Allow me at the outset to address to the
President the sincere congratulations of the delegation of
the Comoros on his brilliant election to the presidency of
the General Assembly at its fifty-first session. My
country, the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros, is
delighted by his election because, in our eyes, it is a
unanimous tribute from the international community to his
great, friendly country, Malaysia, with which the
Comoros maintains excellent relations of cooperation and
friendship. This choice is also a tribute to his personal
qualifications as a veteran diplomat respected by all.
I also take this opportunity to convey our profound
thanks to his predecessor, Mr. Diogo Freitas do Amaral
of Portugal, for the devotion and skill with which he
conducted the work of the fiftieth session of the General
Assembly.
To Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the Secretary-
General, that intrepid artisan of the lofty ideals of peace,
solidarity and justice, I should like to pay a well-deserved
tribute for the efforts that he continuously makes for the
benefit of our world Organization.
My country adheres entirely to the Yaoundé
Declaration adopted by the Heads of State and
Government at the thirty-second session of the
Organization of African Unity (OAU), which recommends
the candidature of Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali for a
second term.
Last year, the United Nations commemorated with
fanfare its fiftieth anniversary. More than 129 Heads of
State and Government solemnly reaffirmed the ideals of
17

the maintenance of peace, the peaceful settlement of
disputes and the strengthening of international cooperation
and development. In the Declaration adopted at that
commemorative meeting, the indispensable role of the
United Nations was recognized by all. That is why the
sovereign leaders of the world also called for the United
Nations to be reformed and attuned to the requirements of
modern times.
An objective analysis has made it possible to see that
the structure of the Organization no longer corresponds to
the realities of today’s world, which is changing at the
economic, political and geographic levels. At a time of
globalization, when science and technology are
revolutionizing communications, the interdependence of
nations is emerging as an incontrovertible fact, and
democracy is the only path of salvation for the peoples of
the world, our Organization simply cannot and should not
keep a body reserved exclusively to certain States on a
permanent basis while the great majority has only
temporary access to it.
In other words, Security Council reform is urgent and
imperative if we are to act in accordance with the principle
of the sovereign equality of States. In that connection, the
Italian proposal for the reform of the Security Council
offers specific advantages in terms of the possibility of
access to the Council for small and medium-sized States.
No one denies the considerable role of the United
Nations in the establishment of a global society that is more
just and peaceful and better integrated. But everyone
remembers the historic conditions of its creation. The end
of the cold war, the elaboration of a number of conventions
and treaties on disarmament and the non-proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction are, in our view, moral values
that guarantee the emergence of a world of peace in which
the right to life and well-being will win out over barbarism
and brute force.
At the dawn of the third millennium, the United
Nations represents the only recourse for the emancipation
of peoples and the eradication of poverty. In this
connection, we must emphasize the considerable work done
by the Organization’s specialized agencies to help States
requiring assistance in their daily struggle against
underdevelopment.
There is no need to recall that, in the past five years,
our Organization has initiated and organized a number of
thematic conferences aimed at identifying solutions capable
of inspiring States in their national policy-making. These
include the New York World Summit for Children, the
Rio Conference on Environment and Development, the
Vienna World Conference on Human Rights, the Cairo
International Conference on Population and Development,
the Copenhagen World Summit for Social Development,
the Beijing Fourth World Conference on Women and,
more recently, the United Nations Conference on Human
Settlements (Habitat II) at Istanbul. We are also entitled
to hope that next November’s Rome World Food Summit
will offer effective guidance in this vital area.
The founding fathers of our Organization, recalling
the horrors and atrocities of the Second World War,
bequeathed to us an instrument that grants primacy to law
and dialogue. Unfortunately, other modern scourges, such
as genocide, ethnic cleansing, occupation and civil war
have continued to raise the clamour of weapons within
States.
The victims of these new wars are the same as those
of yesterday’s — women, children and the elderly.
The resurgence of violence in the Middle East in the
past few days, arising from the many provocations
orchestrated by the new Israeli authorities, throws into the
question the peace process, which recognizes the
inalienable right of the Palestinian people to a sovereign
and independent State.
For my country, the resumption of the peace process
necessarily involves a withdrawal of Israeli troops from
occupied territories of the Golan and southern Lebanon.
The closing of the tunnel under the Al-Aqsa Mosque is a
sine qua non for reducing tensions and halting the
violence. During the past 30 years of warfare in the
Middle East, the victims have been and remain the
civilian populations. No one can forget the Gulf war or its
consequences for all parties concerned.
My country urges Iraq to seek a solution that would
ensure the peace and security of its neighbours and
include respect for the independence and territorial
integrity of Kuwait. In this connection, the question of
Kuwaiti prisoners detained by Iraq is a concern, the
settlement of which would send a signal of willingness
for appeasement.
The illegal occupation of the islands of Tunb and
Abu Musa by Iran is also a source of tension in that part
of the world. The United Arab Emirates is sparing no
effort to recover peacefully that integral part of its
territory.
18

The embargoes imposed on the Libyan and Iraqi
peoples are of concern to my country. Our Organization
must seek ways and means to enable the parties concerned
to begin a dialogue aimed at a solution that would alleviate
the suffering of the civilian populations of these countries.
The advent of a democratic and multiracial South
Africa and the peace restored to Angola and Mozambique
should not make us overlook the fact that the African
continent is still a theatre of conflict. Like the international
community, my country remains concerned over the
deterioration of the situation and the persistence of violence
in Burundi. Only a return to constitutional order and to
republican legality can reduce tensions and foster a dialogue
between all the people of Burundi. We encourage President
Mwalimu Julius Nyerere in his mediation efforts aimed at
a peaceful solution.
The recent Abuja Agreement on Liberia offers a
glimmer of hope for peace, provided that all the factions
observe the current ceasefire and participate in the
disarmament and demobilization of troops.
The Government of Sierra Leone and the
Revolutionary United Front have made a commitment to
negotiation in order to put an end to the tragic fratricidal
war in that country. We can only encourage such initiatives
and commend Côte d’Ivoire for its mediation.
The situation in Somalia warrants special attention. It
demonstrates the inability of the international community to
find a viable solution to the Somali tragedy.
The question of Western Sahara also requires in-depth
consideration on the part of our Organization, because this
question involves safeguarding the unity and territorial
integrity of a State Member of our Organization, the
Kingdom of Morocco.
Fortunately, other conflicts are coming to an end.
Thus, the recent elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina mark
a decisive new stage in the consolidation of peace and
security — the only condition that would make national
reconstruction possible in that country long devastated by
war.
The world has become a global village fraught with
inequality for its inhabitants. Indeed, the new world
economic order and development strategies have not
bridged the gap separating the rich and poor countries. The
mid-term review of the United Nations New Agenda for the
Development of Africa in the 1990s has made it possible to
note that the Agenda has not had the desired impact on
development, despite its harmonized priorities and
objectives. But we dare to hope that the United Nations
System-wide Special Initiative for Africa, which
complements the New Agenda, will stimulate the process
and accelerate the integration of Africa into the
international trading system. For now, small States can
only expect a continued drop in the prices of their raw
materials and an increasingly unbearable debt burden.
The Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros, a
small island State that is among the least developed, is
one of those excluded from international trade because, in
addition to its limited natural resources and the high cost
of international transport, other political and structural
constraints have been brought to bear that bridle its socio-
economic development.
The recent history of my country has been
characterized by a series of tragedies. The Assembly will
certainly recall the dramatic events of September 1995 in
the wake of the invasion of the country by mercenaries.
This aroused the indignation of the international
community and brought true economic and social disaster
to my country. The people of the Comoros have suffered
too deeply from repeated attempts at destabilization
fomented from abroad. We appeal to the international
community to ensure that such practices — which belong
to another era — come to an end throughout the world.
I take this opportunity to reiterate our profound
gratitude to France, whose military intervention, requested
by the Government of the Comoros in accordance with
the defence agreements between our two countries, made
it possible to rout the mercenaries. In the same context,
I am pleased to pay a vibrant tribute to the Organization
of African Unity for the decisive role it played in
restoring constitutional order.
We also extend our gratitude to the United Nations
and all those who, near or far, contributed to the
organization of the first free, democratic and transparent
elections, which brought President Mohamed Taki
Abdoulkarim to the highest office of my country.
This short overview of conditions in the Comoros
demonstrates the extent to which the newly elected Head
of State has inherited a catastrophic situation,
characterized by an exorbitant external debt, an empty
State treasury and months of unpaid salaries for
government officials.
19

Yet, strengthened by his popular legitimacy and the
support of a broad majority of the people of the Comoros,
in six months President Taki drafted the broad outlines of
political, economic and social reforms to overcome the
numerous obstacles impeding the construction of a
democratic, prosperous and interdependent society in the
Comoros. A vast programme was set up in the economic
and financial sphere that included financial stabilization
measures, a State audit, monitoring of civil servants and a
recovery of State movable property and real estate. The
results are promising and, for the first time, there are cases
of corruption and embezzlement of government funds
before the Comorian justice system.
In this series of reforms, the private sector has pride
of place. That is why the Government is disengaging itself
from the monopoly it has enjoyed in many sectors which it
has turned over to dynamic privatization that generates
growth.
Official contacts have been opened with financial
institutions and development partners of the Comoros in
order to establish a structural adjustment programme with
the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank to
restore my country’s credibility.
In the social sphere, ministerial departments — inter
alia, those of national education and public health — have
mobilized their energies to rehabilitate these very sensitive
and vital sectors. An international conference on education
in the Comoros is planned for next December and we invite
all friendly countries, international and regional bodies to
participate in that important meeting, aimed at mobilizing
the necessary resources to finance education that meets the
expectations of Comorian youth.
In the political and institutional sectors, the incredible
proliferation of small political parties and a jury-rigged
Constitution that is ineffective and difficult to implement
have seriously hampered the new democratic process. Thus,
the new presidential majority, comprised of more than 18
political parties out of the 25 that have been officially
recognized, has merged into one great national political
movement. A consultative commission comprised of all the
active forces within the nation — political parties, trade
unions and human rights and environmental associations —
has been working to amend the Constitution. Their draft
will be submitted for approval this month to the Comorian
people in a referendum. As soon as it is adopted, legislative
and regional elections will be held to set up a parliament
for the country and municipal institutions for the regions.
After 2l years of independence, the Comoros are still
being built. President Mohamed Taki Abdoulkarim is
aware of what is at stake. He knows that we must first
rely on our own efforts, but he also knows that he may
rely on the effective support of the international
community, especially the United Nations and its
specialized agencies, including the United Nations
Development Programme, the United Nations Children’s
Fund, the World Health Organization and the Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, to which
we reiterate our complete confidence and deep gratitude
for their efforts towards the development of the Comoros.
From this rostrum, I solemnly appeal to the
international community to give special economic
assistance to the Federal Islamic Republic of the
Comoros.
I cannot conclude my statement without mentioning
the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte, which is
on the fifty-first session’s agenda as a separate item. At
the appropriate time, I will not fail to detail developments
and to express our hope of a settlement in the wake of the
democratic changes that have occurred in the Comoros in
the past six months.
The end of the twentieth century challenges our
collective conscience to build a better world for future
generations — a world without war and without poverty,
a world in which injustice, violence, drugs, terrorism and
fundamentalism will no longer exist. Of course, one might
say that such a world is impossible because profit-
seeking, protectionism and intolerance are obstacles to
progress and hindrances to the well-being of humanity.
But progress in science, technology and medicine
reinforces our optimism.
It is in this spirit that our faith is revived in a United
Nations that is more dynamic and more democratic, a
United Nations in which the rule of numbers will carry as
much weight as the rule of strength.


May I first join preceding
speakers and congratulate you most sincerely, Sir, on behalf
of the Government and the people of the Republic of
Suriname on your unanimous election to the presidency of
the fifty-first session of the General Assembly. On behalf
of my delegation, I pledge you our full support as you carry
out the weighty and challenging responsibilities of your
office. I also wish to pay tribute to Mr. Diogo Freitas do
Amaral for the excellent and exemplary manner in which
he presided over the fiftieth session of the General
Assembly.
The dynamic and extraordinary manner in which
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali has accomplished his mission as
Secretary-General in difficult circumstances of financial
constraints and wars within and among Nations, and his
fostering of social and economic development, has earned
our sincere gratitude. My Government believes that notable
endeavours have been undertaken by His Excellency
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali to shape the future of the United
Nations in accordance with the needs and aspirations of
today’s world.
As members may know, the people of the Republic of
Suriname, availing themselves of their fundamental
democratic right through fair, free and secret elections on
23 May and 5 September 1996, have elected the new
political leadership of the country. As testimony to this
democratic process, I stand before the Assembly on behalf
of my Government and people as the newly elected
President of the Republic of Suriname.
My Government believes that the main challenge
facing us is the difficult task of reversing the current
tendency towards the social disintegration of the nation into
a process of nation- building and creating social harmony.
The need for this is even more pressing, considering
that Suriname has a small population, composed of different
ethnic and indigenous groups and that the living conditions
of large segments of its population have deteriorated
significantly. One of the fundamental problems in meeting
this challenge lies in the development of an economy that
is diversified and not dependent on just one economic
sector — and even less, dependent on a single donor
country.
In order to ensure that our people have the actual
enjoyment of human rights in the widest sense of the
word, a social system will be created that will focus
attention on guaranteeing every citizen minimal social
security; creating a society in which the quality of life is
equal for all and harmony is safeguarded; offering
Surinamese women greater opportunities to develop their
potentialities and to participate in the social structures, as
well as enhancing, in the widest sense of the word, the
care for the Surinamese child; providing for the basic
needs of the people, such as food supply, health care,
education, housing, public transport, water supply,
employment, passable roads and affordable energy supply;
and guaranteeing the protection of property by means of
adequate security.
The Government of Suriname is aware that the
realization of these tasks will demand great efforts from
the Government itself and from the entire population. In
this endeavour we shall work to bring about the
administrative and budgetary decentralization of the
administration through the strengthening of people-
oriented democracy by giving participatory democracy the
scope to develop.
The decentralization of legislation and administration
will be given further attention, to facilitate regional and
local development, with the full participation of regional
and local structures. The necessary conditions will be
created for an integrated approach to the development of
the districts and the interior, so as to eliminate
development lag in these regions. We fully realize that the
responsibility for achieving this goal lies primarily with
the Government and the people of Suriname. We
acknowledge, however, that we live in a larger world, in
a period in which having friendly relations is of eminent
importance. In accordance with international law, and on
the basis of the Charter of the United Nations and the
principles of the Non-Aligned Movement, Suriname will
establish and maintain relations with friendly nations and
international and regional organizations throughout the
world.
Close relations with countries that are our
neighbours from a historical, cultural or geographical
point of view, especially France, Brazil and Guyana, and
5

with Venezuela, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the
United States of America, will be maintained and deepened.
Furthermore, we will strengthen our efforts for full
integration into the subregion, into the wider Caribbean
region and into the Americas through our membership in
the Caribbean Community and the Association of Caribbean
States and through our participation in the free-trade zone
to be established in the year 2005.
This approach demands a more business-like stance in
multilateral and bilateral relations as concerns the principles
of equality, mutual respect, and the interest and protection
of our national sovereignty.
One of the most important characteristics of our era is
the transitional phase we are going through, in which new
ideas, new Powers, new values and norms have arisen,
leaving their mark on both national and international
politics, on the national and international economy, and on
the formation and content of international relations. The
United Nations, which plays a crucial role in defining
international relations and creating favourable conditions for
peace, stability and development, reflects this transitional
process.
In considering the need to redefine the role and tasks
of the United Nations in the post-cold-war era, some people
question whether the United Nations still has a role to play
in the international arena. As far as Suriname is concerned,
the United Nations, as a centre of multilateral relations, has
demonstrated its ability to play a unique role in the
achievement of overall human development on a global
scale. The United Nations has also demonstrated an
extraordinary capacity for giving primacy to the ideals and
aspirations enshrined in its Charter, and has indeed proved
to be effective in the pursuit of such essential tasks as the
maintenance of peace and security and the promotion of
development.
Along these lines, we would like to emphasize that the
continuation of the United Nations as a centre for
multilateral discussion and action is indispensable. We
acknowledge the need, however, to redefine its functions.
First, there is a clear need to reform its bureaucratic
structures in order to make it more effective and efficient
and to bring it more in line with the aspirations of the
majority of the world’s population. Secondly, we must
abide by our obligations under the Charter of the United
Nations to provide the necessary funds for its proper
functioning, even though a restructuring of the current scale
of assessed contributions could be considered.
We believe that if the United Nations is considered
as a train of peace and development on these two tracks,
humankind will embrace our Organization, which will
help us to move forward into the twenty-first century.
On the eve of the new millennium, it is imperative
for the international community to seek solutions to
pressing problems, of which abject poverty may well be
the most compelling. The solemn commitments of the
World Summit for Social Development and the launching
of 1996 as the International Year for the Eradication of
Poverty and the period 1997-2006 as the United Nations
Decade for the Eradication of Poverty have our full
support. There is evidence the world over that continuing
poverty, if not addressed adequately, will result in social
disharmony and in economic and political disorder, and
will become a threat to national and international peace
and stability, thereby negatively affecting the growth and
consolidation of democracy and human rights.
Let it be understood that all efforts to combat the
scourge of illicit drug trafficking, terrorism and organized
crime will prove to be fruitless unless we present a united
front to eradicate poverty.
Suriname has drawn unexpected international
attention by its resolve to employ its timber resources for
the development of its people. My Government is aware
of the concern of the international community as to the
possible consequences of an unsustainable use of our
forest. There are many examples throughout the world on
how we should not proceed, and we have learned from
those experiences.
In order to strike a proper balance between our
actual needs for development and the needs of future
generations, the Government of Suriname will abide by
the commitment expressed through its contribution at the
Rio Conference in 1992 and to the subsequent
investigations and deliberations at various levels of
society in conjunction with foreign investors. In all these
endeavours we will continue to be cautious, with due
regard for the interests of potential investors, the interests
of our indigenous people and the need to protect the
interests of future generations.
We hope that the international community will also
abide by its obligation to provide the necessary
technological and financial assistance, thus contributing to
6

the achievement of these goals. In this respect we look
forward to the coming review meeting on the
implementation of Agenda 21.
The Government of the Republic of Suriname is very
concerned about the problem of illicit drug trafficking,
because it poses special security problems for countries
such as Suriname, which have insufficient resources to
guard its hundreds of miles of shoreline and vast,
underpopulated land areas. Therefore, as part of our policy
of maximum cooperation in the fight against drugs, we
have entered into cooperation agreements with many
countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, especially
with those States adjacent to Suriname. In this context, I
should like to mention the recently established and much
appreciated cooperation between Surinamese police
authorities and the drug enforcement agencies of the
Government of the United States of America. However,
finding an adequate solution to the drug problem will
depend in no small measure on whether equal attention is
given to both the supply and the demand sides of this
phenomenon.
While reflecting on the issues facing our world and
amidst the many challenges to creating global solidarity, my
Government wishes to express its serious concerns over the
developments in the Middle East, which have resulted in a
virtual discontinuation of the historic peace process. We
hope that the parties concerned and the international
community will succeed in bringing the peace process back
on track. The agony of bloodshed and the loss of lives must
be avoided, and there are no alternatives to dialogue and
peace.
I am deeply honoured to have had the opportunity to
address this body on a number of issues that are of prime
importance to the Government and the people of the
Republic of Suriname. I would like to conclude by
reiterating our commitment to contribute to the creation of
a new world order characterized by the eradication of
poverty and based on a more just distribution of wealth and
on an atmosphere that augurs well for peace and global
improvement of the quality of life on this beautiful planet.


Perhaps the term “globalization”, which occurs so
frequently in so many decisions nowadays, best describes
the international system which prevails in the present
decade and which, under the influence of a growing and
close interdependence, will extend into the twenty-first
century. Admittedly, the term is not a precise one that
sums up the broad and complex range of supranational
phenomena that have been emerging since 1989, the year
that symbolizes the end of the cold war.
It is undoubtedly a term that is indicative of the fact
that today the cause-and-effect relationship in the
economic, political and even the cultural sphere
transcends traditional national borders more than ever.
Interdependence is today more pronounced than ever
before in history: markets, capital flows, research and
production do not coincide with the political map. The
industrial assembly lines of advanced technology ignore
national borders, often making it difficult to determine the
origin of a finished product, since its components come
from such diverse sources. The political boundaries of
States are no longer boundaries of economic production
and processes. The network of multinational corporations
has expanded to the extent that transactions between their
subsidiaries account for one quarter of world trade. In the
face of the fluctuation and volatility of international
electronic transactions, the central banks of the most
developed countries already have difficulty controlling the
exchange rates of their currencies or the level of interest
rates. The recent establishment of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) is seen as the institutional
culmination of this global trend towards liberalization of
trade in goods and services and as a force conducive to
interdependence.
Accordingly, globalization, despite the various rates
at which it operates in different parts of the world —
from the slow, deliberate pace at which it proceeds in
countries with agrarian economies to the dizzying rapidity
of its progress in those possessing advanced
technologies — appears to be the distinguishing mark of
4

the post-cold-war era. This phenomenon increasingly lends
itself to the dominance of a system of echoes and
reflections between nations, of all manner of
interrelationships, which in theory should contribute to
international stability, since according to classical doctrine,
the risks of military confrontation are reduced when nations
become more interdependent economically and financially.
Nevertheless, recent events have revealed the contrary: new
sources of tension and conflict have emerged on the
international scene, as well as new unconventional forms of
violence and crime that affect world peace and destabilize
coexistence within and between democratic societies.
In this setting of globalization and interdependence,
the United Nations — with its universal composition, its
agglutinative structure that brings together countries at the
most varied levels of human development and ethnic or
religious composition, its institutional capacity to act as a
point of articulation or a sounding board for all concerns or
aspirations that extend beyond the local, national or
regional level — would be in an ideal position to play a
leading and decisive role. In other words, this Organization
is the forum that, by the nature and magnitude of its
missions, should embody or interpret more faithfully than
any other institution these compelling, topical phenomena
of globalization and interdependence.
Yet, this distinctive role of the United Nations remains
an unrealized vision. It must be asked, then, whether the
United Nations, an organic manifestation of the global
system that has taken shape in this decade, is capable of
effective, systematic action in preventive diplomacy. We
would take it one step further and ask what our own
national responsibility is, as a democratic State and a
founding Member of the United Nations, in strengthening
its role in the face of new challenges.
Although this may appear simplistic, it is possible to
conceive of war as a consequence of poverty, injustice,
overpopulation or poverty. But if these conditions have to
be eliminated before peace is feasible, then preventing or
restricting hostile tensions becomes a Utopian exercise. For
this reason, we believe that there is an urgent need to take
an up-to-date, modern look at how the United Nations
should react and act in response to the new threats to peace,
and at what its capacity should be to respond to the
phenomena inherent in the recent or current forms of
globalization.
On considering these questions, we shall certainly
come up against an unavoidable obstacle: that of the nation
in its traditional form and as the basic unit on which the
structure of the United Nations was built. This nation no
longer exercises a monopoly over international decisions,
and consequently is not the exclusive determinant of their
legitimacy. To some extent, this phenomenon may be
similar to that described as the emergence of the
imprecise State, found in a wide variety of non-State
political bodies or agents that have an international impact
through the intricate network of non-governmental
organizations and multinational political movements
whose proliferation is another sign of the new
interdependence, and which play an increasingly active
role in the management of the world system.
Undoubtedly, Governments, as the executives of the
political decisions of States, retain their essential powers
in matters of diplomacy, security, defence,
macroeconomics and currency. Obviously, the United
Nations, sustained by the will of Governments, has acted
and continues to act as a summarizer or synthesizer of
those various wills, without prejudice to the greater or
lesser influence of the military or financial powers of its
Member States. For this reason, quite naturally, the
activity or inactivity of the Organization depends on the
concerns or indifference of national Governments, or on
the way in which those Governments articulate their
consensus or disagreement. But other actors have also
taken the international stage, and they are not always a
part of the multiplicity of non-governmental organizations.
There are also ethnic groups not assimilated into an
externally imposed nationality, so-called region-States,
with growing links to the world economy and decreasing
links to national authorities, as well as religious
movements that transcend frontiers and inflame fanaticism
which, in some cases, has terrorist effects.
We therefore see a dual and contradictory process:
globalization and fragmentation. On the one hand,
interdependence has given rise to an increasingly
interlinked world in which entities influence each other
mutually, and this in theory would be conducive to the
strengthening of political units and the formation of
mega-States or large regional blocs. On the other hand,
and as a consequence of the progressive impact of these
new actors on the international scene, fragmentation has
also emerged. Since its establishment, the United Nations
has seen the number of Member States increase almost
fivefold, and at present, approximately one third of these
countries has been significantly affected by insurgent or
dissident movements or Governments in exile.
For all of these reasons, which are associated with
this dialectical process of globalization and fragmentation,
5

with the growing international importance of a
heterogeneous collection of new actors and with the
emergence of non-conventional threats to peace that cannot
be reconciled through traditional mechanisms of collective
security, we need to rethink our Organization and to act in
consequence.
The restructuring of the United Nations is certainly not
a new issue. On its thirtieth, fortieth and fiftieth
anniversaries, efforts at revision, or rather at reform,
emerged, aimed at achieving greater efficiency in the
pursuit of its purposes. Unfortunately, however, the effort
currently under way, like its predecessors, does not go to
the root of the problem, which lies far deeper than the
pursuit of administrative efficiency or the rationalization of
functions. If we evaluate the current efforts to restructure
the United Nations, we see clearly that in practice virtually
all of the reforms being studied have no more than a
procedural or formal impact, and do not make a decisive
contribution to strengthening the system, or at least its
substance, especially if we bear in mind that this
Organization exists at a period in history characterized most
distinctly by an accelerated pace of change.
Uruguay fully and spontaneously agrees with the
widespread aspiration for change. Like the vast majority of
States represented here, our country feels a deep-seated,
natural inclination in favour of any means or instrument
that, at the global or regional level, prompts or compels
nations to conduct themselves in accordance with law. For
countries such as ours, which are founded on the rule of
international law, it is essential to support any effort to
guarantee the legal order, the principles of law, and the rule
of law in relations among States. This is not simply a
rhetorical reaffirmation of our desire for peace or our
conviction that international law must prevail.
Uruguay truly takes the principles of the Charter and
the purposes of this Organization as its own, from the
maintenance of peace and security — reflected in the fact
that our country contributes the largest number of troops
per capita to international peacekeeping operations — to the
recognition of the primacy of international law — reflected
in our being the first country to unconditionally accept the
compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of
Justice. Our position with regard to the United Nations is
thus consistent with our historical definition of ourselves as
a nation, a definition anchored in respect for international
commitments and strict compliance with the principles of
international law in all areas in which States bear
responsibility.
With reference to the agenda for the present session,
and without prejudice to the statements the delegation of
Uruguay will be making in the various bodies of the
Assembly, we believe it appropriate to make a few brief
comments on some items of particular interest.
It is clear that the reform of the Security Council has
captured the attention of the international community,
precisely because of the post-cold-war changes I have
mentioned. The potential impact of the Council on the
evaluation, prevention or easing of international conflicts,
and the effective application of the principle of legal
equality among States make it necessary to have greater
democratization or transparency in the decision-making
process and more equitable geographical distribution in
the composition of the Council.
Uruguay has already expressed its support for
increasing the number of permanent members on the
Council in the light of present-day world realities, but the
number of non-permanent members should also be
increased, precisely because of the need for greater
transparency and greater representativeness. While many
proposals for change have been put forward, we should at
the very least all agree that the Council’s future
composition should be designed so that the quest for more
representativeness does not adversely affect the Council’s
operational efficiency.
With regard to the question of Palestine and the
situation in the Middle East, and despite the various
obstacles that continue to hamper the consolidation of a
broad and stable peace, it is essential that the international
community maintain its support for the peace process
initiated in Madrid in 1991. In the same spirit, it should
continue to encourage direct talks between Israel, the
Palestinian Authority and the Arab countries — as is
occurring even today in the United States — with a view
to achieving mutual recognition and the ultimate objective
of a lasting peace throughout the Middle East. We are
confident that the talks taking place in Washington will
culminate in the success to which we all aspire, and to
which they seem to be leading.
In another context, integration processes are
indispensable for fair competition in a world of
subregional blocks. In this regard, the countries of the
Southern Cone Common Market (MERCOSUR) are
convinced that our integration process contributes to a
true liberalization of trade. MERCOSUR constitutes an
integrated, open process that has created economic zones
both inside and outside the subregion. Thus, impetus has
6

been given to association with other States of the
hemisphere, with other regional blocs and with countries
outside the region. But above all, MERCOSUR has
generated trade, both inside and outside the organization.
MERCOSUR is today a demonstration of open regionalism,
which affirms the commitments and, above all, the
teachings of the World Trade Organization.
There is no question that free trade has been and
remains one of the cornerstones of world economic
development, as was repeatedly recognized during the
Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (GATT). For this very reason, we cannot endorse
unilateral efforts to effect the extraterritorial application of
domestic legislation and as a consequence of which,
whether by virtue of their letter or their spirit, a country
would be able to extend the applicability of its laws beyond
its own national borders, undermining not only the principle
of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other States but
also freedom of trade, which is the very essence of the
World Trade Organization, recently established by the
international community.
While our hopes for the establishment of
representative democracy throughout our continent remain
as strong as ever, we continue to oppose the unilateral
application of economic, trade or financial measures against
a State for political purposes. The usefulness of such
measures for the rapid and peaceful transition of a country
towards democracy has not yet been demonstrated.
With regard to cooperation for development, we recall
that the countries with greater capacities to contribute
undertook to allocate at least 0.7 per cent of their gross
domestic product for that purpose. Yet there has been a
significant downward trend in contributions stemming from
that commitment in recent years, and this trend cannot be
linked to the financial crisis the Organization is
experiencing. These are resources intended to fight poverty
and underdevelopment and to create more dignified living
conditions for our peoples. Nor should we confine
cooperation to a vertical, one-way process; rather, we must
also view it in terms of South-South cooperation, availing
ourselves of our mutual experience to create our own
competitive advantages.
A few days ago, Uruguay became one of the first
signatories to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
Together with other developments, such as the Advisory
Opinion of the International Court of Justice regarding the
legality of the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons, this
Treaty constitutes a basic instrument for the reaffirmation
of the principles of international peace and security.
Still in the field of disarmament, we have repeatedly
voiced our opposition to the transfer, stockpiling, export
and production of anti-personnel landmines. Accordingly,
we shall continue to support keenly all initiatives aimed
at eliminating them, as well as at securing the immediate
entry into force of the Protocol adopted in Vienna last
May. Uruguayan contingents assigned to peacekeeping
Missions in Angola, Mozambique and Western Sahara
have been among the many victims of these weapons, and
it is the moral obligation of humankind to eradicate them.
Finally, we should like to close by referring to one
of the clearest and most tangible manifestations of the
phenomenon of globalization we have sought to describe:
the production, trafficking and consumption of illegal
drugs. This is one of the most tragic forms of
international organized crime, and its growing seriousness
is demonstrated by statistics from the most varied sources.
Its transnational nature makes it essential that the
principle of shared responsibility should be systematically
applied — without exception or unilateralism — to the
entire cycle of production, trafficking and consumption.
This is a tightly wound chain whose links include all
countries without exception.
Please accept, Mr. President, our sincerest
congratulations on your election to guide the work of the
Assembly and the firmest commitment of the Government
of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay to support you in
your activities.


The delegation of Panama wishes to join in the very
warm congratulations that the President has already
received from the speakers who have preceded me. His
well-deserved election as President of the General
Assembly at its fifty-first session attests to his skills and
personal merits, and at the same time reflects the esteem
that Malaysia, a prominent member of the Association of
South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has come to enjoy in
the family of nations.
I am also very pleased that this particular part of our
meeting is being chaired by our colleague from the
Philippines, Ambassador Mabilangan.
Allow me on this solemn occasion to pay tribute to
the eminent Portuguese statesman Diogo Freitas do
Amaral, who presided over the historic fiftieth session
with great wisdom, poise and humanism and shed his
particular light on the institutional reform of the United
Nations.
At the fiftieth session of the General Assembly
Panama proposed, together with the United States and
France, that the United Nations and interested countries
should take a decisive part in the holding of the Universal
Congress on the Panama Canal, which will take place in
September 1997. On that occasion the Assembly adopted
resolution 50/12 (1995), which in its operative part,
“Urges the competent organs, programmes and
specialized agencies of the United Nations system,
in particular, the United Nations Development
Programme, the United Nations Environment
Programme and the International Maritime
Organization, to study the possibility of providing
assistance from within existing resources for the
organization of the Universal Congress on the
Panama Canal”. (resolution 50/12, para. 3)
In the first operative paragraph the Assembly noted
that it
“Supports the initiative of the Government of
Panama in convening the Universal Congress on the
Panama Canal, with the participation of
Governments, international bodies, public and
private academic institutions, maritime users and
7

international shipping companies, to examine jointly
the role which the Panama Canal should play in the
twenty-first century”. (Ibid., para. 1)
The Government of Panama has a particular interest in
seeing that Member States of the United Nations, as well as
intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations of
the international community, are informed about how
Panama, as a sovereign State, is preparing to take on all the
responsibilities stemming from the final transfer of the
interoceanic canal in 1999, pursuant to the provisions of the
Torrijos-Carter Treaties.
One calendar year from the holding of the Congress,
I wish to inform the General Assembly that the Panamanian
Government is hard at work on preparations and stepping
up consultations with international organizations and
friendly countries in order to secure meaningful
participation. The Panama Canal Congress will be universal
in terms of participation; it will also be universal because
Panama, with its universalist and Bolivarian traditions, takes
the view that international maritime transport should be
open uninterruptedly to all the flags of the world on an
equal footing and under a neutral and universal regime that
obliges us all to ensure its peaceful use and transit, taking
into account the expansion of international trade and the
growth of the world economy.
Ours is a time in which nations appear to be closer
than ever and in which there are tremendous opportunities
to improve the living conditions of all. At the same time,
the existence of numerous imbalances, obstacles, risks and
dangers gives Governments and peoples grounds for
concern.
It is not only remarkable achievements of science,
technology and trade that are being globalized;
unfortunately, hunger and environmental degradation are
also being globalized. There are still national and
international situations that are marked by the denial of
fundamental values and that affect human rights and the
freedom of peoples. There are growing inequalities between
members of our societies and between nations, and certain
injustices still persist in some aspects of international
relations. Arms trafficking and overt or covert resistance to
agreements and initiatives to reverse the arms race are signs
that attitudes of expediency are prevailing, to the detriment
of our hopes for peace and agreement and our aspirations
to sustainable development. Terrorism, organized crime and
transnational crime conspire and feed off one another on an
unprecedented international scale, exploiting the many faces
of drug use, which is a threat to all mankind.
These concerns dominated the agenda of the Rio
Group at its tenth summit, held a month ago in
Cochabamba, Bolivia. It was an opportunity to underscore
at the highest possible political level the serious
challenges facing Latin America and the Caribbean,
whose average poverty levels have reached alarming
levels despite the tremendous efforts of our Governments
to reduce them.
At that meeting the Panamanian Government
stated — and I reaffirm here in this forum — that poverty
and corruption are powerful forces threatening the
democracies of the continent. On that occasion, the
President of Panama, Mr. Ernesto Pérez Balladares,
stated:
“When Nations embark on political adventures
divorced from institutionality, they do not do so
because they reject in theory the benefits of
democracy, but because they associate their own
despair with the regime under which they live ... For
this reason, until the new concepts governing
economic relations among countries today and
democracy throughout the continent are accompanied
by investment in social sectors and a genuine
modernization of education to help close the gap, the
sectors of the population affected by poverty will
ultimately reject what we here today quite rightly
think should be permanent values of modern
societies.”
For this reason, we wish to reiterate our
understanding of and solidarity with the problems of
hunger and poverty suffered by countries in other regions,
in particular the least developed countries, the majority of
which are in Africa, and certain countries in our region
that are particularly vulnerable. Whatever may be the
standpoint chosen for consideration of the great issues
contained on the agenda of this fifty-first session of the
General Assembly, we should always approach them with
the desire to respond appropriately.
The organization of social life always presupposes
normative vision and action. The United Nations has
proved its capacity to propose to the international
community a body of norms whose effectiveness depends
on their universal application. The fundamental debate
that has been going on in the area of human rights since
the creation of the United Nations has resulted in the
enshrinement of those rights in legally binding texts and
in declarations and programmes of action stemming from
the major conferences held by the United Nations in
8

recent years. We are encouraged by the fact that that
enshrinement is encompassing the rights of solidarity in the
context of problems concerning the environment,
population, society, women’s issues and housing.
The Government of Panama is mindful of the complex
dialectic interactions between peace, human rights and
development. The desire to ensure effective democratization
in national life and to foster development is at the core of
the activities the Panamanian Government is carrying out to
benefit children, young people, women, indigenous and
rural populations, the disabled and certain particularly
disadvantaged urban groups.
The Government’s activities relating to fulfilment of
the Platform for Action adopted at the Beijing Conference
on Women represent commitments strengthened by our
justifiable satisfaction over Panama’s fairly encouraging
indicators regarding the advancement of women. The accent
is currently being placed on the sector of the female
population living in unfavourable conditions of health,
housing and education and having little participation in
political life.
In the context of this constantly renewed effort to find
the best solutions to national problems, the delegation of
Panama wishes to express to the Secretary-General our
thanks and recognition for the cooperation activities that
have been carried out in Panama by the United Nations
Development Programme, as a recognized and neutral
facilitator, to promote national consensus on the Panama
Canal issues. The successes already achieved in this area
demonstrate that the actions of the United Nations its
system in Panama are effective and have an impact on the
life of the nation.
Three months ago Panama ratified the Convention on
the Law of the Sea, the implementation of which has
become more effective since the establishment of the
International Seabed Authority and the International
Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Panama, as a maritime
country, welcomes these promising developments and hopes
that there will be further achievements in the application of
the Convention.
The Government of Panama has great expectations for
its future participation as a member of the Governing
Council of the United Nations Environment Programme and
in the Commission on Sustainable Development. We will
strive to make our contribution and to prove our
commitment to overcoming environmental problems. The
strategic importance of issues associated with biodiversity
is such that my Government hopes that new and
additional funds will be made available to promote
activities in this field. We have the same hope in
connection with climate change, the ozone layer,
desertification and the conservation of forests.
In the area of international peace and security, we
reconfirm our agreement with those Governments that
advocate a total ban on the production, use, trafficking in
and transfer of anti-personnel land-mines. With respect to
the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which has
been signed by Panama, we continue to hold the same
view as in previous years. In this respect, we welcome
Brazil’s initiative to make the southern hemisphere a zone
free of nuclear weapons. This estimable initiative adds to
the efforts of Latin America and the Caribbean to foster
a world free of nuclear weapons, efforts that were
launched with the signing and ratification of the
Tlatelolco Treaty.
Upon learning of the response of the International
Court of Justice to the request issued by the General
Assembly at its forty-ninth session, my Government
welcomed the backing given by that principal organ of
the United Nations to the negotiations on a ban on
nuclear weapons, including tests. We signed the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty on the
understanding that implicit in it is a commitment on the
part of world Powers to achieve a nuclear-weapon-free
world.
Panama has always supported those who believe that
if a part of the funds absorbed by the arms industry could
be made available to combat poverty, ignorance and
disease, there would be positive changes all over the face
of our Earth.
Panama has already expressed in the United Nations
its position and views on the problem of drugs, most
recently at the high-level segment of the substantive
session of the Economic and Social Council in June. We
would like to take this opportunity to reaffirm our support
of Mexico’s initiative, co-sponsored by the Rio Group, on
convening a special session of the General Assembly in
1998, which would offer an opportunity to update the
various debates, concepts, approaches and consensus
positions on the issue of illicit drugs and related crimes.
The Government of Panama has made significant progress
in developing the proposal presented to the Rio Group to
create a multilateral centre in Panama to combat drug
trafficking and related crimes.
9

We are glad to announce the recent holding in our
country of the first international talks on the creation of that
centre, attended by Bolivia, Ecuador, Colombia, Mexico,
Peru, Venezuela and Panama. We agreed at that meeting to
hold another meeting in December 1996 to take decisions
on the training module included in the plans for the
multilateral training and research institute to combat drug
trafficking and related crimes. Another meeting will take
place early in 1997 to study and decide upon the
operational module as a means of combatting drug
trafficking and related crimes, which is essentially civilian
in nature and cooperating with the military forces that will
lend additional support.
In a similar vein, the Panamanian Government also
lends its support and solidarity to the international
community’s struggle to combat terrorism. Terrorist
activity, no matter what the reasoning behind it may be, is
criminal and immoral, and exceeds all limits. Its sole face
is that of fanaticism. Terrorism is the offspring of the
apocalypse, nihilistic and gratuitous in nature, capable of
crushing human freedom and claiming a terrible harvest of
innocent lives.
Other topics on the agenda of this session of the
General Assembly are of particular interest to the
Government of Panama. Negotiations on establishing an
Agenda for Development oblige us not only to talk about
this but to act, prompted by the universal duty to cooperate
which encompasses all individuals and all communities.
The common undertaking of sustainable development
should be carried out through shared responsibilities. For
this reason, we welcome the decision taken by Member
States to politically reactivate the Economic and Social
Council. Now, what is needed is the political will to equip
the United Nations with an Agenda for Development which
will not limit development solely to its economic
component: though that is necessary, it is not enough.
Development should also provide the key part of common
well-being and be placed at the service of purposes
consciously accepted by all, purposes that will enrich the
lives of all, purposes that will enhance the creative capacity
of every individual and be securely grounded in a human
dimension which implies faith in oneself and paves the way
for progress.
Whatever approach is taken in addressing the major
issues on the agenda of this fifty-first session of the
General Assembly, the human being, his hopes and
sufferings and the obstacles and opportunities he faces to
improve the quality of his life, should always have
precedence. In spite of the dazzling clarity with which we
perceive this certainty, it would seem that we sometimes
lose sight of the fact that the human individual is the
ultimate focus of this Organization and of all the
agreements and plans of actions that we arrive at within
it and stemming from it. All our decisions should be
designed to meet the demands, needs, requirements and
interests of human beings.
This requires a revitalization of the ethical side of
the United Nations. My delegation appreciates the
endeavours of the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros
Boutros-Ghali. He has placed his unquestioned talent and
efforts at the service of the Organization. His unswerving
internationalism and his commitment to world peace and
development mean that Panama takes great pleasure in
expressing its gratitude for his work.
A year ago we were welcoming the effort made by
two great men who were struggling tirelessly to
consolidate peace agreements and move towards peaceful
coexistence in the Middle East. Today one of those men
is no longer with us. Panama wishes to express a
posthumous tribute of recognition to Yitzhak Rabin, a
martyr of the peace process between two peoples,
Palestine and Israel, with which our people and our
Government have deeply-rooted friendly relations because
the children of those peoples live together on our soil and
are helping us to build a better country. Now that
fratricidal struggle is casting both nations into mourning,
Panama reaffirms its support for all the initiatives and
resolutions that will strengthen peace and promote
tolerance.
We are very concerned about the events which took
place as a result of changes effected in the Holy Sites of
Jerusalem, to which the Security Council referred in its
resolution 1073 (1996) on Saturday, 28 September 1996.
The Security Council called for an immediate cessation
and reversal of all acts that had resulted in the
aggravation of the situation and that had negative
implications for the Middle East peace process. It
likewise called for the safety and protection of the
Palestinian civilians to be ensured. Finally, it called for
the immediate resumption of negotiations within the
Middle East peace process on its agreed basis and the
timely implementation of the agreements reached.
Another matter of concern to us relates to the
Chinese people, a people with which Panama has
maintained relations since very early in the last century.
My country has benefitted from a continued migration
which, from the building of the interoceanic railway to
10

that of the Canal, has contributed to our development and
to the fashioning of our national identity. This deep-rooted
and lasting relationship with the Chinese people has
strengthened our nation’s and our Governments’ support for
the principle of the universality of the United Nations.
Panama maintains diplomatic relations with the Republic of
China and feels bound to state that those relations have
been fruitful and beneficial. They have always been
characterized by respect and have been receptive to and
incorporated the interests and needs of both sides. For this
reason, we feel that our relations are exemplary in the best
possible sense.
On the other hand, in a few years’ time Panama will
assume full responsibility for the interoceanic Canal and, in
the context of that responsibility, Panama must
acknowledge that the People’s Republic of China is one of
the main users of the waterway both in terms of the number
of vessels and in terms of the volume of cargo originating
in or destined for the People’s Republic of China. We are
encouraged by the fact that a significant number of Chinese
citizens and companies on both sides of the Taiwan Strait
live and work in harmony in Panama, where they have won
the respect and affection of Panamanians because of their
diligent hard work. We are convinced of the validity of the
principle of one China, and we reaffirm our support for the
efforts of both parties to unify the Chinese people. We
reiterate our conviction that they will achieve that purpose
in a framework of mutual respect that gradually helps to
build trust between the two parties and create a favourable
environment for Chinese reunification.
The question of Security Council reform, the increase
in the number of its members and other related matters is
of irrefutable importance for the United Nations, as is the
question of the strengthening of the role of the United
Nations. It is unacceptable to try to change the membership
of the Security Council solely on the basis of supposed
essential features that make certain countries more suitable
than others to join decision-making organs and hold seats
in the Security Council. Because of the functions it
performs, today’s state of affairs and a moral commitment
to the future of the United Nations, we call for a reform of
the Security Council that will provide regional
representation, an increase in both membership
categories — permanent and non-permanent — and
equitable distribution.
The Government of Panama regards the Italian
proposal as a democratic approach that responds to the
concern for representativity. We were encouraged by the
willingness to negotiate, with a view to achieving
consensus, voiced by the Italian Minister for Foreign
Affairs last week from this rostrum. In the issues of
Security Council reform and the strengthening of the role
of the United Nations, the best possible ideas and loftiest
purposes should come into play. We wish to see a better,
more effective and more representative Security Council.
We would also like to see opportunities to participate in
the United Nations go hand in hand with the
responsibility to act to ensure international peace and
security and for these to be seen from the perspective of
their relationships with democracy and development. The
Panamanian Government has decided to reaffirm its
support for Japan and Germany having permanent seats
on the Security Council.
I could not conclude without fulfilling my duty as a
Panamanian to reiterate before this world Organization
that Panama is ready to assume sovereign control over the
Panama Canal in 1999, with all the administrative,
operational and security responsibilities entailed in the full
implementation of the Torrijos-Carter Treaties.
Panamanians’ shouldering of the main responsibility for
the Panama Canal will coincide with the advent of the
twenty-first century. We shall march resolutely into the
new millennium, looking forward to a promising future in
which it will become clear that Panama’s universalist
vocation has never wavered, and we strongly reaffirm that
vocation.
Panama’s universalism, I am proud to say, is an
ethical one, capable of absorbing the most diverse
currents of thought and human action, whether from the
North, South, East or West. Our geography made us this
way, and our history opened us up to the world —
obviously, commercially, but above all culturally.
As of 31 December 1999 Panama will be better
integrated in the world because it will be able to make
free use of its entire territory for the integration of its
nation. We shall then have to cope with the tremendous
need to make full use of our potential and abilities and to
fully exercise our rights and fulfil our responsibilities. On
31 December 1999 the Panamanian nation will be at the
centre of an excitement sparked by the joining in our
veins and souls, of the past and the future, of the
struggles of generations, of joy and suffering and of the
many endeavours that all bear the same name, a name
that designates a common objective, a single mission that
many times engendered fervour and even heroism.
In the twenty-first century, Panama will still be a
small country. What will be different, I repeat, is the full

integration of the Panamanian nation in its territory, the
simple but intense and far-reaching meeting of a nation
with the entirety of its territory. The existence of an
interoceanic waterway, the Panama Canal, in that territory
will prompt us to pursue, step up and deepen our efforts to
establish the right approaches and institutions to complete
our sovereign life as a nation and to facilitate the fulfilment
of our universalist vocation. That universalism will make it
possible for us to continue to participate in the realities of
a globalized and interdependent world with the desire to
make it a source of mutual enrichment, openness, initiative
and creativity.
It is a fortunate historical coincidence that on
Wednesday of this week, 2 October 1996, the General
Council of the World Trade Organization (WTO) decided
to accept the report of its subsidiary organ concerning
Panama’s accession, thus ensuring its entry as a full
member of the World Trade Organization. We welcome the
fact that, with the accession of Panama, all countries in the
Latin American region have become members of the WTO.
We all aspire to see a United Nations that will be
ready to deal with present and future problems. Panama
hopes to contribute to the vital consensuses and aspires to
become part of the necessary renewal of the United
Nations. As part of the Panamanian experience since the
creation of the United Nations, I personally have taken part
in the Organization’s intergovernmental machinery often
enough to be able to speak of faith. With faith in the
United Nations, we have often been capable of moving
mountains of mistrust and misunderstanding, which have
covered the world in a landscape of conflict and deadlock.
Thanks to that faith in the United Nations, today we can
speak of new generations of human rights and new
generations of peacekeeping operations, which, in the view
of men and women of my generation are proof that the
United Nations represents a victory over the erosive effects
of time and history.
My delegation believes that the United Nations has
accomplished wonderful tasks through its constructive
consideration of various manifestations of human diversity
and through the taking of decisions that give them a
productive, secure and peaceful place on Earth.


At the outset, allow
me, Sir, to express my delegation’s congratulations upon
your election to the high position of President of the
General Assembly at its fifty-first session.
The Afghan trauma, which was imposed by others
and endured by the Afghan people, continues to have
disturbing consequences for our nation. For the world, it
may be just another trouble spot. But for Afghans, it
means agony, pain, loss, psychological trauma and an
unknown future. We must not forget that there is still
hope. It lies in the international connection between me
and other representatives and, through them, to their
countrymen. The United Nations was built on that dream
and today, that connection is once again being made —
it is the fifty-first connection.
Two tragic dates will stand out in the recent history
of Afghanistan: 27 December 1979 and 27 September
1996. Both were black days that trigger bitter memories
in the minds of all patriotic Afghans. The first date
reminds them of the occupation by the former Soviet
Union and the second, of another occupying force, backed
by another neighbour.
The force occupying parts of our homeland today is
known as the Taliban — a name that became very
familiar to the General Assembly at the previous session.
3

What was the Taliban’s first act when it captured Kabul? It
was to attack not a military garrison, but the United Nations
office in Afghanistan. Its first act was to breach the sanctity
of the United Nations compound, in violation of all
accepted international norms and laws.
That is the Taliban. As European Commissioner,
Emma Bonino, said yesterday, the Taliban is a force that
threatens to take Afghanistan back to the dark ages.
Numerous international media reports from Kabul draw a
picture of an organization supported from abroad, imposing
a draconian system on a terrified people. The Taliban have
ordered schools and universities to close and stopped all
education and employment for women. There are numerous
reports from the media, the United States authorities and
the United Nations on the role of the Taliban in a $75
billion heroin export industry in Afghanistan.
On 1 October 1996, The New York Times said that the
1 million people who live in Kabul alone had been plunged
into the
“labyrinth that is Taliban rule”.
On 3 October 1996 the Reuters news agency said that,
while the Taliban has tried to seek international recognition,
it has been greeted with “suspicion — and fear”. In just
their first week in Kabul, the Taliban earned the
condemnation of Amnesty International.
These are not the words of the Afghan Government
describing the Taliban occupation — these are the words of
Amnesty International:
“Despite statements from their leadership
suggesting moderation, it is clear that Taleban guards
are busily implementing a reign of terror in Kabul ...
Families are afraid to go out into the streets, afraid to
answer their doors, and afraid that their loved ones
will suffer the brutal consequence”
of Taliban rule. Amnesty International accuses the Taliban
of seizing, in house-to-house searches in the capital, up to
1,000 prisoners, who were forced to walk over the front-
line minefields.
French television showed the Taliban storming into the
Kabul museum, where they destroyed many artifacts, relics
and statues that were unique. Those artifacts and statues
belonged to the Buddhist era and are irreplaceable.
I am talking about the Taliban, which is
overwhelmed by foreign-fomented hatred, mandated by a
foreign-crafted agenda and committed to the annihilation
of the political, social and economic fabric of
Afghanistan. It is an organization whose display of terror
in Kabul breaks all records. In short, the Taliban are
mercenaries — an illegal and illegitimate force that has
been imposed on the Afghan people.
Once again, foreign interference is the main cause of
the continued conflict in Afghanistan. The current state of
terror and chaos, touching the lives of every living soul
in Kabul, is the direct consequence of that interference.
We have at our disposal hard evidence that we will
submit in due course to the Security Council for
appropriate consideration. What could prove that there is
foreign interference better than the foreign militias, which
include some officers, who were recently captured on the
battlefield by the armed forces of the Islamic State of
Afghanistan?
The Islamic State of Afghanistan firmly believes that
the so-called Taliban is a perfect example of a mercenary
force as defined by the International Convention against
the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of
Mercenaries, adopted by the General Assembly in 1989.
We are not denying the existence among the Taliban of
Afghan youths who were raised across the border and
attended religious schools there, but it cannot be stated
too clearly that the main corps of the Taliban military
staff consists of officers and militia forces from beyond
our borders, paid by military-industrial magnates trying to
overthrow the Islamic State of Afghanistan.
The United Nations General Assembly, on 21
December 1995, adopted a resolution which condemned
any State that permits or tolerates the recruitment,
financing, training, assembly, transit and use of
mercenaries with the objective of overthrowing the
Government of any State Member of the United Nations,
especially that of a developing country.
The Charter of the United Nations, in various
Articles, urges all Members to develop friendly relations
among themselves and to refrain in their international
relations from the threat or use of force against the
territorial integrity or political independence of any State.
On the occasion of the commemoration of the
twenty-fifth anniversary of the United Nations on 24
October 1970, the General Assembly approved the
4

Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning
Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States. The first
principle declares that States shall refrain in their
international relations from the threat or use of force
against the territorial integrity or political independence of
any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the
purposes of the United Nations.
The Seventh Islamic Summit Conference in
Casablanca on 13 December 1994, the Conference of Heads
of State and Government of the Non-Aligned Countries on
18 October of 1995 in Cartagena de Indias, the General
Assembly resolution on Afghanistan of 19 December 1995
and the Twenty-third Islamic Conference of Foreign
Minsters on 9 December 1995 held in Conakry, Guinea, all
insist vigorously on the principle of non-intervention and
respect for the territorial integrity and independence of
Afghanistan and on a peace process based on genuine intra-
Afghan dialogue.
It is a matter of great disappointment that persistent
appeals to the United Nations made by the Islamic State of
Afghanistan to send a fact-finding mission to inquire into
and investigate the level, degree and nature of foreign
intervention in Afghanistan remain unanswered.
Last year, we presented facts about the Taliban from
this rostrum. Our plight went unheard. We are afraid, given
the accounts of documented facts by the press and our clear
stand on the legacy of the Taliban, that our plight might go
unheard once more. That will be even more catastrophic
than the Taliban take-over itself.
The latest reports, as recent as yesterday, reveal some
shocking realities and facts about the Taliban attacks on the
areas surrounding Kabul, the capital. Allow me to unveil
the screened and concealed crime that the Taliban, assisted
by their outside sponsors, committed very recently. Exactly
26 days ago, on 11 September 1996, intelligence sources of
the Defence Ministry of the Islamic State of Afghanistan
intercepted and recorded a Taliban radio transmission
between Nangarhar and Kandahar. That transmission says
the following:
“Give regards to the victorious Mullah Shukrullah ...
Tell him that new APR weapons have already been
brought to Kandahar. You should immediately send
these arms, which are gas weapons, through Torkhan
towards Nangarhar because we have organized a
group of Taliban with special gear and are waiting for
the said weapons. We can capture large areas with
a single round.”
On 17 September, just six days later, I personally
took this report, submitted to me by the Ministry of
Defence, and presented it to the State Supreme Council,
convened under the leadership of Mr. Rabbani, the
President of Afghanistan, in Blandage bunker, just north
of Kabul, the capital. I still remember an overwhelming
stillness occupied the room after I submitted the report.
After a brief calmness, a member of the Council
remarked that maybe the report had been passed around
to demoralize State troops; hence, not enough attention
was paid to the issue.
Yesterday, we obtained a shocking — and I repeat,
shocking — report from the headquarters of the
Government in Taloqan, which reminded me of the
Supreme Council meeting. Officials of the Islamic State
of Afghanistan recorded radio conversations by the
Taliban in the front line around evening on 26 September,
the night before the Taliban take-over of Kabul. The
following assurances were reported:
“Reassure the leaders that the new weapons have
had good results in Lata Band, Bande-Ghazi and
Puli-Charkhi.”
These areas, for the information of the
representatives, are located to the east of Kabul, the
capital.
More staggering realities are provided by the
eyewitness reports of those who saw the areas afterwards.
These eyewitnesses have reported that they saw most of
the corpses of the Government troops laying on the
ground without any sign of injury from a bullet or arsenal
penetration in their bodies. However, they did reveal that
they had noticed that the Government troops had bled
from their noses, eyes and ears. Mr. Muslim, a veteran
commander of the Government, who witnessed similar
situations during the Soviet occupation, has remarked that:
“The Taliban advance in the front line completely
surprised me. I then realized that the Taliban must
be in possession of some kind of weapons more
advanced than we had seen, possessed or known.”
Mr. Muslim, the commander, continues:
5

“Chemical weapons hadn’t crossed my mind until
the evening of 26 September during the Taliban’s
fierce attack on Lata Band. I received a radio
transmission that a large number of our men were
being lost and even when I commanded the rest to
retreat, I heard no reply. I contacted my headquarters.
I was ordered to examine the front line. One hour had
passed since my initial contact with the front line
when I arrived there. Then I saw Commander Saboor,
lying dead on the battle ground. I only noticed blood
around his nose and ears. Saboor was a close friend of
mine. Suddenly, I had a flashback of the Red Army
using similar weapons during the jihad. I really
wanted to take his body, which had no trace of
external injury, back with me. But the intensity of
fighting did not give me the chance.”
Based on this account, it is the strong conviction of
the Islamic State of Afghanistan that the foreign sponsors
of the Taliban have provided them with some type of
internationally banned gas or chemical weapon which were
used in the Taliban onslaught for the capture of Kabul, the
capital, where they encountered strong resistance.
We are bringing this tragic episode to the attention of
this Assembly and therefore appeal to the international
community immediately to assign a team of inquiry to
investigate the case to which I have referred.
The Islamic State of Afghanistan has continuously
provided information to the United Nations Special Mission
and to the Security Council about the military acts of the
Taliban, which have systematically refused to accept the
United Nations peace process.
In a letter to the Secretary-General of the United
Nations dated 5 September 1995 (S/1995/767), the
Government of Afghanistan warned the international
community about the dangers of the fragmentation and
disintegration of Afghanistan and of the possibility of the
Taliban military advances getting out of control.
In the letter to the Secretary-General dated 14
September 1995, the Islamic State of Afghanistan
forecasted
“the outcome of this new tension as alarming and
perilous”
and earnestly called for the prompt dispatching
“of a fact-finding mission to western Afghanistan in
order to report during the consultations to the
Security Council”. (S/1995/795, p. 2)
The Secretary-General, in a letter dated 22
September 1995, assured that,
“The United Nations remains committed to the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of Afghanistan
and opposed to all external interference in your
country. I am using the mandates entrusted to me by
the Member States to do all I can to resolve the
sources of conflict which contribute to instability in
Afghanistan. I shall continue to pursue a
comprehensive approach to the overall peace
process, in which the Special Mission will continue
to play the main United Nations role. I ask that you
continue to cooperate with it.”
In a letter dated 27 September 1995 to the Secretary-
General, the Islamic State of Afghanistan stated that,
“Taliban not only undermined peace and
tranquillity in the western parts of the country, but
in the meantime, posed an external practical menace
to the territorial integrity of Afghanistan.”
(S/1995/823, annex, p. 3)
and that,
“the most reasonable and practical way to peace, and
appropriate atmosphere for a peaceful transfer of
power to an elected authority enjoying the
confidence of the people, is first and foremost the
need to ease off the present crisis of confidence'”.
(ibid.)
In the general debate of 4 October 1995, we declared
that attempts by
“reactionary groups to destabilize a moderate Islamic
system which believes in democracy and human
rights, are wrong in their assessments and
calculations. Such foreign circles may think that
after the usurpation of power by the Taliban all will
go well for them. In fact, they will add a further
problem, especially by bringing onto the scene a
faction which has no factual presence on
Afghanistan’s political scene. These circles should
be aware that the peace and security in the capital,
the actual relative peace and stability in the country
6

and in the region, would be jeopardized by such an
erroneous miscalculation. The same error was made
by the former Soviet Union in 1979.” (Official
Records of the General Assembly, Fiftieth Session,
Plenary Meetings, 19th meeting, p. 10)
As far as the activities of the United Nations Special
Mission are concerned, we suggested, in a letter dated 30
September 1995, that the efforts of the Secretary-General
“and those of Ambassador Mahmoud Mestiri, Head of
the United Nations Special Mission to Afghanistan,
would benefit from the establishment of a contact
group on Afghanistan composed of States, but not the
ones immediately involved, as well as of interested
organizations.” (A/50/510, annex, p. 2)
In a letter dated 12 October 1995, we warned that,
“The different leaders of the Taliban have several
times declared their rejection of the United Nations
Special Mission’s action in proposing to them to
accept a ceasefire. They have also rejected the
proposals for peace talks with other parties to the
conflict.” (S/1995/866, annex, p. 2)
In a letter dated 12 November 1995, we informed the
Secretary-General that,
“On 11 November 1995, the Taliban launched as
many as 170 rockets on the civilian-populated sectors
of Kabul, as a result of which 37 innocent lives were
lost and more than 52 civilians wounded, while
immense damage was inflicted upon public property.”
(A/50/748, annex, p. 2)
This is why in a letter dated 16 November 1995
(A/50/760) addressed to the Secretary General, the Islamic
State of Afghanistan inquired about the identity of the
Taliban, their ideology and goals, their rejection of the
peace process and their negative attitude towards the United
Nations.
As a result of the heavy bombardment of the capital
by the Taliban on 26 November 1995, the Secretary-
General expressed his concern about the escalation of
fighting and called upon all parties to cooperate with the
efforts of the United Nations Special Mission, then headed
by Ambassador Mahmoud Mestiri, aimed at achieving an
immediate ceasefire and promoting negotiations among the
parties on a transitional mechanism for the transfer of
power, to achieve a just and durable settlement acceptable
to all Afghans.
During 1996 Afghanistan continued to keep the
United Nations well informed about the atrocities
committed by the Taliban in a letter dated 19 January
1996 (S/1996/44).
On 9 April 1996 the Security Council held two
meetings on Afghanistan. During the meetings the
delegation of the Islamic State of Afghanistan provided
adequate information on the role of the so-called Taliban
in causing turmoil in Afghanistan and threatening the
peace and stability of the region. This was recognized by
the Security Council in a statement to the press on 13
December 1995.
In a letter dated 22 August 1996 addressed to the
Secretary General, the President of the Security Council
stated that the members of Security Council,
“express their strong view that the warring parties
should renounce the use of force and settle their
differences by peaceful means, through negotiations.
“The members of the Security Council are
convinced that the main responsibility for finding a
political solution to the conflict lies with the parties
and that all States must refrain from interference.”
(S/1996/683, first and second paragraphs)
The Taliban have consistently taken a rejectionist
attitude and still act against the letter and the spirit of all
Security Council and General Assembly resolutions and
decisions.
Given this account, I must say that this is the time
to look back and see who is responsible for the ongoing
human tragedy in Afghanistan. Was it not the lack of any
appropriate response by this Organization to the
intransigent attitude of the Taliban that encouraged and
enabled them to see the tunnel wide open and to pursue
their designs crafted by military-industrial magnates from
abroad?
The Islamic State of Afghanistan had continuously
warned the United Nations about the possible outcome.
Who is to blame, and could we consider it a conspiracy
of indifference or a conspiracy of victimization?
Regardless of which one it may be, the blood of Afghans
has been spilled. One thing manifested by the indifference
7

thus far is that Afghan blood is not cheap; rather, it is
worthless.
Let us go back to the drastic events that took place
during the last couple of weeks. The Government forces
evacuated the capital in order to prevent a bloodbath. The
Taliban invaded Kabul on the morning of 27 September
1996. The Government authorities relocated their
headquarters and offices in Taloqan, the capital of the
northern province of Takhar.
Resistance against the Taliban is not limited only to
the Panjshir Valley, where the Taliban are conducting
widespread and extensive battles, targeting civilian areas. In
many other parts of Afghanistan, under the rule of the
Taliban, there exists the potential for resistance. Soon we
will hear about uprisings.
In today’s circumstances, the objectives of the Islamic
State of Afghanistan have not changed, and I would like to
emphasize once again our firm commitment to General
Assembly resolution 50/88 on Afghanistan, which was
adopted by consensus on 19 December 1995.
The provisional setback of one party in the conflict
and the territorial gain of one side could not mean that
peace would prevail in the country. Military occupation
cannot bring about conflict resolution. On the contrary, the
escalation of tension once again necessitates a negotiated
settlement of the conflict through the mechanism
formulated in operative paragraph 4 of resolution 50/88 B
of 19 December 1995. This provides a solution to the crisis
in Afghanistan through the United Nations peace process.
A ranking United Nations official expressed his
concern by stating in The Los Angeles Times of 5 October
1996,
“It’s frightening [that] this is going to be the
Government, because these men have obviously had
no experience but fighting.”
The Taliban, who have invaded the capital city of
Kabul with cross-border military assistance, will not be able
to ensure the national unity of Afghanistan, especially in
the light of what they have done during the first days of
their military rule in the capital. The Taliban, in spite of
being Pashtuns, neither agree with the majority of Pashtuns
of the country nor with Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, Turkmen,
Baluchis, Nooristanis and others.
The Afghan leaders, intellectuals and scholars cannot
agree with the regressive and backward views of the
Taliban. Many religious leaders of the country do not
approve of their attitude and deem it incompatible with
the needs of Muslims in the modern world. They all
consider them unacceptable tools of foreign intervention.
The military rule of the Taliban must not be
considered final or accomplished. Those foreign quarters
which have provided financial and military assistance to
the Taliban will not be able to subsidize and finance their
rule permanently.
The Taliban are lacking any vision or ability for the
objective of economic and social rehabilitation in
Afghanistan. They lack any coherent and systematic
thinking or projection of the vast needs of today’s
Afghanistan. Many of their leaders consider the teachings
of modern science and technology contrary to religion.
They consider science to be sacrilege. The Taliban, who
still believe the earth is flat, are not the people for
Afghanistan, not when we are about to enter the twenty-
first century.
Yet the outside sponsors of the Taliban are
attempting to cover up their actual identity and nature,
thus soliciting a kind of legitimacy for this illegitimate,
obscurantist and terrorist group. Any relation established
with the Taliban may be interpreted by the Taliban as
tolerance by the international community. Allowing this
to happen would be an affront to the principles of the
United Nations, a seal of approval for terrorism, a
legitimization of foreign intervention and, indeed, an
insult to the human conscience.
In the name of the Islamic State of Afghanistan and
the victimized Afghan nation, I express gratitude to all
those countries that have expressed their concern and
disapproval of the occupation of the Afghan capital,
Kabul, by the Taliban, and the rule of terror in that city.
Days after the occupation of Kabul, on 2 October
1996, the Coordination Meeting of Foreign Ministers of
the member States of the Organization of the Islamic
Conference (OIC), at which I had the honour to speak,
convened at the United Nations in New York. In a final
communiqué, they expressed
“the hope that the Afghan parties will peacefully
resolve their political differences and collectively
8

work for the restoration of peace and stability in the
country”.
The practical solution to the Afghan problem needs to
include the following elements, in conformity with General
Assembly resolution 50/88 B of 19 December 1995 on the
question of Afghanistan: first, an immediate cessation of
armed conflict and the declaration of a ceasefire; secondly,
an invitation to all Afghan parties to the negotiating table,
under the auspices of the United Nations and with the
cooperation of the OIC; thirdly, an agreement on the
composition and establishment of a transitional Government
of national unity and the creation of a credible, authoritative
body to which power would immediately be transferred;
and, fourthly, the consolidation of the political process in
order to ascertain the views of the people and solve the
problem through elections or through the convening of the
traditional Grand Assembly.
Our basic views and main objectives are as follows:
the re-establishment of peace and stability, along with the
creation of conditions conducive to ensuring that the
peoples of Afghanistan can live, in an atmosphere of law
and order, on the basis of democratic values and respect for
human rights, as required by an authentic and truthful
vision of high Islamic principles; and the establishment of
a strong central Government on the basis of agreement
among all Afghan sides that have the capacity to mobilize
masses and are able to secure the achievement of these
goals. This will allow Afghanistan to become once again a
positive factor for peace and stability in the region to which
it belongs.
Only a transitional Government of national unity
would be able to secure the national unity of the country
and to allow the launching of the major task of
reconstructing and rehabilitating Afghanistan. Such a goal
could not be achieved without the full participation of the
intellectuals, scientists, experts and technocrats of
Afghanistan, many of whom now live abroad. We are
expecting all countries that are in favour of peace and
stability in Afghanistan to assist our people in order to
achieve these noble objectives.
Upon adopting the Charter of the United Nations 51
years ago in the city of San Francisco, the founding fathers
of this global establishment declared the United Nations to
be based on the sovereign equality of all States. They did
this at a time when this principle was an ideal. The struggle
for freedom by many nations, together with millions of
sacrifices, on the one hand, and the need in the twentieth
century for natural interdependence between the members
of this global family, on the other, proved more than ever
the righteousness of this principle.
It is apropos in this connection to quote His
Excellency Mr. Hervé de Charette, the Foreign Minister
of France, who on 25 September stated from this rostrum:
“If we are not careful, we are going to be living in
a world without criteria, without values, without
references, in which some — the strongest and
richest — will be in a position to decide alone on
the future of the planet.” (Official Records of the
General Assembly, Fifty-first Session, Plenary
Meetings, 8th meeting, p. 18)