnormalities. We hope that the international
community will give these efforts its full support.
As if our own four decades of painful experience
with the dreadful business of nuclear testing were not
enough, there appeared once again this year in our
beautiful Pacific the trauma of yet a further series of
nuclear tests, intended to continue until May next year. I
refer of course to the French resumption this year of
nuclear testing at Mururoa. It is probably because we are
far removed from metropolitan centres that there is a
tendency for certain people to look at the Pacific as the
“ideal desert” for nuclear testing, as one French official
recently put it. Often overlooked too is the fact that all
island nations spread out across the length and breadth of
the Pacific are connected by this mighty ocean. Nuclear
damage to one island nation poses immense long-term
implications and dangers to others in the region.
As people who are living the nightmarish experience
of nuclear testing, we cannot and will not accept the weak
argument that the current tests are safe for any of our
Pacific neighbours and friends. Nor can we accept the
continuation of this irresponsible practice in the region.
We have denounced its resumption from the beginning
and will continue to do so.
We joined in support of New Zealand’s case against
France in the International Court of Justice. We took this
action with great regret since France has always been a
constructive partner in our relationship with the developed
world. It is simply incomprehensible to us that this great
nation of culture, science and fine arts could visit this
abomination upon us in the Pacific region. We protested
4

to the French authorities, but the first tests went ahead
anyway. Although the International Court of Justice
declined to hear the case, the decision was entirely based
on technicalities. France should not think that this is a
victory for it, as many of the judges pointed out that there
was a strong moral and legal background for halting the
tests. I strongly disagree with the claim made by the French
Foreign Minister here a few weeks ago — that the tests
were environmentally safe. Look at the situation I have just
described in the Marshall Islands. We have also received
documentation from a number of eminent scientists which
would, at the very least, warrant exercising caution.
Furthermore, France is a State party to the Noumea
Convention for the Protection and Development of Natural
Resources and Environment of the South Pacific Region as
well as the Convention on Biological Diversity. The
principle of environmental-impact assessment and the
precautionary approach are not compatible with the
activities that it is carrying out today. The offer to carry out
an impact assessment after the tests are finished is a
ridiculous offer, since by then it might be much too late.
The tests are violating treaties and they are violating our
environment, and I also think that they are a violation of
our human rights. The tests must stop. They must stop now.
The collective voice of the leaders of the countries of
the South Pacific Forum was heard when a statement was
issued during its meeting in Papua New Guinea expressing
extreme outrage at the resumption of French nuclear testing
in the Pacific. They demanded that France desist from any
further tests. The outrage was especially compounded by
the intransigence of France, and the People’s Republic of
China, in persisting with their nuclear tests in the face of
the strong views of the Pacific region. My Government
stands by the decision announced last week by the
Chairman of the Forum, Sir Julius Chan, that France is no
longer invited to the post-Forum dialogue.
We are in full support of the extension of the Non-
Proliferation Treaty. We will also work actively to achieve
a breakthrough in the negotiations for a comprehensive test-
ban treaty. We also acknowledge the support of just, fair-
minded and world-conscious leaders and peoples, who have
condemned and continue to condemn this anachronistic
series of tests in the Pacific. We join our voice to theirs in
support.
This session provides the community of nations with
a unique opportunity to examine our past performance
record. As a world-governing institution, the United Nations
must look closely at its strengths and build upon them.
Likewise, it must pay particular attention to its
shortcomings and weaknesses so that it can continue to
provide much-needed hope, strength and direction to the
nations of the world.


On
behalf of the delegation of the Kingdom of Morocco, I am
pleased to extend to the President my sincere
congratulations on his election to the presidency of the
fiftieth session of the General Assembly.
I am convinced that his diplomatic experience,
excellent knowledge of international issues, and the many
responsibilities that were assigned to him will ensure the
success of our work and help us achieve the best results.
I also wish to assure the President that the delegation
of the Kingdom of Morocco will spare no effort in
cooperating with him and in providing every support to
facilitate his task. I also salute in him the representative
of a country which shares strong ties of friendship,
cooperation and good-neighbourliness with Morocco.
I should like to avail myself of this opportunity to
pay tribute to the outgoing President, Mr. Amara Essy,
for his excellent conduct of the work of our previous
session.
I should like also to express my deep appreciation to
Mr. Boutros-Boutros Ghali, the Secretary General, for his
untiring efforts towards the promotion of peace and
security and for his constant endeavours in facing up to
the tremendous responsibilities shouldered by the United
Nations as a result of the developments that took place in
the world over the past few years.
Those efforts of the Secretary-General acquire
greater importance at a time when our Organization faces
an unprecedented financial crisis.
This session stands out by the fact that it coincides
with the fiftieth anniversary of our Organization. We may
recall the day, 50 years ago, which gave rise to hope that

we were embarking on an age of emancipation, liberty,
independence and the maintenance of peace and security.
That day heralded, for all humanity, the dawn of a new era
that was received with joy as it was to be the beginning of
a path of dialogue and cooperation that affected an
alternative to violence and confrontation.
The important changes in international relations
witnessed by the world over the past few years did usher in
a new world situation. However, the fact that, in the new
situation, the economic interests of the major Powers
continued to have the upper hand frustrated the hopes of the
developing countries that a new era of genuine solidarity
between the rich and the poor was about to emerge and
serve the legitimate interests of all the members of the
international Community.
As we see it, the economic and social situation in
most countries of the South gives no cause for hope or
optimism. The gap between developed and developing
countries is still widening, and the economic, commercial,
and social problems of the developing countries are only
worsening. This has thrown the doors wide open to such
phenomena as extremism, fanaticism and terrorism,
scourges that we must confront and curb.
In order for us to do so, the world economy has to be
restructured in the context of genuine cooperation between
all nations and an earnest dialogue in which the rich
countries would shoulder their full responsibilities towards
the promotion of an international partnership whose aim
should be to find viable solutions to this problem that
would work in favour of men’s moral and material
interests, wherever they may be: North or South.
While we welcome the initiatives taken towards the
restructuring of the world economy since the ratification of
the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and the
subsequent inception of the World Trade Organization, and
the steps taken by numerous developing nations, including
Morocco, to restructure their economies with a view to
integrating those economies into the world economy, we
believe that such initiatives, by themselves, will not be
sufficient to lead to solutions to the economic, trade and
financial problems that beset the third world. We hope that
the World Trade Organization will adequately and fully
discharge its responsibilities and that it will be provided
with the necessary means that would make it an effective
tool and enable it to translate into reality the commitments
made.
We hope that the current negotiations amongst the
various international organizations concerned will lead to
the desired coordination between monetary, financial and
trade policies and thereby lead to the laying of genuine
foundations for free international trade, wherein there
would be no deterioration in the terms of trade or any
decline in the prices of primary commodities. We also
hope that those discussions will mark the beginning of a
reconsideration of the concept of foreign debt from which
the developing countries suffer.
The African continent is in the grip of a disastrous
economic and social situation. Morocco views with
concern the deterioration of this situation as it is part of
the African continent, and is a member of the African
family that has a long history of shared struggle for
liberation and emancipation which binds it to all the
peoples of Africa.
Given the gravity of a situation, that portends untold
tragedies, Morocco calls on the international community
to make a concerted effort to find a solution to the
worsening problems of Africa.
In our opinion, the strategic perspective and the
approach adopted so far in tackling those problems will
not lead to any improvement or substantial qualitative
change so long as the international community does not
commit itself to a long-term strategy that embodies
concrete commitments in favour of Africa. Such a
strategy, as we see it, should be part of a comprehensive
perspective aimed at improving the level of social and
economic development in Africa with a view to
integrating the continent into the world economy and
enabling it to benefit from its dividends. In this respect,
Morocco calls for a speeding up of the implementation of
the Convention to combat desertification in order to meet
the needs of our continent at both the national and
international levels.
In spite of the efforts made by the United Nations
and repeated calls from this rostrum to give pride of place
to dialogue, and to solve conflicts by peaceful means and
preventive diplomacy, some regions in the world continue
to be the scene of armed conflicts and civil wars which
crush our hopes of establishing lasting peace and security.
By the same token, the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction, especially nuclear weapons, still threatens our
world and should be addressed most earnestly in order to
avoid irreparable disasters.
2

In this respect Morocco has effectively contributed to
the indefinite extension of the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and hopes that all
countries will accede to this important Treaty and thereby
ensure its universality. Morocco also hopes that the Middle
East will be exempt from all weapons of mass destruction,
as has been the case for other regions of the world. This is
one of the noble objectives that the Organization should
work for so that all may channel the funds tied up in this
field to development and to combating all forms of
underdevelopment.
It is indeed cause for optimism that progress has been
made in the negotiations on the test-ban treaty, especially
the pledge made by the Conference on Disarmament to
conclude a treaty concerning this issue before the end of
1996.
The era of colonialism is now a thing of the past. As
a matter of fact, this has been one of the great
achievements of the past 50 years. Unfortunately however,
the two Moroccan cities of Sebta and Melilia and the
neighbouring islands are still under Spanish occupation.
These enclaves, which are part and parcel of Moroccan
territory, and which overlook the Mediterranean sea, are
thus the last remaining colonies in Africa. Such a situation
is indeed a strange anomaly which neither reason nor logic
can accept and which clashes head on with the spirit and
the letter of the United Nations Charter.
In this context, may I recall the major stages which
Morocco has gone through in order to complete its
territorial integrity. Since its independence in 1956,
Morocco started negotiations with Spain in order to
complete its independence, hence the withdrawal, in 1958,
from the region of Tarfaya, which is part of the Moroccan
Sahara, then the withdrawal from the region of Sidi Ifni in
1969. In 1975, after a period of alternating dialogue and
tension, Morocco recovered its other southern provinces.
The only parts that are still under Spanish colonization are
Sebta and Melilia and the neighbouring islands.
Morocco, which opted for dialogue as a fundamental
principle in its policy vis-à-vis its neighbours, propounded
that principle in international forums as the best means of
avoiding armed conflict and sought to settle all problems by
peaceful means, remains convinced that its historical ties
with Spain, coupled with the two countries’ common
economic interests, will help overcome the difficulties that
stand in the way of a solution to this dispute.
Morocco considers Spain to be one of its most
important economic and political partners in view of the
size of Spain’s investments in Morocco, the volume of
trade between the two countries, the joint development
projects, such as the intercontinental link between Spain
and Morocco that would link the African and European
continents, as well as the burgeoning cooperation in the
areas of culture and tourism.
We are convinced that if all this is taken into
account, it would help resolve the disputes. We believe
that the best framework for the desired settlement is to be
found in the proposal made to Spain by His Majesty King
Hassan II, to set up a reflection and consultation
committee with the aim of finding a solution to the
problem of Sebta and Melilia that would allow Morocco
to exercise its sovereignty over the two cities and the
neighbouring islands while preserving Spain’s economic
interests.
The Arab Maghreb Union has made considerable
progress on the road to Maghreb unity. Morocco, which,
like its neighbours, believes that the Union is a strategic
choice, is determined to overcome the few remaining
obstacles in the way of progress towards unity. In this era
of economic blocs, the creation of the Arab Maghreb
Union is an unavoidable necessity if regional integration
is to be achieved, if challenges are to be met and if we
are to ensure the progress and prosperity of our peoples,
who are united by the bonds of common language,
religion and history.
I am sure that idea of establishing the Arab Maghreb
Union, which reflects an ancient historical reality, will
come to fruition as have other regional blocs that have
achieved a high level of integration and unity even
without enjoying the bonds that unite the Arab Maghreb
Union.
In recent years, the Middle East has witnessed many
developments that have created an opportunity to achieve
peace and to end the Arab-Israeli conflict on the basis of
the principles of land for peace, respect for the national
and political rights of the Palestinian people and the
establishment of their own State, with Al Quds as its
capital.
One of the decisive events in the region was the
conclusion of the Israeli-Palestinian Agreement signed at
Washington D.C., which confirmed that the peace process
in the region is irreversible, notwithstanding the obstacles
it is encountering. The Jordanian-Israeli agreement also
3

confirmed that the logic of tolerance and coexistence in the
framework of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace based
on international legality is now an absolute necessity for all.
In this connection we welcome with satisfaction the
Taba Agreement that was signed in Washington D.C.
between the Palestinians and the Israelis, an important
milestone on the road towards the establishment of peace
and security in the region. It is our fervent hope that the
two parties will be able to overcome existing obstacles and
show a firm determination to settle pending problems,
bearing in mind the legitimate interests of all and respecting
their commitments and the behests of international legality.
Optimistic as we are about the progress on the Israeli-
Jordanian and the Israeli-Palestinian tracks, we hope that
positive development will materialize on the Israeli-Syrian
and Israeli-Lebanese tracks which would lead to results
acceptable to all parties on the basis of the relevant
resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and
General Assembly, particularly Security Council resolutions
242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978).
Last year, in an attempt to promote the peace process
in the region, Morocco acted as host to the very first
Economic Summit for the Middle East and North Africa,
which stressed the need to establish economic programmes
as part of an effective partnership that would create better
living conditions for the peoples of those regions. The
Summit also emphasized the need to assist economic
development in Palestine to enable the Palestinian people to
promote their economic and developmental institutions and
to participate on an equal footing in the development of the
region.
We hope that the Amman Summit will be another
milestone in the mobilization of the potential of public and
private sectors to consolidate the peace process by
promoting economic cooperation to help in the region’s
development and by meeting the aspirations of the peoples
of that region after progress, prosperity and just and lasting
peace.
The United Arab Emirates and the Islamic Republic of
Iran have not yet arrived at a final settlement of their
dispute over the future of the islands of Abu Musa and
Greater and Lesser Tumbs. In light of our historical
relations with those two sisterly countries, and given the
relations of neighbourliness and friendship between the
peoples of the United Arab Emirates and Iran, we look
forward the day when there will be a final solution to this
dispute so that the region may revert to the spirit of
coexistence that once characterized it.
The tragedy of the Bosnian people is almost without
precedent in the history of mankind. It is even more
alarming in light of the international community’s failure
to stand up against murders, displacement of populations,
ethnic and religious cleansing, mass rape and the
destruction of the country’s culture heritage and
civilization.
It is regrettable that the world should be witnessing
such procrastination under the new world order, which
purports to be founded on respect for human rights. It is
also somewhat amazing that that new world order, which
had mustered all its resources to extinguish every hot spot
outside the Western world, should now fail to protect a
people in the very heart of Europe who are daily being
subjected to Serb aggression.
Morocco, which had been under the impression that
the problem of Bosnia and Herzegovina would be settled
in 1992, was surprised at the deterioration of the situation
there and by the escalation of violence and massacres. In
this connection, Morocco has consistently discharged its
human and Islamic duty to defend the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of the Republic of Bosnia and
Herzegovina, mitigate the agony of the Bosnian people
and provide humanitarian assistance to them.
I am convinced that the meeting of the Islamic and
International Contact Groups in Paris on 7 September
1995 and the meeting that took place between the two
groups yesterday, 28 September 1995, are likely to open
the way to coordination and consultation to achieve the
expected objectives and strengthen the foundations for
peace in the region on the basis of justice and
international law.
We welcome with hope the results of the 8
September 1995 meeting between the Bosnian, Serb and
Croat ministers at Geneva.
We hope that the agreement in principle concluded
by the parties to the conflict last Tuesday, 26 September
1995, in New York will be a decisive step towards
alleviating the sufferings of the people of Bosnia and
Herzegovina and that it will help them achieve their
hopes for peace, tranquillity, sovereignty, safeguard the
territorial integrity of the Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina
and thus ensure peace, reconciliation and stability in the
region.
4

With regard to the question of the so-called Western
Sahara, Morocco took the initiative of proposing the
organization of a referendum and accepted the settlement
plan presented by the Secretary-General. Morocco also
agreed on the criteria concerning voter identification and
made serious efforts in full cooperation with the Secretary-
General, the Security Council and the United Nations
Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara
(MINURSO). Morocco has also offered financial assistance
and the necessary support to overcome difficulties and
implement the settlement plan in good faith.
In view of the obstacles we are now encountering in
connection with the identification process with regard to all
persons of Saharan origin, we appeal to the Security
Council to take the necessary measures and to mobilize all
the appropriate means that would safeguard the settlement
plan against collapse and remove the spectre of tension
from the region.
I take this opportunity to renew our commitment and
stress our firm determination to continue our full
cooperation with the Secretary-General in order to complete
all the procedures and take all necessary measures to
organize the referendum early next year, as suggested by
the Secretary-General in his latest report to the Security
Council on the issue.
We hope that the fiftieth anniversary of our
Organization will be an opportunity to study all the ideas
and suggestions put forth in order to improve and redress
the structures of our Organization so that, given all the
changes in the world, it can meet the actual needs of the
international community. I refer in particular to ideas
regarding the enlargement of the Security Council and
improvement of its working methods, which must be
carefully considered and given ample time so that results
can be achieved and a consensus can be reached.
We are confident that the perseverance and earnest
determination we have shown in taking up challenges will
be the best incentive for us to face up to the new challenge
and enable our Organization to fulfil its duties adequately
at the dawning of the twenty-first century, which we hope
will be the beginning of a new era of peace, stability and
life in dignity for humanity.


I would like to begin by
extending my warmest congratulations to the President
on his election to the presidency of the General
Assembly at its current session. I also take this
opportunity to place on record our sincere appreciation
of Father Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann for his efforts
and leadership during the sixty-third session. I wish as
well to commend the Secretary-General for his
comprehensive report on the work of the Organization
and for his tireless efforts and dedication in the cause
of international peace and security.
 The current financial and economic crisis
affecting many countries around the globe, particularly
in the West, has reached the shores of Africa.
Originating in the West, the uncontrolled banking and
mortgage crisis, arising from over-leveraged subprime
lending schemes, burst into the open, destroying the
liquidity and survivability of many institutions in the
developed countries.
 It was thought that, since Africa was not a player
in this sector, its financial institutions and its
economies would escape more or less unscathed. Such
was not to be; African difficulties have been
compounded. This crisis follows on the heels of the
food and energy crises and the challenges posed by the
impacts of climate change. The severity of the crisis on
poor countries cannot be underestimated. Poor
countries have no choice but to work hard to restore
strong growth and recover lost ground in order to move
towards internationally agreed development goals. In
this respect, it must be emphasized that the global

15 09-53165

crisis cannot be an excuse to avoid fulfilling existing
international aid commitments. In addition to timely
delivery, flexibility of resources and predictability, it is
critical that the aid be effective. Developing countries
need access to new funding, including credit and
liquidity facilities, infrastructure investment and
support for domestic financial systems.
 Members of the General Assembly are by now
aware of the tense standoff that prevails in the northern
part of my country, following the unwarranted and
deliberately provocative incursion and occupation by
Eritrean forces of Djibouti’s sovereign territory at the
beginning of last year, 2008. This wholly reckless
action by Eritrea, a neighbour, provoked a mutual
military build-up, leading to serious clashes between
the two forces. In particular, the clashes of 10 to
12 June 2008 resulted in many deaths, countless
wounded and prisoners taken on both sides, and this
merits a special note.
 My country embarked upon a calm and prudent
policy that deliberately allowed sufficient time for the
possibility of comprehensive bilateral contacts at every
level in order to resolve hostilities amicably and
peacefully. Our efforts fell consistently on deaf ears,
accompanied by rebuffs, blatant denials, and
dismissive and condescending utterances. Regional
organizations, heads of State and Government, and the
United Nations have all attempted to initiate dialogue;
these efforts have gone for naught with Eritrea, which,
in its usual brazen manner, has gone so far as to deny
even the existence of any tension in the area, despite
the clear, far-reaching and unmistakable conclusions of
the United Nations fact-finding mission. Indeed, the
mission’s report represents a damning indictment of the
regime’s deceptive and erratic behaviour.
 The Security Council has consistently condemned
Eritrea’s forceful occupation of my country’s territory,
namely, Ras Doumeira and Doumeira Island, and in
resolution 1862 (2009) of 14 January 2009, demanded,
inter alia, that Eritrea withdraw its forces and all their
military hardware to the status quo ante; acknowledge
its border dispute with Djibouti; engage actively in
dialogue to defuse the tension and in diplomatic efforts
leading to a mutually acceptable settlement; and to
abide by its obligations as a Member of the United
Nations.
 The resolution required Eritrea to comply
immediately, and, in any case no later than five weeks
after the resolution’s adoption date of 14 January.
Eritrea, however, rejected the resolution the next day.
There the matter has essentially remained, in the light
of the series of requests made by the Secretariat for
more time to pursue contacts, particularly with the
Eritrean authorities. As everyone now realizes, it is a
futile exercise to seek a credible response from Eritrea,
whose intentions have always been to procrastinate on
various pretexts while firmly entrenching itself in the
occupied territory.
 As Djibouti has repeatedly stated, the occupied
areas of Ras Doumeira hill, which overlooks the
Bab-El-Mandeb strait, and Doumeira Island, which is
in the same Red Sea area, are situated in one of the
busiest shipping lanes in the world. The militarization
of this key strategic maritime route does not augur well
for peace in the region or for international shipping and
investment.
 The dispute between Eritrea and Djibouti must
not be allowed to fester any longer. It must be resolved
along the lines of Security Council resolution 1862
(2009) without further equivocation, confusion or
deliberate procrastination. Inaction sets a dangerous
precedent that others will surely follow in the future:
deny and refuse to cooperate. The Council must not
appear to be appeasing Eritrea indefinitely. It is a
dangerous and an unpredictable regime that so far has
not shown any respect for international norms and
behaviour. The Council must act now, using all means
at its disposal.
 Once again, the situation in Somalia is tense,
tenuous and unpredictable. Somalia’s plight is
sickening, hopeless and disgusting, to say the least.
Here we have a transitional Government that enjoys the
full backing of the international community. Yet
paradoxically, that same entity is woefully lacking the
money and manpower that would enable it to confront
the deadly insurrection that has paralysed the whole
country. Mogadishu, the capital, is essentially a war
zone. Most of its civilian population has been
displaced, having fled the never-ending anarchy,
abuses, impunity and other egregious crimes against
humanity. The collateral damage to the civilian
population is horrendous — in short, unquantifiable.
Coupled with that, the Somali people are facing an
extreme drought that threatens a widespread food
shortage and starvation, which would necessitate major
international emergency food aid.

09-53165 16

 The presence of African Union peacekeepers has
been a major factor in keeping the transitional
Government in power, but they are continuously under
attack, and the need for more troops, as well as for the
training and equipping of sufficient Somali forces,
cannot be overemphasized. Indeed, there is tremendous
goodwill towards the current Transitional Federal
Government, in particular towards Sheikh Sharif
Sheikh Ahmed, the current President, who enjoys both
trust and international credibility. Unfortunately, that
has not been matched by a commensurate support in
terms of resource flows consistent with the promises
and pledges made to the Government. Resources make
the difference in the outcome of hostilities.
 All the same, life in Somalia goes on, and with
resources that country would be able to start addressing
the critical urgent problems and issues of security,
governance and job creation. Addressing the terrible
drought now battering the country and crippling its
already low food stock is a top priority. We must all
fulfil our obligations to enable the Government to
function. No doubt that is a tall order, but that is what
it takes and that is the challenge that we all have to
confront.
 We are well aware of the flow of arms, resources
and foreign fighters into Somalia and of the threat that
Al-Qaida might establish a beachhead there. One can
say that the time has come for all well-meaning
Somalis, as well as peoples and Governments of
goodwill everywhere, to step forward in order to create
a lasting and stable environment for the people of
Somalia. We owe that to the people of Somalia.
 The stage appears set for dramatic developments
in the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories,
which is by far the longest occupation in modern times.
As we all know, the United Nations Fact-Finding
Mission investigating last winter’s three-week war in
Gaza has issued its report. While both the Israelis and
the Palestinians were strongly criticized, the
condemnation of Israel by a United Nations body was
unprecedented, stating that the result was
 “a deliberately disproportionate attack designed
to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian
population, radically diminish its local economic
capacity both to work and provide for itself, and
to force upon it an ever increasing sense of
dependency and vulnerability”. (A/HRC/12/48,
para. 1893)
 The peace process is frozen and there is no hope
in sight of jump-starting it soon, as the new Israeli
Government is intent on pursuing its business-as-usual
policy of more settlements and refusal to engage in a
process that addresses the final status issues.
 My country is keen to have peace and security
soon restored in the northern part of the sisterly nation
of Yemen, within the framework of its territorial
integrity, sovereignty and unity.
 One cannot fail to notice the number of countries
that have raised the issue of the representation on and
composition of the Security Council. It is undeniable
that we are in a different world from that which existed
in the aftermath of the Second World War. Given the
critical need to have a global body capable of
addressing, in some manner, the challenges of an
evolving international landscape, the issue is of
concern to many countries. For the United Nations to
retain its credibility and authority, it must continue to
be relevant. New norms have risen, while whole
continents lack permanent representation, let alone the
power of the veto.
 Once again, it must be said that Africa, the
continent with the largest number of countries, needs to
have a permanent voice in the conduct of world affairs.
We see no reason to change our position, which we
noted in 2007, that Africa seeks no fewer than two
permanent seats, with all the prerogatives and
privileges of a permanent member, including the right
of the veto, in addition to five non-permanent seats. Of
late, things have been changing for the better in much
of Africa, but the current disastrous international
economic crisis was not of our making, as is true for
the fallout from global warming. They and other crises
underscore the urgency of our meaningful involvement
in the United Nations and in world affairs. Permanent
seats and increased membership on the Security
Council would be in keeping with those growing
international demands.
 Time and space do not allow us to consider in any
depth a number of other critical issues confronting
developing countries. There should be some mention,
however, of the harm to countries’ trade and
development stemming from the protective tariffs of
the industrialized West. The effort to provide subsidies
for a few large farming operations, blocking
competition from farmers of the developing world,
only hurts the latter. Perhaps cotton is a good example.

17 09-53165

 There is also the stalemate in the Doha Round
trade talks. Those discussions must reopen in earnest,
with the commitment to reach a satisfactory
conclusion. Lastly, we need to highlight the concern
regarding the Millennium Development Goals and the
likelihood that they will not be achieved by 2015 in
most countries. In sum, that is tragic for so many lives.
Efforts must therefore increase towards mitigating that
trend.
 In conclusion, I wish, on behalf of my
Government and the people of Djibouti, to express our
heartfelt sorrow and profound condolences to the
bereaved families and to the Government and the
people of the Philippines for the torrential rains and
heavy flooding that caused havoc and unprecedented
disruption of lives and destroyed infrastructure.