I take pleasure in congratulating Mr. Garba on his election to preside over the current session of the General Assembly. His election is an expression both of appreciation for his expertise and of recognition of the important role his country  Nigeria  plays in the international community. I am completely confident that he will conduct the business of the session in the best possible manner which will help in dealing with the vitally important international issues on our agenda.
I also wish to express our thanks to his predecessor  Mr. Dante Caputo, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Argentina  for the objective manner in which he conducted the business of the previous session.
Every year we meet in this international forum to reaffirm our commitment to the purposes and principles of the United Nations and to review the urgent problems and crises which afflict the world. We exchange views and adopt positions on those problems in order to reach decisions which we consider appropriate in dealing with them. In all our efforts we aim at establishing conditions for an international community that will enjoy stability  justice  security and peace. I should like to express our appreciation of the comprehensive report of the Secretary-General Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar on the work of the Organization during the previous year. We express our full satisfaction at the new orientation that is becoming more end more prevalent in the international community  foremost among which is the desire to strengthen the role and enhance the prestige of the United Nations. We support this orientation  in particular  and will work together with all Member States towards reaffirming and consolidating it. The Secretary-General has indicated in his report that the Organization has  in fact  proven both its authority in assuming the role that it was entrusted with and its ability to contribute in m effective manner to the resolution of a number of problems through active peace efforts as it did in Afghanistan  Iran and Iraq  South-East Asia, Namibia and Cyprus and with respect to other Issues that are of concern to us all. While expressing our appreciation for these efforts, we must underline the fact that progress in discharging our responsibilities in dealing with these - and other - issues depends on our action, that of all of us, as Members of this Organization, on our commitment to peaceful settlements, non-use of force and full cooperation with the efforts undertaken by the United Nations.
The question of Palestine is the most important and foremost challenge that continues to confront the international community. Prom the very inception of the United Nations the General Assembly has had the question of Palestine on its agenda and, indeed, the Organization assumes a particularly heavy responsibility for that issue. TWO ongoing developments of unquestionable importance are currently taking place regarding this question, developments which must be taken into consideration in any discussion of the issue. They are the Palestinian peoples' uprising in the occupied territories, on the one hand, and the proclamation of the independent State of Palestine, on the other hand.
The intifadah is a liberation movement against Zionist occupation and its plans for the settlement of the territories and its continuing violation of the sanctity of the holy lands in Palestine. The intifadah has forced itself on the attention of the world and has become a daily news for the international media. It has clarified the nature of the conflict in a manner that will ebon to failure any attempts at misinformation and deceit. What we have here is a people defending their dignity and struggling for their right to self-determination and national statehood, and accepting every sacrifice in the process. This is the bright and honourable side of the picture. On the other side of the conflict, we see the ugly face of the Israeli practices of oppression which include the murder of children, women and the elderly, deportation, incarceration and torture.
Furthermore, we see the bulldozing or dynamiting of homes  the confiscation of land and property and the establishment of new settler colonies. In the name of my country, I salute the blessed intifadah of the Palestinian people and reaffirm our continued support for it. We call upon all international institutions and organizations to assume their responsibilities and to awaken the consciousness of the world so that an end may be put to attempts by the occupation authorities at genocide by removing the Palestinians from their homeland. Last year we witnessed new proof of the desire of the Palestinians to achieve a just and comprehensive solution to the problem based on international legitimacy. I am referring to the courageous initiative taken by the Palestine National Council. Despite world-wide appreciation of the Palestinian initiative and recognition by з majority of the countries of the world of the State of Palestine, Israel - impelled by its expansionist policy and its racist philosophy - still persists in its obduracy and its rejection of all initiatives of good will. In this, it is encouraged by the political and military support that It still receives from certain quarters and countries.
The dialogue between the United States and the Palestine Liberation Organization is a positive development and a step in the right direction. But dialogue is not an end in itself. What is required is that the dialogue result in a clear and explicit position recognizing the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, foremost of which is its right to self-determination. We believe that an international conference attended by all the parties concerned, including the PLO, the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, and also including the permanent members of the Security Council, is the most direct way of solving this crucial question in a comprehensive and just manner.
We view with profound satisfaction the halt of the war between Iran and Iraq that destructive war which squandered the human and material resources of the two neighbouring countries and hindered development in the region. It also jeopardized the security and peace of the whole world. But our satisfaction will not be complete until full understanding is reached by the parties and a formal end put to the state of war, until clear, solid foundations of a just and durable peace between them are established in such a way as to preclude any recourse to the use of force in the future. We believe that co-operation with the Secretary-General and his endeavours and the implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) constitute a guarantee for achievement of the desired peace.
With regard to the tragic situation in fraternal Lebanon  we are pleased to take note of the resumption of work by the Arab Tripartite Committee. We commend the noble efforts undertaken by that Committee and the positive results that have thus far been achieved. We call upon the parties to continue to co-operate with the Committee as the only available means to extract Lebanon from the vicious circle of infighting and to bring to that country, embattled for so long, the overdue peace and security which it deserves. We also look to the representatives of all the fraternal Lebanese people, meeting in Taif, with the hope that they will reach an agreement on appropriate foundations for building the Lebanon of the future, foundations that represent civilization and a spirit of giving.
My country can only condemn the continued Israeli occupation of south Lebanon and of the Syrian Golan. We salute the heroic resistance of the people against that occupation. We call upon the international community to meet its duties in securing full implementation of the relevant resolutions of the Security Council calling for an end to the Israeli occupation of those territories.
With regard to Afghanistan, my country has always supported the Afghan people's right to self-determination and to the free choice of its political system, without external interference. We call upon all the parties to implement the Geneva Agreements on the subject and to co-operate with the sincere efforts of the Secretary-General of the United Nations in this regard. With respect to the question of Cyprus, ray country believes that a just and durable settlement ensuring the coexistence of the two Cypriot communities can be reached through participation in good faith in the ongoing efforts of the United Nations.
My country also salutes the endeavours of the leaders of Central America to deal with the problems confronting that region through negotiations and other peaceful means with a view to achieving stability and enabling the peoples of the region to devote their efforts and resources to the development process.
The State of Qatar considers the elimination of apartheid in South Africa to be a lofty goal for all mankind. That evil regime is a challenge to the values and sentiments of mankind and г violation of the purposes and principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The elimination of that regime is a prime responsibility of our Organization and of the international community. We consider that the limited measures enacted by the authorities in Pretoria in an effort to deal with world public opinion can only mean the perpetuation of that evil regime and impede the final objective ρ namely, the total elimination of apartheid. We welcome the positive developments with regard to independence for Namibia and we hope that all the obstacles South Africa still raises will be overcome. The United Nations plan for Namibia’s independence should be permitted to bear fruit so that the Namibian people may enjoy independence and regain its security and stability.
The International community is confronted with two major challenges that threaten its very structure and put at great peril the achievements of human civilization. I refer to the dangers posed to the environment  on the one hand, and the spread of drug use, on the other hand. The major industrialized countries and the developing or least developed countries are equally in jeopardy. Co-operation on a global scale is necessary to meet these challenges with all the determination they require. Although the responsibility falls upon us all, the industrialized countries beau: a greater burden in this respect commensurate with their financial and technological resources, which may not be available to the developing countries.
In this regard my country supports the holding of the proposed 1992 international conference on environment and development. We hope this conference will provide solutions conducive to the protection of our planet in the interests of future generations. At the same time we call for intensified efforts to deal with the scourge of drugs, which threaten the achievements and the very foundations of our civilization.
We wish to express our satisfaction at the improvement in the international political climate and the detente in the relations between the Soviet Union and the United States as illustrated, among other things, by the conclusion of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate· -Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, and the beginning of the destruction of some of them, which constitutes a first step towards total disarmament. We also consider this achievement a first step on the long road towards the global and comprehensive end of the nuclear-arms race and a harbinger of better times to come for the human race in a world where peace and understanding prevail.
In this connection we attach particular importance to the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones, particularly in the Indian Ocean and the Middle East. We feel great concern over Israel's possession of nuclear arms, especially if we take into account its aggressive characteristics and its dominant trait to embark on hazardous adventures. Our concern is heightened by Israel's refusal to accede to the Non-Proliferation Treaty and its refusal to subject its nuclear installations to international inspection, 'as well as its co-operation with the racist regime of Pretoria. We also support the total elimination of nuclear weapons and the cessation of all nuclear tests, as well as ensuring the diversion of the enormous resources spent on arms to the social and economic development of the developing countries, with an enhanced role for the United Nations.
Political detente cannot be consolidated without economic detente. Unfortunately the economic crisis is still with us  if anything, it is worsening. Ws feel deep concern at the widening economic and technological gap between the developing countries and the industrialized countries. While the economies of the majority of the developing countries are stagnant or in decline, the major concern of the industrialized countries is to achieve growth without inflation.
The debt problem still constitutes an impediment to the economic development of many developing countries. It is essential to arrive at a fair global understanding to find a solution to the problem of external indebtedness. We believe in the usefulness of the resumption of the broad North-South dialogue aimed at establishing forms of economic co-operation beneficial to all concerned. We hope the special session of the General Assembly scheduled to take place early next year will provide a useful forum for the resumption of this dialogue. We are confident that that session will provide a strong impetus to international co-operation in the field of economic development. Here, we emphasize the importance of the role of the United Nations as a principal forum for dialogue and negotiations relative to such co-operation.
Past experience teaches us that we are able to deal effectively with most of our problems if we put our faith in our international Organization and in each other. The challenges confronting us are great indeed, but through seriousness of purpose and good faith we can meet them. Thus we shall achieve our objective of a world where justice and mutual respect prevail and where mankind enjoys the blessings of freedom, peace and stability.


I am honoured to address the General Assembly today at the beginning of its forty-fourth session. I should like to congratulate Joseph Garba of Nigeria, a distinguished diplomat, on his election as President of this session of the General Assembly, and I wish him success in his presidency.
I feel a great personal pleasure on this occasion, for this is a homecoming for both Barbara and me. The memories of my time here in 1971 and 1972 are still with me today - the human moments, the humorous moments that are part of even the highest undertaking.
With the Assembly's permission, I should like to share one story from one of the many meetings of the Security Council. I was the Permanent Representative of the United States, and I was 45 minutes late for the meeting. All 45 minutes were filled by the first speaker to take the floor, and when I walked in and took my seat the speaker paused, with great courtesy, and said: "I welcome the Permanent Representative of the United States. And now, for his benefit, I will start my speech all over again, from the beginning."
That is a true story, at that moment. differences of alliance and ideology didn't matter. The universal groan that went up around that table from every representative present, and the laughter that followed united us all. Today, I would like to begin by recognising - again, a personal privilege - the current Permanent Representatives with whom I served, Ambassador Dugersuren, Ambassador Martinez Ordonez. Ambassador Pabetafika and Permanent Observer Dube. It is wonderful to look around and see so any familiar faces - foreign ministers, members of the Secretariat, and delegates. Of course, the Secretary-General, you were the Permanent representative of your country when we served together. Under-Secretary-General Farah. you were a Permanent Representative back then too. Ambassador Aguilar was here then and is now back. It is an honour to be back with you in this historic Hall, and I apologize if , have forgotten any of you old enough to have served in 1971 and 1972.

The United Nations was established forty-four years ago upon the ashes of war and amidst great hopes. The UN can do great things. No, the United Nations is not perfect, it is not a panacea for the world's problem. But it is a vital forum where the nations of the world seek to replace conflict with consensus, and it must remain a forum for peace. The UN has the support of the United States of America. In recent years, the war of words that is often echoed in this Hall has been giving way to a new mood.
We have seen a welcome shift from polemics to peace-keeping. United Nations Peace-keepers have given their lives in service to the United Nations. Today, should like to remember one of those soldiers of peace, an American on a mission of peace under the United Nations flag, on a mission for all the world, a man of unquestioned bravery and unswerving, dedication to the United Nations ideal - Lieutenant-Colonel William Richard Higgins. I call on the General Assembly to condemn the murder of this soldier of peace and to call on those responsible to have the decency to return his remains to his family. Let us all - right now, right here - dedicate ourselves and our nations to the cause that Colonel Higgins served so selflessly.
The founders of this historic institution believed that it was here that the nations of the world might come to agree that law, not force, shall govern. And the United Nations can play a fundamental role in the central issue of our time, for today, there is an idea at work around the globe, an idea of undeniable force - and that idea is freedom. Freedom's advance is evident everywhere.- Central Europe and Hungary, where State and society are now in the midst of a movement towards political pluralism and a free-market economy, where the barrier that once enforced an unnatural division between Hungary and its neighbours to the west has been torn down and replaced by a new hope for the future, a new hope in freedom. We see freedom at work in Poland, where, in deference to the will of the people, the Communist Party has relinquished its monopoly on power, and indeed in the Soviet Union, where the world hears the voices of people no longer afraid to speak out or to assert the right to rule themselves.
But freedom's march is not confined to a single continent or to the developed world alone. We see the rise of freedom in Latin America where, one by one, dictatorships are giving way to democracy. We see it on the continent of Africa, where more and more nations see in the system of free enterprise salvation for economies crippled by excessive State control. East and West, North and South, on every continent, we can see the outlines of a new world of freedom.
Of course, freedom's work remains unfinished. The trend we see is not yet universal. Some regimes still stand against the tide. Some rulers still deny the right of the people to govern themselves. But now the power of prejudice and despotism is challenged. Never before have these regimes stood so isolated and alone, so out of step with the steady advance of freedom. Today we are witnessing an ideological collapse, the demise of the totalitarian idea of the omniscient, all-powerful State. There are many reasons for this collapse, but in the end one fact alone explains what we see today: advocates of the totalitarian idea saw its triumph written in the laws of history, they failed to see the love of freedom that was written in the human heart.
Two hundred years ago today, the United States - our Congress - proposed the Bill of Rights: fundamental freedoms belonging to every individual. Rights no Government can deny. Those same rights have been recognized in this congress of nations in the words of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations. From where we stand, on the threshold of this new world of freedom, the trend is clear enough. If, for those who write the history of our times, the twentieth century is remembered as the century of the state, the twenty-first century must be an era of emancipation, the age of the individual. Make no mistake, nothing can stand in the way of freedom's march. There will come a day when freedom is seen the world over to be the universal birthright of every man and woman, of every race and walk of life. Even under the worst circumstances, at the darkest of times, freedom has always remained alive - a distant dream, perhaps, but always alive.
Today, that dream is no longer distant. For the first time, for millions around the world, a new world of freedom is within reach. Today is freedom's moment. You see, the possibility now exists for the creation of a true community of nations, built on shared interests and ideals. A true community, a world where free Governments and free markets meet the rising desire of the people to control their own destiny, to live in dignity, and to exercise freely their fundamental human rights. It is time that worked together to deliver that destiny into the hands of men and women everywhere. Our challenge is to strengthen the foundations of freedom, encourage its advance and face our most urgent challenges, the global challenges of the twenty-first century: economic, health, environmental well-being, the great questions of war and peace.
First, global economic growth. During this decade, a number of developing nations have moved into the ranks of the world's most advanced economies, all of them - each and every one - powered by the engine of free enterprise. In the decade ahead, others can join their ranks, but for many nations, barriers stand in the way. In the case of some countries, these are obstacles of their own making: un-needed restrictions, regulations that act as dead weights on their own economies and obstacles to foreign trade. But other barriers to growth exist, and those, too, require effective action.
Too many developing countries struggle today under a burden of debt that makes growth all but impossible. The nations of the world deserve better opportunity to achieve a measure of control over their own economic fate and build better lives for their own people. The approach the United States has put forward - the Brady plan - will help these nations reduce that debt and, at the same time, encourage the free market reforms that will fuel economic growth.
In just two days, I will be speaking to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and I will discuss there, in more detail, the steps that our nations can take in dealing with the debt problem. But I can say now the new world of freedom is not a world where a few nations live in comfort while others live in want. The power of commerce is a force for progress. Open markets are the key to continued growth in the developing world. Today, the United States buys over one-half of the global manufactured exports that all developing nations combined sell to the industrialized world. It is time for the other advanced economies to follow suit, to create expanded opportunities for trade. I believe we will learn, in the century ahead, that many nations of the world have barely begun to tap their true potential for development. The free market and its fruits are not the special preserve of a few, they are a harvest that everyone can share.
Beyond the challenge of global growth lies another issue of global magnitude: the environment. No line drawn on a map can stop the advance of pollution. Threats to our environment have become international problems. We must develop an international approach to urgent environmental issues, one that seeks common solutions to common problems. The United Nations is already at work on the question of global warming and the effort to prevent oil spills and other disasters from fouling our seas and the air we breathe. And I will tell you now the United States will do its part. We have committed ourselves to the world-wide phase-out of chlorofluorocarbons by the year 2000. We have proposed amending our own Clean Air Act to ensure clean air for our citizens within a single generation. We have banned the import of ivory to protect the elephant and rhinoceros from the human predators who exterminate them for profit. And we have begun to explore ways to work with other nations, with the major industrialized democracies, and in Poland and in Hungary, to make common cause for the sake of our environment.
The environment belongs to all of us. In this new world of freedom, the world's citizens must enjoy this common trust for generations to come. Global economic growth and the stewardship of our planet - both are critical issues.
But as always, questions of war and peace must be paramount to the United Nations. We must move forward to limit and eliminate weapons of mass destruction. Five years ago, at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, I presented a United States draft treaty outlawing chemical weapons. Since then, progress has been made, but time is running out. The threat is growing. More than 20 nations now possess chemical weapons or the capability to produce them. And these horrible weapons are now finding their way into regional conflicts. That is simply unacceptable. For the sake of mankind, we must halt and reverse this threat.
Today I want to announce steps that the United States is ready to take, steps to rid the world of these truly terrible weapons, steps towards a treaty that will ban - eliminate - all chemical weapons from the Earth 10 years from the day it is signed. This initiative contains three major elements. First, in the first eight years of a chemical weapons treaty the United States is ready to destroy nearly all - 98 per cent - of our chemical weapons stockpile, provided the Soviet Union joins the ban, and I think it will. Secondly, we are ready to destroy all of our chemical weapons - 100 per cent, every one - within 10 years, once all nations capable of building chemical weapons sign that total-ban treaty. And thirdly, the United States is ready to begin now. We will eliminate more than 80 per cent of our stockpile even as we work to complete a treaty, if the Soviet Union joins us in cutting chemical weapons to an equal level and if we agree on the conditions, including inspections, under which stockpiles are destroyed.
We know that monitoring a total ban on chemical weapons will be a challenge. But the knowledge we have gained from our recent arms control experience and our accelerating research in this area makes me believe that we can achieve the level of verification that gives us confidence to go forward with the ban. The world has lived too long in the shadow of chemical warfare? so let us act together, beginning today, to rid the Earth of this scourge.
We are serious about achieving conventional arms reductions as well. And that is why we put forward new proposals just last Thursday at the negotiations in Vienna on conventional forces in Europe, proposals that demonstrate our commitment to act rapidly to ease military tensions in Europe and move the nations of that continent one step closer to their common destiny: a Europe whole and free.
The United States is convinced that open and innovative measures can move disarmament forward and also ease international tensions. That is the idea behind the "open skies" proposal, about which the Soviets have now expressed a positive attitude. It is the idea behind the "open lands" proposal, permitting for the first time ever free travel for all Soviet and United States diplomats throughout each other's countries. Openness is the enemy of mistrust, and every step towards a more open world is a step towards the new world we seek.
Let me make this comment on our meetings with the Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union, Mr. Shevardnadze, over the past few days: I am very pleased by the progress made. The Soviet Union removed a number of obstacles to progress on conventional and strategic arms reductions. We reached agreements in principle on issues from verification to nuclear testing. And, of course, we agreed to a summit in the spring or early summer of 1990. I look forward to meeting Mr. Gorbachev there.
Each of those achievements is important in its own right, but they are more important still as signs of a new attitude that prevails between the United States and the USSR. Serious differences remain; we know that. But the willingness to deal constructively and candidly with those differences is news that we and indeed the world must welcome. We have not entered into an era of perpetual peace. The threats to peace that nations face may today be changing, but they have not vanished. In fact, in a number of regions around the world, a dangerous combination is now emerging: regimes armed with old and unappeasable animosities and modern weapons of mass destruction. That development will raise the stakes whenever war breaks out. Regional conflict may well threaten world peace as never before.
The challenge of preserving peace is a personal one for all individuals right here in this Hall. Mr. Secretary-General, I say with great respect that you have made it your own. The United Nations can be a mediator, a forum where parties in conflict come in search of peaceful solutions. For the sake of peace, the United Nations must redouble its support for the peace efforts now under way in regions of conflict all over the world. I assure the Assembly that the United States is determined to take an active role in settling regional conflicts. Sometimes our role in regional disputes is and will be highly public, and sometimes, like many others do, we work quietly behind the scenes. But always, we are working for positive change and lasting peace.
Our world faces other, less conventional threats no less dangerous to international peace and stability. Illegal drugs are a menace to social order and a source of human misery wherever they gain a foothold. The nations which suffer this scourge must join forces in the fight, and we are. Let me salute the commitment and extraordinary courage of one country in particular: Colombia, where
we are working with the people and their President, Virgil lo Barco, to put the drug cartels cut of business and bring the drug lords to justice.
Finally, we must join forces to combat the threat of terrorism. Every nation and the United Nations must send the outlaws of the world a clear message hostage-taking and the terror of random violence are methods that cannot win the world's approval. Terrorism of any kind is repugnant to all values that a civilized world holds in common. And make no mistake.- Terrorism is a means that no end, no matter how just, can sanctify.
Whatever the challenge, freedom greatly raises the chances of our success. Freedom's moment is a time for hope for all of the world, because freedom, once set in motion, takes on a momentum of its own. As I said the day I assumed the presidency of our country, we do not have to talk late into the night about which form of government is better. We know that free government, democracy, is best. And I believe that is the hard-won truth of our time, the unassailable fact that still stands at the end of a century of great struggle and human suffering. And this is true not because all our differences must give way to democracy , but because democracy makes room for all our differences. In democracy, diversity finds its common home.
At the very heart of the democratic ideal is respect for freedom of belief, freedom of thought and action, in all its diversity, for human rights. The world has experienced enough of the ideologies that have promised to remake man in some new and better image. We have seen the colossal tragedies and dashed hopes. We know now that freedom and democracy hold the answers: what men and nations want is the freedom to live by their own lights and a chance to prosper, in peace.
When I began today I spoke to you about peace-keeping. I want to speak to you now about peace-making. We must bring peace to the people who have never known its blessings. There is a painting that hangs on the wall of my office in the White House which pictures President Abraham Lincoln and his generals meeting near the end of a war that remains the bloodiest in the history of my country. Outside at that moment a battle rages, in this picture, and yet what we see in the distance is a rainbow, a symbol of hope, of the passing of the storm. That painting is called "The Peace-makers". For me, it is a constant reminder that our struggle, the struggle for peace, is a struggle blessed by hope.
I do remember sitting in this Hall, I remember the mutual respect among all of us proudly serving as representatives, yes, I remember the almost endless speeches - and I do not want this to be one of them - the Security Council sessions, the receptions, those long receiving lines, the formal meetings of the General Assembly, and the informal discussions in the delegates' lounge. And I remember something more, something beyond the frantic pace and sometimes frustrating experiences of daily life here: The heartbeat of the United Nations, the quiet conviction that we could make the world more peaceful, more free. What we sought then, all of us, now lies within our reach. I ask each of you here in this Hall:
Can we not bring a unity of purpose to the United Nations? Can we not make this new world of freedom the common destiny we seek? I believe we can. I know we must. My solemn wish today is that here, among the United Nations, that spirit will take hold, and that all men and all nations will make freedom's moment their own.
Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the work of the United Nations.


May I first, on behalf of the people and Government of the Republic of Cuba and on my own behalf, express our warmest congratulations to Major General Joseph N. Garba, outstanding son of the brotherly people of Nigeria, on his election to preside over the forty-fourth session of the General Assembly. At the outset, too, we wish to express our appreciation of Mr. Dante Caputo, a remarkable Latin American political figure and statesman, who performed brilliantly as President of the General Assembly at its forty-third session. During that session we welcomed with satisfaction and hope the disarmament agreements between the Soviet Union and the United States, which undoubtedly opened the way for a relaxation of tension, a reversal of the arms race and the removal of the threat of war. We cannot overlook the influence of the Soviet union's policy of peace on that.
Hope of peace is still uncertain, for those are just initial steps, yet to be consolidated. The nuclear arsenal remains virtually intact. The United States and some of its allies plan to modernize theirs, and have declared that the strategy of North Atlantic Treaty Organization should be maintained. The United States military budget is not being reduced. Therefore, we should not deceive ourselves or harbour illusions that tensions have disappeared from the international arena. A difficult road lies ahead. Yet, there are some grounds for hope, unless the Government of the United States itself to be lured by the dangerous and cherished idea that socialism can be brought down from within, and adopts a policy of arrogance and domination.
Cuba strongly supports a policy of peace, and will do everything it can contribute to making this process, which is all-important for mankind, irreversible. However. the fundamental idea prevailing in the United States position is that peace among the big Powers, detente between the blocs, should allow the United States to pursue its policy of pressure and threat against revolutionary, Progressive and independent countries of the third world.
Therefore peace should not be seen exclusively in the context of the level of confrontation between the big Powers. The peace that we non-aligned developing countries - which do not possess nuclear weapons but which have the great strength of our moral weapons - seek, the global. honourable, just and lasting peace we are a11 looking forward to, requires that underdeveloped nations also benefit from the climate of detente. As the first Vice-President of the Council of state and of the Council of Ministers of  Ministers, General of the Army Raul Castro stated at the  Ninth Summit Conference of Non-Aligned Countries: "The security and peace of the rich are not the security and peace for which the poor nations struggle. We want peace with sovereignty, independence, dignity, Justice and development. We want a truly universal Peace without interference or aggression."
We cannot conceive, much less accept, that while talks and negotiations agreements that contribute to disarmament, international peace and security, the United states continues at the same time to apply its hostile policies and actions against independent nations in different parts of the world. The situation prevailing in Panama today is the clearest example of the arrogance with which the empire views peace with small states  - undoubtedly a peace  with sharp claws.  Cuba has been instantly reaffirming, the continued provocations and campaigns orchestrated, day and night against Panama, more than against an individual or an event, are designed to create an atmosphere conducive to a United States breach of the Torrijos-Carter Treaty under which Panama will gain full sovereignty over the Canal and which requires the dismantling of United States military bases in the Canal Zone by the end of this century.
The Ninth Summit Conference of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries expressed its concern over the increase of United States troops in Panama and at continued military manoeuvres on Panamanian territory, which create a situation of tension that could lead to serious conflict. The Heads of State or Government reaffirmed in Belgrade their solidarity with the people of Panama in their struggle to consolidate the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of their country. They demanded full observance of the letter and spirit of the Panama Canal Treaties of 1977 and rejected any action that might constitute a violation or disregard the validity of the treaties and called upon the United States to refrain from adopting any measure or action that could prevent their full implementation. They deplored the coercive economic measures imposed against the Republic of Panama and demanded their immediate termination.
The international community's solidarity with the heroic people of Panama is necessary to prevent the threat that now looms over that country from becoming a reality. There is another situation of tension in our region that has not yet been resolved. The Central American conflicts, which has lasted for years, has seen an important development in the Tela Agreements, crowning efforts that reflect the political will of Latin American peoples and Governments. We hope that such serious negotiating efforts will counter the United States Government's policy of interference which - after years of sustained heavy financial backing of the Somoza bands operating against Nicaragua whose disbanding has now been legally decided - is now promoting and appropriating funds for the Nicaraguan opposition with a view to sabotaging the country's legitimate win and producing an electoral victory favourable to its own interests.
We welcome the calm and firm attitude of the Sandinista Government in the search for a just and honourable solution to a conflict that has taken the lives of many of Nicaragua's best youth, fallen in defence of their national sovereignty and independence. The search for a politically negotiated solution in El Salvador is also part of the negotiating process in Central America. Acceptance of the Tela Agreements by both parties to the conflict allows us to harbour hopes for the honourable solution sought by a people which have suffered the horrors of a terrible repression that has taken thousands of lives and inspired Salvadorean patriots to Put up a formidable fight, we support the just stand of the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLM) and the Democratic Revolutionary Front (FDR), which have once again shown their readiness to hold negotiations and engage in constructive dialogue.
We express our solidarity with the just demand of the people and Government of Argentina to recover their sovereignty over the Malvinas Islands. we also support Bolivia's call for a direct and useful outlet to the sea.
The Iran-Iraq conflict, which has for years kept these two non-aligned countries immersed in a bloody war that should never have begun, is now moving towards negotiation. Hostilities have ceased, but certain elements contained in security Council resolution 596 (1987) have yet to be Implemented before the achievement of a just and stable peace is possible. The imperialist presence in the Gulf, .here naval forces pose a threat to the security and independence of States in the region, does not contribute to attaining the much needed permanent peace. In South West Asia the signing of the Geneva Agreements has not prevented one of the parties, with the support and assistance of the United States Government, from continuing its attempts to impose a military solution contrary to the letter and spirit of the Geneva Agreements. Cuba supports the national reconciliation policy being pursued by the Government of the Republic of Afghanistan in a flexible and persistent fashion. The completion of Vietnamese troop withdrawals from Cambodia constitutes an important contribution to the political solution of the Cambodian conflict. Regrettably, however, the recent meeting in Paris did not bring about immediate results.
The situation in the Middle East is worsening and it has not yet been possible to get all the parties involved to agree to convening and holding an international Peace conference, which is in our view a viable way to resolve the conflict, with the participation of all parties concerned on an equal footing, including the Palestine Liberation Organization (H.0). the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Our Government expresses its unrestricted support for their right to independence and a national State. The intifidah. the heroic uprising of the Palestinian people against the ruthlessness of Zionism, deserves the respect and recognition of the entire international community. Cuba reiterates its condemnation of the actions of Israel and the united States, its strategic ally, and expresses the conviction that the solution to the conflict in the Middle East must necessarily entail a solution to the question of Palestine.
We support the just cause of the Lebanese people in their struggle for national unity and territory integrity. We reiterate our support for the legitimate rights of the Cypriot people to preserve their national unity, independence, sovereignty and non-aligned character. We consider the convening of an international conference on Cyprus under the auspices of the United Nations to be a positive initiative.
we wish to express our support for the just policy of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea aimed at' the peaceful reunification of their country and the total withdrawal of United States occupation troops from the south of the peninsula. We are confident that we will soon be able to welcome a delegation from a unified Korea to the United Nations.
We support the establishment of an independent and sovereign Sahraoui State and the withdrawal of the Moroccan administration and troops from the territory of Western Sahara.
We reiterate our support for Madagascar's recovery of its rights over the Malvinas Islands - Glorieuses, Juan de Neva, Europa and Bassas da India - as well as for the aspirations of the Comoros Islands to recover their sovereignty over Mayotte. Progress in the situation in southern Africa has been significant since December last, when the United Nations became the stage for the signing of the Tripartite Agreements that preceded the beginning of the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). There is no doubt that the long and complex negotiating process which resulted in the signing of the Tripartite Accords is proof that serious negotiations can be held while the legitimate interests of all parties are respected. As our President, Comrade Fidel Castro, has pointed out, Cuba negotiated seriously and is seriously fulfilling its commitments. By 22 September 1989, a total of 20,666 combatants had returned victorious to our homeland, in compliance with the agreed timetable, which was duly monitored by the united Nations verification team.
In conformity with the decision of the Ninth Summit Conference of Non-Aligned Countries held recently in Belgrade, the united Nations has the lofty and delicate responsibility of monitoring the implementation of the provisions of resolution 435 (1978) and of ensuring that the Namibian people and the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), its legitimate representative, can express themselves, without obstacles of any type, in the free and sovereign elections scheduled for next November. Cuba joins the non-aligned countries and all
honourable peoples the world over in demanding an immediate end to all interference in Namibia by forces of the colonial Power.
At their Ninth Summit Conference the non-aligned countries raised their voice to denounce the intransigence of the apartheid racist regime, as manifest in its continued internal repression. The Conference pointed out that apartheid cannot be reformed, that it must be eliminated through the complete eradication of its criminal system. The Conference also called on the United Nations to adopt effective measures in accordance with Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Cuba fully endorses these Just demands of the Non-Aliped Movement.
All necessary measures must be taken to avoid fraud in the forthcoming elections. Threats and acts of aggression against the Namibian people must come to end. The Koevoet racist military forces, which are part of the Namibian police, must be disbanded immediately, voters should cast their votes in the places .here they are registered. Secret ballots must be respected. Illiterate voters should  be able to have the assistance of persons of their choice,  and ballots should be counted in the districts, and not brought to the capital.
The Assembly should have full powers and not be subordinated to the administrator. as the. representative of the South African racist regime wishes, when deciding on the state to be taken towards independence.
We note with satisfaction that the climate of aggression and threats from outside against Ethiopia is beginning to be disposed. As a result, the circumstances which, more than 10 years ago - when a request was made by the Ethiopian Government - made the presence of Cuban internationalist contents necessary to assist Ethiopia's forces in repelling outside aggression, have come to an end. Thus the Cuban combatants who comprised small contingent in Ethiopia returned home this September. In this manner Cuba has once again proven its ability to express its solidarity with other peoples and at the. same time contribute to international peace.
With the independence of Namibia and its entry into the international arena and the community of nations, the struggle against colonialism will have achieved a great victory. However, we should not feel satisfied, more than 20 territories, with a potation of several million, still live under colonial domination. The people of Puerto Rico remain under a foreign boot, after almost 100 years of United States military occupation. It is well known that the so-called Plebiscite with which the United States Administration intends to determine the Territory's future is an attempt to incorporate Puerto Rico, as a new state, in the Union.
Because of this, the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization this year not only reaffirmed the right of the Boricuan people to self-determination and independence, in accordance with General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), but also expressed its hope, and that of the "international community, that, in any consultation, the people of Puerto Rico would be able to exercise, without any hindrance, its right to self-determination and independence, with expressed recognition of their sovereignty and full political equality, in line with the provisions of resolution 1514 (XV). Cuba, together with the other non-aligned countries, considers that efforts must be made to put an end to all existing colonial situations by the turn of the century.
The problems deriving from the sustained growth of the drug consumer market - particularly in the United States - and the resulting incentive to production and trafficking have become increasingly serious. We must face this situation resolutely. The struggle against drug production and trafficking must go side by side with the struggle against consumption, against the market which, in the United States alone, produces annual profits exceeding $150 billion. Cuba is, as always, prepared to play its corresponding role in that battle.
One issue that deserves our immediate attention is the threat to global security resulting from the international economic situation. We reiterate that, while the steps being taken in the field of disarmament and towards the creation of a climate of detente in the solution of some conflicts, as well as in the relations between the great Powers, are encouraging, such progress has not led to solutions to the problems of underdevelopment or the economic crisis afflicting the third world. He will not advance towards a real system of security so long as the already huge gap between the developed countries and the underdeveloped part of the world - which is suffering from an increasingly critical situation of backwardness, poverty and underdevelopment - continues to grow. These issues must be reconsidered, and a lasting solution found, if we wish to live in a world of true peace and social stability.
The encouraging picture painted by the economic performance of the industrialised nations during 1988 is very different indeed from the situation of crisis prevailing in the economies of the developing countries. United Nations studies themselves indicate that the average per capita income of industrialized countries is 50 times higher than that of the least developed countries, and that the mere annual growth of the wealthiest countries amounts almost to the total annual per capita income of the poorest nations, which is approximately 3300.
What kind of peace can we talk about in such a situation of seemingly unsolvable imbalances, where the poor increase the opulence of the wealthy? If peace is not linked to development, then poverty, inequality and violence will not disappear.
The phenomena which continue to characterize international economic relations, perpetuating this unjust situation, which are particularly evident in third-world nations with respect to unpayable external debt, are well known: protectionism? difficult access to markets for the main products of the developing countries; deterioration in the terms of trade? dumping; reduced financial flews? high interest rates? coercive economic measures? international monetary and financial instability? and external debt. All of this has resulted, in the recent past, in a net transfer of resources from the developing countries to the industrialized nations, causing not only continued plundering that prevents growth and development but also a new form of economic colonialism. Suffice it to mention, as an example, that the transfer of resources from Latin American countries to their creditors, in recent years alone, amounts to $179 billion. This represents 4 par cent of their annual gross domestic product - a figure that exceeds, by far, Germany's forced external net transfer of resources after its defeat in the First World War.
Many have focused their attention on the specific problem of external debt. But consistent steps towards true solutions have not yet been taken. Proposed solutions, coming mostly from creditors and based on case-by-case rescheduling, have only worsened the economic situation of debtor countries, although they have succeeded in their main objective of keeping creditor banks from enduring imminent heavy losses. Debtor countries, however, are growing nearer to insolvency, and their stagnation is prolonged with economic and social costs that have led to serious political disturbances and claimed hundreds and hundreds of human lives.
Proposals made within and outside the United Nations, based on a reduction of the amount of the debt, involve recognition that the debt is unpayable. The experience of all these years only confirms that the real solution to the debt problem involves the total elimination of the debt and the establishment of a new international economic order which would do away with the causes of today's grim Picture. Existing proposals would be a palliative only if reductions reached substantial levels, which Latin American Economic System experts have fixed at no less than 50 per cent, if ceilings are set for interest rates, and if a general
framework for implementation were established including all debtors without exception.
As long as we attempt to resolve the problem on a case-by-case basis we shall continue to fail. We would support United Nations efforts to bring about a real political dialogue between debtor and creditor countries.
The special session of the General Assembly to be held in the spring of 1990 and its preparatory process will give us an opportunity to reassess the challenges posed by this ongoing crisis of development in the face of the world's new economic and social realities. We hope the special session will promote frank and constructive dialogue with the understanding that unless swift and realistic solutions are promoted the problems new affecting vast regions of the world will in the future threaten the countries of the North with social and political instability.
Of course, the international development strategy for the 1990s will have to be realistic and provide for concrete policy measures with defined goals and objectives. But in particular it will require the readiness of industrialized countries to contribute to efforts by developing countries.
Protection of the environment is a concept that must be clearly defined because of its close relation to problems of development, the protection of natural resources, international economic relations, extreme poverty and the sovereignty of States, it is a matter of concern to all nations, a matter with respect to which imperialist actions bear a great responsibility, owing to the transfer to our countries of polluting industries by capitalist developed countries irrespective of the diversity of forms the problem takes in different areas. The problem must therefore be examined and measures chosen with the participation of all States, not a restricted or select group. I„ particular, its close links to problems of development must be very clear, since underdevelopment is the main threat to the third world. Underdevelopment stems from our colonial past, which also involved, among other acts of aggression, the devastation of our forests and caused irreparable damage to our environment. Increasingly, the United Nations is becoming the optimal forum for contributing to the solution of the numerous problems we are facing. Maximum co-operation by all Member States is necessary to make its action more effective. The unique role played by the Secretary-General through his efforts to eradicate hotbeds of conflict has gained recognition by the international community, thus strengthening the Organization's potential to mediate and give political negotiating coverage to parties that had in the past been engaged on the battlefield. He should pursue those endeavours wherever conditions allow in the search for compromise and the honourable peace demanded by our peoples.
The growing role of the third world in the United Nations may be seen in the context of that positive performance. There is no doubt that the United Nations represents the development of our planet since the end of the Second World War - from the establishment of the Organization to the present day. Today's United Nations is not and cannot be the United Nations of 1945. We must therefore embark on a sustained process of democratising its machinery in keeping with the interests of all member States. Cuba has already stated its position on this subject, which is of interest to the entire international community.
The Bush Administration has clearly begin to take steps with respect to Cuba that would make it the eighth United States Administration not wishing to establish a climate of peace and good-neighbourliness and persisting in hostile and aggressive action against us.
Cuba knows it is not alone in the struggle to defend its rights, its independence and its sovereignty. We appreciate the numerous expressions of solidarity we have received. We wish in particular to refer to the decision adopted by Heads of State or Government of non-aligned countries at the recent ninth summit conference held in Belgrade. They condemned the continued threats of aggression against Cuba, the violation of its air-space and territorial waters and the blockade imposed against Cuba in the areas of finance, credit and trade, along with radio broadcasts from the United States and the decision to begin television broadcasts of a destabilizing nature, in violation of international law and, particularly, the 1982 Nairobi Convention.
We have warned the United States of the consequences of beginning such broadcasts, it will bear full responsibility. Cuba will not tolerate such session in silence. We shall respond - and I wish expressly to reaffirm that from this rostrum. Heads of state or Government of the Bon-Aligned Movement also reiterated their support and solidarity with respect to Cuba's Just demand for the return of the territory illegally occupied by the United states at its Guantanamo naval base. Cuba will never forget those decisions, which should be taken into account by the united states Administration as it formulates its regional policies.
The anti-Cuban attitude of United States arch-reactionary circles on the Potomac increases the political blindness of the top leadership of that country in its vain attempt to make the Cuban revolution yield, this has reached the point -here strategic aircraft in combat formation have been sent to our country simulating a massive air strike, as took place on 20 May last, while United states submarines approached our shores with unknown objectives, which, could have caused serious and delicate incidents. Like all other peace-loving nations that are firmly confuted to achieving the social and economic development demanded by their peoples, Cuba shares the great wish to devote all its resources to the noble goal of develop.
Cuba - the Cuban revolution - has been a reality for more than three decades, and it constantly renews its energies and strengths. Long ago. our people decided to sever the chains of bondage to metropolis countries and neo-colonialism, and freely chose the economic, political and social system It wanted. Therefore, our readiness to maintain peaceful relations of co-operation and friendship with any country - and the United States ought to remember this - is based primarily on this principle; Cuba must be treated for what it is, an independent state and a sovereign socialist nation.


Mr. President, ascending the steps which lead to this podium# and speaking before the United Nations General Assembly is always a great honour and privilege. Today this honour and privilege take on added significance for our delegation. I have the pleasure of conveying to you, and to the Government and people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria# congratulations and best wishes on your unanimous election as President of the forty-fourth session of the General Assembly.
Furthermore# I have the honour of conveying to you a personal congratulatory message from Father Halter Prime Minister of the Republic of Vanuatu. The Prime Minister: sends his fondest regards to you, a friend and a man he knows to be not only a proud son of Nigeria, but also a proud son of Vanuatu. We recall that the honorary title of ,Chief, was bestowed upon you at a custom ceremony during a visit you made to Vanuatu in 1985, in your capacity as Chairman of the United Nations Special Committee against Apartheid. Thus Nigeria's pride and joy on your election is shared by Vanuatu. I will resist, for the sake of life, repeating the many words already spoken In praise of your diplomatic experience and skills. Instead, I will merely associate out delegation and myself with those words and the sentiments they express. We prefer to draw attention to four words, which those of us are privileged to know you personally find most appropriate in describing you. Those four words are: sincerity, courage, dignity, and integrity. Those four qualities make you not only a proud son of your country and of Africa, but also of all those who cherish those virtues.
We join in the tribute paid to the Group of African States, particularly to the Governments of Cameroon and Egypt, by the Minister of External Affairs of Nigeria, when he addressed the General Assembly and expressed gratitude for the African consensus which led to your election. Furthermore, we associate ourselves with the very moving words of appreciation we have heard you address to our dear friend and brother, Mr. Paul Bamela Hugo, the Permanent Representative of Cameroon  What you expressed on that occasion, Mr. President - with which we concur - were fat more than the usual sentiments.
We welcome the Under-Secretary-General, Mr. Ronald I. Spiers - a distinguished diplomat - to his new poet, and we wish him well. We also congratulate your predecessor, Mr. Dante Caputo, former Foreign Minister of Argentina, for a job well done. His presidency coincided with certain historic developments which have contributed to a new atmosphere that we must now profit from in our efforts to strengthen the United Nations, and prospects for justice and lasting world peace.
There is no doubt that, in a real sense, the current international climate is far better than it has ever been within the lifetime of most of those who now inhabit this planet. We now have a chance finally to cross the threshold and ensure that mankind will not, through a nuclear conflict between the two super-Powers intentionally destroy life as we know it. None the less, many major problems continue to plague mankind, and we believe that sincerity, courage, dignity and integrity continue to be essential qualities in the process of building and preserving justice, peace and a better world for every roan, woman and child in every corner of the globe.
We welcome and applaud the new openness, mutual respect and generally friendlier atmosphere that characterize current relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. However, we would be less than true to ourselves, and to history, were we to forget that many of the things that plague mankind today are not consequences of the post-Second-World-War antagonisms between these two great countries but, instead, result from old contradictions and grievances that predate the cold war and reveal the imperfections of the human species, as well as of the various institutions we have shaped.
An astute observer once remarked, ,Man's mad vanity is often mocked by life,. Thus, while some raced recklessly to build and deploy newer and more powerful weapons of mass destruction, nature demonstrated, with repeated regularity, that it could outdo mankind by in leashing hurricanes, cyclones, earthquakes, floods and droughts that gave us more than enough death and devastation - if that was what we wanted. While some experimented with, and developed  silent killers, such as chemical and bacteriological agents, nature gave us more than enough infectious disease  to satisfy any longing we might have to inflict pain and suffering on other human beings. While some obsessively consumed addictive drugs with hedonistic fervour# nature revealed that, eventually, those consumers become themselves consumed by their obsession.
While some raced selfishly to build temples of pagan idolatry to material wealth, with little regard for the future well-being of our planet, nature responded to the repeated violation of our environment the only way it could - by revealing how scarce are the earth's resources, and how precarious its ability to support and sustain life. While some have expended their energy in misguided efforts to deny the humanity of others, merely because of differences in skin pigmentation, religious beliefs, cultural nuances, language or gender, nature has repeatedly revealed that if we cannot now be united in life we will most assuredly be forever united in death.
It is time for us all to realize that if every one of us does not have a future none of us shall have a future. Thus, the Foreign Minister of the Philippines, Mr. Raul S. Manglapus, spoke for us all - not only for the poor people of his country - when, on 27 September 1989, he so eloquently stated, among other things t
,Today a human being is born not only with original sin but also with
original debt., (A/44/PV.9, p. 38)
This chilling reality, substantiated by the fact that the developing world now- owes the developed world more than $1.3 trillion, portends a future without hope for most of the world's people. Furthermore, this debt, which has already reached unmanageable proportions, continues to grow and grow and grow, with no apparent end in sight.
We would be hard-pressed to recall a recent international meeting at which a discussion of the debt crisis, end other aspects of a general appeal for economic justice, had not played a prominent role. There are some encouraging signs that the urgency of this message has finally begun to penetrate. However, every day that this problem is left unresolved in a comprehensive fashion by the international community and the developing countries of the world nearer to an economic abyss and a potentially devastating social apocalypse.
№>t all of the economic ills of the developing countries result from the actions - or lade of action - of the developed world. Naturally, developing countries must shoulder a fair share of the responsibility for the general malaise that exists in so many of their own economies. However, deteriorating terms of trade - characterized by severely depressed commodity prices, reverse flows of capital, and increasing protectionist pressures - have, for most of the world, made appeals for international economic justice a matter of great urgency.
Greater fiscal responsibility and restraint are needed, but certainly not at the expense of those who are the most disadvantaged in the various developing countries. This would not only be Impolite it would also be immoral.
Ironically, those who are among the first to counsel the adoption of rather severe fiscal restraints with respect to the social sectors of developing countries are often among the last to adopt far milder restraints themselves when it comes to military expenditures for new methods of death and destruction. Developing countries generally find It difficult to obtain sufficient economic credits to develop social Infrastructure. The same countries usually find it easier to obtain economic credits to fuel excessive military expenditures.
While some nations were busy devoting considerable resources and energy to building and maintaining elaborate military defences against real and Imagined external enemies, another, less manageable and more Insidious, foe of us all was also busy. This foe developed an ability to threaten us all; regardless of our size regardless of our wealth, regardless of our power, regardless of our professed beliefs. This foe respects no international border, no set of laws, and no boundaries of decency. This foe is as brutal, as principled and as immoral as was an earlier foe - the international traffic in human beings known is the slave trade. Today's foe - the international traffic in narcotic drugs - poses a clear and present danger to contemporary civilized society. What it cannot seduce, it attempts to corrupt  what it cannot corrupt, it attempts to intimidate} what it cannot intimidate, it attempts to Hill and destroy.
Those who engage in this traffic deserve neither our sympathy nor our mercy. They are evil incarnate, and must be confronted with all means at our disposal, just as the slave traders of earlier generations were confronted by decent human beings and civilized Governments and institutions, and just as latter-day practitioners of genocide were confronted by the international community during the Second World War, and later at International tribunals, which for ever contented crimes against humanity.
Today, the courage of the Government and people of Colombia presents us with an historic challenge. Should we fail to meet that challenge - should we allow Colombia to stand alone in Its confrontation with evil - we shall have written the epitaph of modern civilization. The message of Mr. Virgilio Barco, President of Colombia, delivered here at the General Assembly on 29 September 1989, moved us all to stand in unison and applaud. Let that message also lead us to stand in unison and fight for the future of our respective peoples - for the future of our children.
A young playwright, raised in a section of our host city that was recently in the news, has crafted a work striking in its similarities to a tragic event that occurred recently in his former neighbourhood. The plot of his play centres on an act of mindless racial violence and exposes the raw emotions of the play's characters. At the play's conclusion, a man who had stood by and watched the fatal beating of the black victim is surprised by the reaction of his girlfriend. To exculpate himself  he exclaims
,... life is short. The past is past. Let's worry about us. When the bomb hits, we're all going to die anyways.,
She pointedly replies t
,The world's not going to end with a bomb. It's going to end with people like you standing around doing nothing.,
One week after the play went into rehearsal, a tragic and much-publicized killing occurred in the community where the author had been raised and where the play was set. The theme of the play could just as easily have been about the international community's inaction in the face of drug trafficking it could just as easily have been about how the world has stood around watching the violent disintegration of Lebanon  it could just as easily have been about how some of us have stood around watching the intifadah in the occupied territories of Palestine. The theme of the play could just as easily have been about those who have been satisfied to be spectators each time the people of South Africa have demonstrated that they have had  ore than their fill of apartheid. The there could just as easily have been about those who chose to be spectators when the people of Namibia, the people of Hew Caledonia, or the people of other Non-Self-Governing Territories, decided to reclaim their own identities, their own sovereignty  their own futures.
In this regard, we note the very moving appeal of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Portugal, Mr. de Deus Pinheiro, that the international community not rent in indifferent to the situation in East Timor. The Government and the people of Vanuatu will never be indifferent to conditions in East Timor, Western Sahara, or other small Territories which some tend to overlook when they assess the current state of international relations. To us, the world has not progressed nearly as far as we would like to believe, if the peoples of those small Territories are not allowed freely to express their will and determine their r perspective futures.
Closer to Vanuatu's own shores, the people of New Caledonia and the Government of Trance have embarked on an imaginative initiative  hid  could prove capable of providing a framework for a genuine act of self-determination and a just and lasting solution to the trouble -plagued history of that South Pacific Territory. We continue to support an early transition to an independent New Caledonia in accordance with the legitimate aspirations of New Cal® dm la's colonized people.
The Reads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries continue to view the decolonisation process as an important international priority. At the Ninth Summit Conference of the Non-Aligned Countries, held in Belgrade, Yugoslavia  the Heads of State or Government reiterated and reaffirmed their commitment to the process by which most of the countries represented here today have won their political independence. On the specific subject of New Caledonia they ,strongly urged that the question ... be kept under active consideration at the United Nations until the conditions for an internationally acceptable act of self-determination} in accordance with the principles and practices of the United Nations, have been met.,
The important process of dialogue has led to the restoration of peace and a calm political atmosphere in New Caledonia. As a neighbouring country Vanuatu applauds the measures taken to end the violence and reform the old social order. We will continue to support the process under way in New Caledonia so long as its people continue to work within that framework, and to view that process as a vehicle for the political evolution of their country.
We are grateful for the understanding and support received from the international community on this issue. We know it is not always easy to understand and appreciate all of the nuances emanating from cries for justice by the people of a small Territory in a distant region. We also know it is not always easy - owing to other constraints and limitations - for a great Power to respond in a positive manner. France has demonstrated a greatness, as well as courage and compassion, by its willingness to listen to the grievances of New Caledonia's people, and by its willingness be fashion bold new initiatives in an effort to address those grievances.
Nothing would please us more than to believe that the Government of South Africa is now possessed of the greatness, the courage, and the compassion to live up to its various undertakings to promote the decolonization of Namibia, and to help forge a new South Africa built on honesty, justice, and equality. However, w· share the scepticism of those who doubt the sincerity of the current rulers of Pretoria.
Namibia is on its way to independence despite the many road-blocks erected by the apartheid regime. He rejoice at the prospect of an independent Namibia assuming its rightful place within the community of nations. However# the rest of the world must assure that South Africa lives up to its commitments and not just those it finds convenient.
With respect to South Africa itself it is clear that apartheid is doomed.
This discredited doctrine of racial superiority has been repudiated by all# save those whose hearts and minds still reside in the early decades of the nineteenth century when the ownership of one human being by another was a socially acceptable method of attaining wealth and power.
Today# those who imprisoned Nelson Mandela find that in his confinement he is freer than they are as his gaolers. His freedom is the freedom of a dignity that could never be diminished a will that could never be broken a conscience that could never be compromised. The confinement of his gaolers is the moral confinement of those who are consumed by nothing but greed and hatred.
Those who govern South Africa attempted the impossible. They attempted the indefinite imprisonment of an entire country. Such repression nay succeed temporarily but history teaches that such success is always short-lived. Today# the largest gaolbreak in history is occurring. Soon South Africa will be free, and all of that country's people can share its wealth and will share its future.
Hurricane Hugo which recently battered the Eastern Caribbean and parts of the United States has added its name to the long list of natural disasters that continue to plague mankind. He extend our deepest sympathy and condolences to the victims of Hugo and join in appeals for emergency and long-term assistance to help rebuild what was destroyed. As horrible as the consequences of the hurricane were  however t we cannot help but note that for some unfathomable reason, mankind still seems determined to match or even exceed nature in its destructive capabilities. The follies of mankind appear to have no limits.
Thus while we mourn the victims of hurricane Hugo# nuclear testing continues in the South Pacific. Why? He cannot understand. Every delegation that has participated in the general debate has commented on a new positive international atmosphere and greatly enhanced prospects for world peace. Why, then must the people of the South Pacific continue to see their environment violated by the testing of nuclear weapons? For what conflict are these weapons necessary?
Against whom have the peace-loving peoples of the Pacific sinned? Why must our lands  our waters* and our skies be used to test weapons that the people of no other region want tested on their lands  in their waters  or in their skies?
We are pleased by recent expressions of concern for the environment. However  we find considerable irony in these expressions of concern. We are waiting for new voices to join us in appealing for an end to nuclear testing in our environment. We are waiting for new voices to join us in appealing for an end to the dumping of hazardous materials in our environment. We are waiting for new voices to join us in an appeal for an immediate end to the drift-net fishing that is devastating our marine ecology. We are waiting for new voice  to join us in appealing for a more equitable and universal distribution of the resources that have already been extracted from the Earth.
We will continue to raise and articulate our strong environmental concerns. We will do so not to keep pace with any existing fashion  nor because of a new awareness of how fragile is the thread by which the environment supports life on this planet. We will do so because of our traditional respect for the very delicate balance of life we call our environment. We  ill do so because of our concern for the future  and because we know that our children - and their children - have no other place to go but the four corners of the Earth. We will do so because we do not want our world to end as a result of too many of us doing nothing - or not enough - when so much needs to be done.


First of all, let me congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-fourth session. Your unique and illustrious background as soldier, political leader, scholar aid author, and your wide experience in multilateral diplomacy will no doubt provide you with the particular sensitivity and skills required to guide us through the complex issues of the United Nations agenda. My delegation has absolute confidence in your abilities. We pledge our fullest co-operation. I would also like to congratulate Mr. Ronald Spiers on his appointment as Under-Secretary-General for Political and General Assembly Affairs and Secretariat Services. I am confident that he will bring to his responsibilities the highest degree of professionalism, which was the hallmark of his predecessor. May I also express our appreciation to His Excellency Mr. Dante Caputo for carrying out his duties so diligently and admirably during the last session.
Last year was an exceptionally good year for the United Nations. For the international community, long used to the unending eruption of wars, disputes and conflicts, never had the promise of peace been so close to realization. Agreements were reached to end the war in Afghanistan and to establish a cease-fire between Iran and Iraq. In December, agreement was also reached to usher in Namibia's transition to independence. The United Nations peace-keeping forces were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of their contribution to peace-keeping. Multilateral diplomacy was patently yielding results. The prestige of the United Nations had never been greater.
This year, in 1989, we are a little less euphoric. We are sobered by the realities and the difficulties of the resolution of conflicts among nations. While some progress has been achieved on several fronts, we are keenly aware of the problems that still stand in the way of peace. Eight months after the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan, the fighting and the killings have not abated. The talks to end the Iran-Iraq conflict have stalled. We are alarmed at the worsening situation in Lebanon and the stalemate, if not retrogression, in spite of earlier progress, in the resolution of the question of Palestine. We await the long overdue birth of independence in Namibia with the keenest interest.
Singapore feels privileged to be able to contribute to the achievement of this goal through our participation in the united Nations Transition Assistance Group police contingent. We are also honoured that the leader of our police contingent, Superintendent lee Kok Leong, has been appointed chief electoral officer to oversee elections in Namibia. But we are disturbed at the attempts by South Africa to circumvent the implementation of some key aspects of the United Nations plan for Namibian independence as contained in Security Council resolution 435 (1978). We must continue our vigilance to ensure that nothing will derail the transition to independence aid prevent the full implementation of free aid fair elections in November. After Namibia, the international community should help to hasten the pace of fundamental change in South Africa to end the abhorrent and evil apartheid system.
The Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, in summing up the problems of peace-making in his report on the work of the Organization, said:
"I am all too conscious how thorny is often the path leading to a just and lasting settlement aid how hard is the resistance encountered." (A/44/1, p. 12) I fully agree with him. If there is a lesson to be learned in all this, it is that there is no quick fix to peace.
When a major Power comes to the conclusion that military power cannot be used to achieve political objectives and that dialogue with a global rival is more fruitful than confrontation, it ushers in a more auspicious international climate. But we have clearly learned this year that even when the major Powers are prepared to settle their conflicts a necessary but insufficient condition for the attainment of peace has been met. The key that unlocks the door to peace in regional conflicts is often in the hands of the parties directly involved. All that is needed is one inflexible and intransigent party to block the peace process.
We are also aware that, even as we have to work harder on the problems of international and regional conflicts, a new generation of problems compelling urgent attention has come on out agenda - problems such as drugs, the environment, refugees and debt. Those problems recognize no borders and, if left unattended, could complicate and threaten the wider and long-term security of the international community and our search for peace.
Among the nations in South-East Asia, the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) as a whole has done well. We have progressed because our national stability has allowed each of us to concentrate our attention on our internal political, social and economic development. This in turn contributes to ASEAN's resilience and cohesion. We had hoped that the same peaceful and stabilizing conditions would be achieved in Indo-China, but, alas, the Cambodian conflict remains an intractable problem. It is now 11 years since the Cambodian issue was first brought before the Security Council in January 1979 after Vietnamese forces invaded Cambodia on Christmas Day in 1978.
For 10 years the international community spoke through the United Nations resolutions, calling upon Viet Nam to end its occupation of Cambodia and to accept a comprehensive political settlement which would bring lasting peace to the region. Such a comprehensive political settlement would provide, among other things, for the withdrawal of foreign forces under effective international supervision and control, the creation of an interim administrative authority, the promotion of national reconciliation under Prince Sihanouk and the right of the Cambodian people to choose their own leaders free from outside interference.
Our efforts at the United Nations were not without impact. Initially, Viet Nam denied that its troops had invaded Cambodia. later, when this untruth was exposed, Viet Nam arrogantly declared that the situation in Cambodia was irreversible. But continued United Nations pressure and international isolation, denying Viet Nam valuable aid and investment, forced it to concede for the first time, in 1986, that it was prepared to reach a political solution. What Viet Nam had not taken into account was the strength and resilience of the Cambodian nationalist resistance. The high cost of foreign occupation brought its economy to the brink of bankruptcy. Now that the Soviet Union is keen to reduce its burdens abroad, the option of a continued Vietnamese presence in Cambodia cannot be ensured. Viet Nam has readied a point where it has to reconsider its strategy.
On 5 April this year Viet Nam dramatically announced to the world its intention to withdraw ail its troops from Cambodia by the end of September. In recent days, we have seen photographs and newspaper reports of Vietnamese soldiers departing in military trucks. It is certainly a major media event, but what are we as responsible Governments to make of this announced withdrawal? Are we to conclude that the Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia ended on 26 September as Viet Nam claims it did? Are we to conclude that the problems of Cambodia are now all resolved? Is there no further need for the United Nations to continue to debate and discuss the issue of Cambodia?
The most significant point to note about the announced withdrawal is that, first, it is a unilateral withdrawal undertaken without a comprehensive political settlement in place. The withdrawal of the Vietnamese troops has not been effectively verified. We have no way of knowing if the withdrawal is genuine and total. There was only a handful of media journalists, several observers from some non-governmental organizations and representatives of the few countries that have
diplomatic relations with the Him Sen regime who had gene to Phnom Penh to observe the Vietnamese departure This motley group could not honestly verify that there are now no more Vietnamese troops in Cambodia. Indeed, the united Nations technical fact-finding mission dispatched on agreement by the Paris Conference on Cambodia reported that even in the best of circumstances it would be difficult to verify satisfactorily the exit of the Vietnamese troops. The terrain and the poor infrastructure and transportation system in Cambodia makes systematic supervision and control very difficult.
Secondly, this is the eighth time that the Vietnamese have claimed to have withdrawn their forces from Cambodia. In the past, as in July 1982, May 1983, Jime 1984, April 1985 and May 1986, Viet Nam had said that it was withdrawing its troops from Cambodia, but each time we learned that those withdrawals amounted to no more than a rotation of troops. We are therefore justified in being sceptical about the present withdrawal. Our scepticism is supported by an article in the 27 September issue of the Bangkok Post which reported that some East European sources had told its correspondent, Mr. Jacques Bekaart, that some Vietnamese troops had been left behind in Cambodia.
Thirdly, there still remains the vital question of Vietnamese soldiers who are staying behind as militia of the Hun Sen regime aid as settlers. Viet Nam has not contested the existence of Vietnamese settlers in Cambodia. The argument is over the numbers. Viet Nam claims feat there are 80,000 Vietnamese settlers in Cambodia. Prince Sihanouk says there are about 1.3 million. Some Western diplomats in the region estimate the figure to be between 300,000 aid 400,000. The issue of the number of settlers is important as this determines who has a right to vote in the internationally supervised free aid fair elections that come with a comprehensive settlement, and therefore the right to choose the Government of Cambodia.
In my case, Viet Nam has not entirely relinquished its right to intervene again in the affairs of Cambodia. In several statements made since the 5 April announcement of Viet Nam's intention to withdraw by the end of September, Viet Nam has asserted its right to send its troops, or whatever other assistance, to Phnom Perti if it feels that the survival of its puppet regime is threatened by resistance guerrillas.
There are therefore considerable doubts whether the Vietnamese have completely withdrawn from Cambodia. However, even if we could document that Viet Nam had completely withdrawn its forces, I submit that the United Nations should still continue to debate and discuss fee Cambodian issue. Some nay argue that the united Nations role should be limited to discussing violations of the United Nations Charter and that united Nations interest in Cambodia should cease when foreign intervention there ends. 'A> understand the fallacy of this argument, let me cite an analogy* if the South Africans decided to withdraw their forces from Namibia but insisted cm leaving in place the Windhoek regime as the exclusive Government of Namibia, without giving the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) the right to compete in fairly held elections, we would immediately denounce South Africa aid declare that fee Windhoek regime had no legitimate right to rule Namibia since it was installed by foreign occupation forces.
That is precisely what Viet Nam is trying to do in Cambodia. After withdrawing most of its forces, it continues to insist that the Hun Sen regime, which was put in place by the foreign occupation forces, should continue to rule Cambodia. That is why the Paris Conference failed. The three Cambodian parties led by Prince Sihanouk, which are recognized as fee legitimate representatives of the Cambodian people by the Assembly, by the United Nations, were willing to share power with Mr. Him Sen in an interim quadripartite coalition Government until free, fair and democratic elections were held under united Nations supervision. They were prepared to allow the Cambodian people to determine who should rule them, demonstrating their commitment to the most fundamental principle of the United Nations Charters that a people's right to self-determination should never be diminished.
Viet Nam and Mr. Him Sen opposed this, declaring that Mr. Hun Sen should enjoy a monopoly, or near-monopoly, of power in Phnom Penh. They knew that by doing so they would give the nationalist forces led by Prince Sihanouk no choice but to launch a military struggle to secure their legitimate right to self-determination. Both Viet Nam and Mr. Hun Sen want to trigger off this civil war. We are sad that the Cambodian people, who have now suffered fear almost 20 years, continue to live in agony. But it is Viet Nam and Mr. Hun Sen who are responsible for this state of affairs, and they should be condemned for it.
After raising the hopes of the Cambodian people through our principled and moral stand over the past 10 years, we cannot disappoint them by abandoning them at this crucial hour when they are so near to securing real liberation. The United Nations can and should help the Cambodian people by insisting that there should be a comprehensive political settlement of the Cambodian problem. The international community must insist that it can never accept anything less than this. Such a comprehensive political settlement must give the Cambodian people the right to determine their own future in free, fair and democratic elections under international supervision. Only this will end the civil war and allow the Cambodian people to breathe freely again.
The exercise of self-determination in Cambodia must be based on national reconciliation of all Cambodian parties. All parties must have a stake in the future of Cambodia, lb attempt to exclude any party as a pre-condition for national reconciliation is unrealistic and irresponsible. It is tantamount to inciting the prolongation of conflict and bloodshed. That is why Prince Sihanouk has wisely and realistically called for the formation of an interim quadripartite Government of all four Cambodian parties. This interim quadripartite Government will have the responsibility of organizing free and fair elections. Since all parties will be involved in organizing the elections, all will be bound by the results.
No matter what we, as individual countries, may think about any Cambodian party, only the Cambodian people have the moral and political right to determine who should or should not rule Cambodia. Nobody else has that right. In exercising their right to self-determination through free and fair elections, the Cambodian people will finally be able to pass their verdict and judgement on the Khmer Rouge. The inter national community has the obligation to help create conditions that will enable the Cambodians to exercise freely their political choices, and to respect their choice, whatever it may be. The international community should recognize that the Cambodian people will have the wisdom to choose wisely.
Let me restate the central issues of the Cambodian problem. First, the total withdrawal of all Vietnamese troops must be verified by the United Nations, as only the United Nations can provide an effective international supervisory, monitoring and control mechanism. Secondly, the Cambodian people must have the opportunity to exercise the right of self-determination, which is a basic right of all peoples under the united Nations Charter. Thirdly, none of the Khmer parties should be denied the opportunity to stand for election under the comprehensive political settlement, as only the Cambodian people have the right to decide who should govern them; the exclusion of any party should not be made a pre-condition for a settlement agreement.
My country, Singapore, does not bear any historical animosity against Viet Nam. But why have Singapore and our Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) partners championed the cause of Cambodia so energetically in the past decade? We have done so because Viet Nam's invasion and occupation of Cambodia have threatened the peace and stability of South-East Asia. we have done so because Viet Nam's action, if not repudiated, would set a very unfortunate precedent. Viet Nam must not be allowed to get away with only partially solving the problem. If it succeeded, it would have demonstrated that aggression pays. It would have shown to others that it is possible for one country to invade another country with impunity, set up a client regime, and after a long enough interval walk away from the mess it created, leave a resistance war raging and go back to business-as-usual with the rest of the world. That would create a dangerous precedent. For all peace-loving States of the international community, we must not accept this dangerous precedent. It would put our security in jeopardy if this should become acceptable international behaviour.
The Cambodian issue has been a success story of the united Nations. This may sound paradoxical but it demonstrates that international moral pressure does work. Through the united Nations resolutions adapted year after year, with increasing support, we have forced Viet Nam to change its position over time. We have come this far. Viet Nam is taking the first step towards the resolution of the Cambodian question by thinning out its troops in the field. But the problem is far from being resolved. We at the united Nations must continue our moral suasion to convince Viet Nam that it has the responsibility to settle the Cambodian question comprehensively in the interest of a just and lasting peace for the Cambodians and in the interest of regional security and stability. When Viet Nam contributes to the comprehensive political settlement of the Cambodian issue, peace will return to Indo-China. When there is peace in Indo-China, the international community will help in its reconstruction. Viet Nam will finally be able to concentrate on its cam internal economic and social development and reap the fruits of prosperity.