 I extend Venezuela's congratulations to Ambassador Choudhury on his election as President of this session of the General Assembly, and to reiterate our pleasure at the intelligent and expert manner in which Ambassador Jaime de Pinies guided the work of the Assembly during a year that was significant for the United Nations in so many ways.
Venezuela is once again addressing the General Assembly to confirm its commitment to the fundamental principles of the United Nations and to make its voice heard in defense of the ideals of peace and international coexistence, which warranted the Organization's coming into being in historical circumstances.
It is not idle to stress that mankind is living through a period characterized by difficulties and challenges of every kind. We are living in a period of confusion and undeniable risks. At times such as these, one can easily lose faith in human beings and in their potential to build and maintain an international order free from violence and the urge for hegemony in inter-State relations. As Saint-John Perse said: "After all, it is man who is at stake" (mais c'est de l'homme qu'il s'agit).
Despite every obstacle and the innumerable pitfalls facing the United Nations during its relatively brief history, the Organization still represents a crucial factor in the struggle for reason in the present international context. The criticisms that are sometimes leveled at it often lose sight of the deep meaning of the existence of an organization in which it is still possible to convene the overwhelming majority of States in order to urge them to face their problems by means of dialog and civilized debate.
While it is true that since the Second World War there has not been another general conflagration, it is likewise undeniable that the precarious "nuclear peace" is not a voluntary arrangement, and much less is it reassuring. Rather, it is the result of an endless rivalry for power rooted in fear, insecurity and the quest for domination by some States over others. In the present international context it would seem that we have no choice but to conceive of peace merely as a balance of power - which is at all times threatened. It is true, the balance of power does contribute to puace, but in no way does it guarantee it.
If we recall the origins of the two most ruinous military confrontations of this century, we see that although the most recent world war broke out because of the imbalance of power in Europe the first of those wars was unleashed despite the existence of what was at the time seen as a stable balance of power.
Those thoughts point in a clear direction: in our nuclear age, when mankind can see the risk of self-destruction with frightening clarity, we cannot rely exclusively on the balance of power to maintain peace; It is essential to go beyond this narrow approach and build more genuinely solid foundations for peace.
We are speaking of a peace based on the principles of a deeply humanistic ethic, on the values of tolerance, dialog and international co-operation. This is how we see the mission of the United Nations - as an effort that is for ever
renewed to give peace the support of ethical values, of agreements freely entered into, which will make it possible to coexist free from hegemony. We do not believe that to be an illusion.
Venezuela views with deep concern the alarming pace of the nuclear and conventional arms race, which seems to be a paranoid advance and, worse yet, one in constant acceleration.
We feel duty bound to confirm our commitment to the goals of disarmament and arms control, and our hope that negotiations under way in various forums on these matters will move forward steadily. We, the small and medium-sized nations, have the duty and the right to raise our voices as many times as may be necessary to give warning of the dangers that loom on the horizon and concern us all.
We object to any attempt to militarize outer space, which some seek to present as a panacea and the definitive course for the future elimination of the nuclear threat; but which, in fact, is nothing more than a new attempt to escape from the political and ethical dilemmas of our times with ever more advanced, complex, illusory and costly technological formulas.
In this respect, it is fitting to point out that the technological obsession, as revealed by the production of increasingly sophisticated and destructive arms systems, is little by little becoming an end in itself, while seriously weakening the political and ethical controls which should guide relations among States. We therefore insist that the arms race continues to subject us to grave and immeasurable threats to our species and planet. We shall never stop denouncing those threats as being absurd. Quite simply, we cannot be resigned to a precarious and uncontrollable situation.
Heightened East-West tensions, based on the overflow of nuclear arsenals, the growing use of military force, and great-Power intervention in various regional scenarios - these are other symptoms of deterioration which augur ill for world peace and stability.
Given this persistence of interests seeking to restore the rigidity of a bipolar world, those countries that wish to maintain a position of critical independence, diplomatic flexibility and political autonomy affirm the principles of genuine non-alignment before this Assembly.
During the past decade the countries of Africa, Asia and Latin America had many expectations of the global North-South process of negotiations, intended progressively to lessen the vast disparities between the economies of the industrialized countries and those of the less privileged peoples. The present situation has become extremely paradoxical: the economic and social crisis besetting the developing countries is perhaps more serious than ever before, and yet the political will of the most powerful to help tackle that crisis is in a state of constant decline.
Apparently there is no perception whatsoever of the risks of this spectacle of impoverishment and socio-economic backwardness. What is at issue here is a threat to world peace, arising from the clamor and anguish of vast sectors of mankind for whom the future seems to hold no promise and who are left with a sense of uncertainty.
We would violate an elementary rule of balance were we not to point out the positive changes that have occurred in the global context. As Latin Americans, we feel that one of the most encouraging changes in recent years has been the return to democracy, which has happened gradually over almost all of Latin America.
For years it was Venezuela's fate to live in a continent where authoritarian regimes were predominant. We can still see tragic realities of dictatorships on the map of Latin America. Repressions and mass violations of fundamental human rights have become the distinctive features of those Governments. Nevertheless, the surge towards democracy has an irrepressible impetus.
We are aware that it will not be easy to maintain democracy in our region, because the authoritarian regimes left behind a legacy of deep political wounds and grave socio-economic crises. Nevertheless, Venezuela trusts that this time the democratic process will prove to be lasting and irreversible. As the President of Venezuela recently said:
"The democratic Governments of Latin America must now strengthen their societies, their economies and their rules of the game in politics, in conditions that are hardly favorable. Venezuela is deeply committed to the process of building a hemisphere where freedom flourishes, and moving towards development with a social content. Our solidarity with the best Latin American causes is beyond question."
It is this feeling of solidarity which pron^ts us to bring before this Assembly the distressing and conflicting economic reality which overwhelms Latin America, severely obstructing any hope that our peoples may reach better standards of living.
The diagnosis of experts and specialized agencies gives us a precise idea of the situation. Most of our countries are undergoing the worst economic crisis since the 1930s. Per capita income in the region has declined by approximately 9 per cent since 1980 down to the 1977 levels, and in some countries to those of 1960. Unemployment and underemployment have risen to 50 per cent in some access. There is galloping inflation of almost 50 per cent in the region as a whole. The external debt is estimated at between $380 billion and $400 billion -an outrageous amount, which stifles our possibilities for development, particularly bearing in mind that close to 50 per cent of Latin America's export earnings is used for the payment of interest. In fact,/ recent years, our countries transferred about $106 billion to the industrialized countries - a burden which, in relative terms, is double the war reparations that Germany had to pay during the 1920s, as was pointed out recently by a United States expert.
The strange reverse net transfer of resources from South to North, that is to say, from developing to developed countries, is analyzed in detail in the 1986 United Nations World Economic Survey. It was emphasized at the last session of the Economic and Social Council in its resolution 1986/56, which refers consideration of this distressing and untenable phenomenon to this Assembly. As Willi Brandt says in his recent book. Weapons and Hunger, this is a "blood transfusion from the sick to the healthy".
Therefore it is obvious that we are facing a potentially explosive situation, one that will require an unusual effort of joint action. The Latin American democracies have borne their share of the responsibility for finding a way out of this crisis. Indeed, in our countries, even though faced with extremely severe conditions, we have been implementing policies for a rational and well-thought-out management of economic life.
We must repeat: the external debt burden and the rising tide of economic protectionism, which has now become almost the rule of conduct among the industrialized countries, are curtailing the capacity for progress of the nations of the developing world. This situation must and inevitably will change. It is our hope that these changes will take place on the basis of dialog and concerted action, guided by a positive realization of the common destiny of mankind.
It is in this spirit that the countries of the Group of 77 have brought before this forum the need to give priority consideration to the item "Interrelated areas of money, finance, debt, flow of resources, trade and development", including the preparation of an international conference on money and finance for development, with full participation.
We trust that the recently approved new round of trade negotiations will make it possible to restore the multilateral character which a system of international trade should have and which, as is well known, has been seriously eroded in recent years. The drafting of multilateral principles and norms to broaden the area of
trade to include new areas, such as services, should not condition or delay a solution to the immediate problem of ever-growing protectionism, which detracts from the credibiH :y of the system and constantly affects the prospects for growth and diversification of the developing countries, through their exports.
Venezuela regrets that the new round will not be open and unconditional for the developing countries, as was to be expected of an international effort to bring constructive solutions to current problems and to draw up a trade system that would respond to the collective interest.
The United Nations has repeatedly given development priority among its considerations. We believe the time has come to stress further the importance of this key problem, as it is a fundamental challenge of our times. We must, through this Organization, discover new ways to make it possible to resume the multilateral efforts which only a few years ago were on the verge of providing promising results. Venezuela will be prepared to co-operate without hesitation in advancing plans for joint North-South and South-South action, which we have supported in the past and shall continue to support.
Tensions in Central America have been and are the subject of the most careful scrutiny by the democratic States of Latin America. The persevering, patient and resolute action for peace by the Contadora Group and the Support Group prove that we are able to find a Latin American response to crucial problems in the region.
Venezuela is part of the initiative of the Contadora Group, being convinced that we must be prepared to explore every avenue to find peaceful outcomes to conflicts in the area and that every type of effort must be made to do away with the hostile atmosphere, which could lead to a general and fratricidal war in that long-suffering region.
What the Contadora Group and the Support Group are doing constitutes political action the merit of which has been to keep alive the possibility of dialog. We are firmly convinced of the value of this instrument for bringing about an atmosphere of mutual trust and ensuring that there is the political will on all sides to reach the final objective: to sign and inclement the Contadora Act for Peace and Co-operation in Central America. We shall not tire in our steadfast efforts.
We believe that there are sufficient reasons to persist along this path, provided that there is an end to the obstinate attitude of those interests which are determined to prolong the atmosphere of confrontation prevailing in the area, spurred on by the intervention of outside factors that obstruct the attainment of a negotiated settlement of the crisis.
Peace in Central America will not become a reality unless the States of the region themselves, not acting under external pressures, reach agreements that make coexistence possible, with a pluralistic democracy, on the basis of respect for the self-determination of peoples.
Venezuela is unreservedly committed to the protection of fundamental human rights, and it has been a primary objective of the Government of Venezuela to give due guarantees for freedom and for human dignity in every sphere. This is not a circumstantial posture to be maintained for a limited time or in a given area. On the contrary, it is an irrevocable conviction and a constitutional mandate of our democratic system, which in turn encourages and improves the equality and justice of Venezuelan democracy.
In accordance with its principles, Venezuela participates with great interest in the United Nations organs dealing with human rights, so as to give impetus to and support all actions aimed at bringing about positive changes in countries which present scenarios of persistent violations of such rights. At the same time, we have given a vote of confidence to countries which have finally succeeded in crossing the threshold to freedom and have taken a democratic course; for, as we see it, the defense and consolidation of this way of life is the ideal and practical formula for ensuring full respect for human rights.
During 1986 several international meetings were held on what remains a formidable challenge for the United Nations. I am referring to the persistence of the policy of apartheid and to one of its external manifestations: the illegal occupation of Namibia. I had the opportunity to participate in the International Conference for the Immediate Independence of Namibia, which was held in Vienna in June of this year. The final Declaration of that Conference reaffirms, once again, that the only basis for the peaceful settlement of the problem is the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia contained in Security Council resolution 435 (1978). At the time Venezuela, as a member of the Security Council, gave its full support to the adoption of that resolution. Venezuela has requested and resolutely supported the application of mandatory sanctions as provided for in Chapter VII of the Charter, so that the constant threat of South African policies to world peace will not continue and become more acute.
We are witnessing a situation of deep-rooted upheaval which jeopardizes international peace and security and which is becoming increasingly alarming. The escalation of terrorist acts indiscriminately endangers fundamental human values, such as the right to life, to peace, to freedom and to confidence. There is no reason or goal that can justify the use of terror in desperate attempts to achieve certain objectives. We are convinced that international solidarity can lead to joint efforts aimed at promoting an atmosphere of confidence that will make it possible to eliminate such criminal manifestations.
Every day the problem of drug abuse and illicit traffic in drugs demands more and more careful attention by Governments. It requires firm policies and effective acts of international co-operation, that are appropriate to the challenge we face.
Mankind is threatened and we must have an international instrument to enable us to punish the crime and focus on the social and economic roots of the problem. At the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly President Lissinchi warned of the dangers for the internal and external security of countries created by the illicit traffic in drugs which has even altered relations among them. To quote the President of Venezuela, these dangers include attempts to "destabilize Governments through corruption, making use of all kinds of criminal elements, tying them into an intricate network of operations, conspiracies and complicities which involve all levels of society, from subversives of the left and right to the most affluent and most impoverished of our citizenry, striking at the very heart of public life. ... its penetration ... has reached such a magnitude that ... drug trafficking not only represents a threat to the national security and sovereignty of several countries but is also turning into a dangerous agent of international conflicts."
In this connection, I should like to express the appreciation of my Government to the Secretary-General and his supporting staff for the preparation of the draft international convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances. This will enable us to have in a very short time a comprehensive text with the observations of many Member States, in particular those where the problem of the illicit traffic in and use of drugs is of major importance. As will be recalled, in 1984 Guatemala advocated the idea of a new convention to cover aspects which had not been anticipated in the international instruments now in force.
The International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking is to be held in 1987. It has been convened by the Secretary-General for the purpoe of generating universal action to combat the drug problem in all its forms and at all levels and to approve a plan for future action on the problem. Both initiatives have the support of the Government of Venezuela.
Venezuela is committed to the strengthening of the United Nations and will decisively challenge any attempts to make it inoperative or set it aside as one more symbol of lost illusions. He reaffirm this commitment especially at this time of crisis and downgrading of the programs of multilateral action established to find solutions to the grave problems that afflict so many countries.
In our view, rationalization criteria are necessary to enable the United Nations to make the best use of both its financial and its human resources, and of the effective support of Member States in this joint effort.
In signing the San Francisco Charter we entered into commitments which ve have invariably complied with, even in the worst times; these have never been an excuse to fail to comply with our budgetary responsibilities as far as the United Nations is concerned.
Since January of this year Venezuela has been a non-permanent member of the Security Council for the third time. We have played our part in dealing with the delicate matters considered by it, guided by principles of balance, moderation and harmonious coexistence, in the search for possible solutions and a lessening of tensions throughout the world.
On reviewing the Secretary-General's report to this session we find statements made with authority and common sense. Its more general outlines on the possibilities of solving world conflicts give us much food for thought. We find particularly striking a paragraph which sums up the whole significance of the role that multilateralism should play in our times, and I shall quote it: It reads: "The strengthening and revitalization of the present structure of multilateral institutions is critical to the resolution of problems confronting, the international community relating to peace, security and development. To ignore this necessity is to imperil the future prospects of a better world."
We support the Secretary-General's guidelines with the same conviction. Their implementation would strengthen the ability of the United Nations to give clear leadership in the economic field. We must remember the self-evident truth that the solution of many economic problems would bring with it a lessening of tensions.
On the fifth anniversary of the mandate given to Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar as Secretary-General of the United Nations we wish to convey our appreciation to him for his outstanding work, in which he has clearly shown his ability to handle with dignity and dedication the setbacks which our supreme multilateral forum has been facing.
In th is International Year of Peace, we reaffirm our confidence in a more prom is ing future for all the peoples of the world. We shall not falter in our efforts, as a country which yearns for peace and development and is struggling to achieve them, in the firm conviction that peace and development are indivisible.


On behalf of the delegation of Zaire and on ray own behalf I should like at the outset to congratulate the President on his election to guide the work of the United Nations General Assembly at its forty-first session. It is a pleasure for me to see him presiding over the General Assembly, particularly since he is a son of the third world and a gifted statesman. His political and diplomatic experience, together with his thorough knowledge of the United Nations system, guarantees the success of our deliberations. The delegation of Zaire, need I say, assures him of its whole-hearted co-operation.
To his predecessor. Ambassador Jaime de Pinies, an experienced figure in the United Nations and a well-known personality, we express our delegation's appreciation for the outstanding way in which he guided the fortieth and commemorative session of the Assembly as well as its thirteenth special session, on the critical economic situation in Africa.
Lastly I should like to pay a special tribute to our Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Javier Perez de Cue liar, for his brilliant report on the work of the Organization, which offers a lucid and profound analysis of the major problems that concern the international community. That objective and courageous study of the explosive situation in South Africa and the present state of the economies of the developing countries confirms the justified apprehensions of the Non-Aligned Movement with respect to those issues.
The forty-first session of the General Assembly has begun at a time when the international community is deeply disturbed by the patent inhuman injustices imposed upon the blade majority in South Africa by a white racist minority sustained by certain Powers. The Pretoria regime is seeking to perpetuate its illegal occupation of Namibia and to impede that Territory's accession to independence.
The racist regime's constant defiance of the international community and the way in which it acts like a dominant Power exploiting the region are illustrated very clearly by its acts of sabotage and terrorism directed against neighboring independent States it wishes to destabilize because they are helping the black nationalists in South Africa aid Namibia.
Several rounds of negotiations to restore peace and security in that part of Africa have met with but one response from the Pretoria regime: systematic refusal to make any compromise and recourse to military incursions into the neighboring States.
Front-line States are well aware of the misdeeds, the barbarous and bloody repression committed by the racist troops from Pretoria, which, over recent years, have resulted in the deaths of several thousand men, women and children, as well as in the destruction of the economic infrastructure of those countries. Zaire welcomes the unstinting support offered by the Eighth Non-Aligned Summit to the front-line States. This is clear evidence of the fact that the great majority of the United Nations Members condemn the Pretoria racist regime and support the legitimate struggle waged by the black people in South Africa to recover their fundamental rights. The delegation of Zaire, which supports mandatory, comprehensive, binding sanctions, unreservedly, against the Pretoria regime, nevertheless considers that the international community must give its total support to the Organization of African Unity (OAU) so that the latter may find an African solution, which can, as speedily as possible, promote the restoration of peace and , security in southern Africa. This will enable all the countries in the region to ensure their economic and social development within the context of interregional co-operation, while guaranteeing the territorial integrity and sovereignty of their States.
Consequently, Zaire urgently appeals to all those countries which have a special relationship with the Pretoria regime to intensify their pressure on South Africa so as to persuade it unconditionally to release Mr. Mandela and all the other political prisoners, thus bringing about conditions favorable to the establishment of a political climate propitious to negotiations between blacks and whites aimed at setting up a democratic regime. The time has come for all peoples committed to peace and justice to demonstrate their solidarity with the nationalists of the African National Congress (ANC) and the Pan African Congress of Azania (PAC).
In Namibia the minority white regime in South Africa is continuing its systematic plunder of the natural resources of the Territory in collusion with
outside economic interests. This is in violation of United Nations resolution and Decree No. 1 for the Protection of the Natural Resources of Namibia, which was adopted by the United Nations Council for Namibia in 1974. The racist Government is continuing to take steps to jeopardize the territorial integrity of Namibia. It is seeking to detach Walvis Bay from Namibia and to proclaim its sovereignty over the Penguin Islands and the other offshore islands. Never, in recent times, has a regime been subjected to such condemnation, reprobation and recrimination. Because of its intransigence and refusal to put an end to apartheid, sanctions against the regime are being considered by the overwhelming majority of the international community. Nevertheless, notwithstanding such isolation, the regime persists in raising major obstacles to Namibia's accession to independence. To justify its illegal presence in the Territory, it is seeking to subordinate Namibia's independence to considerations which are totally unrelated to Security Council resolution 435 (1978), a resolution which has to date been accepted as the sole valid basis for a peaceful settlement to the Namibian question. In this regard the Security Council should play a primary role in maintaining international peace and security, rather t^ aiding behind legal quibbling, which is tantamount to tacit support for the Pretoria regime.
My delegation therefore considers that the United Nations should take urgent steps to ensure that the United Nations plan for Namibia is fully applied.
The continent of Africa faces other trouble spots apart from those in the South. I am referring to Chad and the Western Sahara. In Chad we are witnessing a dramatic challenge to the principles of international law as set forth in the Charter of the Organization of African Unity. I have in mind particularly respect for sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity, non-interference in domestic affairs of States, non-recourse to force in relations between States and
the peaceful settlement of disputes. The situation in Chad constitutes a serious threat to peace, stability and security in Central Africa, but above all it represents a threat to the maintenance of a balance which is necessary throughout the African continent as a whole. Recourse to Article 51 of the United Nations Charter by a legitimate government which has been the victim of blatant external aggression has resulted in many interpretations by certain Member States; but those same States, when they are themselves attacked by a force from outside, are better placed than anybody else to understand the meaning of Article 51. The same applies with respect to the occupation of part of a State's territory by armed forces, supported and supplied from outside, in order to overthrow the established government. If it is unanimously recognized that such de facto occupation is illegal and constitutes a threat to peace and security, then the same must apply with respect to Chad. That country, a member of our Organization, is undergoing a period of division of its territory, which is being split into two parts; the northern area is occupied by forces supported from the outside.
The United Nations must therefore adopt a resolution during this session reaffirming the principles of the territorial integrity of Chad and the inviolability of its frontiers. It must also invite any outside occupying forces to leave Chad. The people of Chad are entitled to freely exercise their sovereignty and self-determination. It is up to them alone to work for a reunification within the context of national reconciliation brought about by the N'Djamena Government.
All the parties concerned by the problem of the Western Sahara are in agreement on the idea of organizing a referendum under the auspices of the United Nations. My delegation supports the commendable mediation efforts carried out by those parties with the Secretary-General of the United Nations in close
co-operation with the current Chairman of the OAU in accordance with resolution 104 of the twentieth summit of the Organization of African Unity.
In the Middle East no progress has been made since last year and tensions continue in the area, despite resolutions adopted at the fortieth session of the General Assembly. One of those called for the organization of an international conference on this issue, a matter which has been on the General Assembly's agenda for well-nigh 41 years now. In that region the parties in conflict have opposed any spirit of dialog and negotiation, whereas the Security Council decided, in resolution 338 (1973), that negotiations should begin immediately.
The international community thus has a duty to prompt the protagonists to accept the idea that they must overcome psychological, historical, legal and other obstacles in order to achieve peace. This peace presupposes, first of all, justice and equality, because the Arab people in Palestine, like the people of Israel, are entitled to a homeland and a State. That was understood from the outset by the United Nations General Assembly, which, on 29 November 1947, set forth the principle of a Jewish State and a Palestinian-Arab State, when it adopted resolution 181 (II) relating to the partition of Palestine.
Secondly, that peace can be brought about only through implementation of resolution 242 (1967), adopted by the Security Council on 22 November 1967. That resolution lays down the conditions for the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle Bast. They are: the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force or by war; the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from Arab territories occupied in 1967; the termination of all states of belligerency; respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and its right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force; the guaranteeing of a just settlement of the refugee problem; and the guaranteeing of the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the region.
Finally, this longed-for peace in the Middle East is possible only if there is recognition of the rights of the Palestinians, because the violation of those rights is at the very heart - indeed, was the origin - of the conflict in the Middle East.
Various General Assembly resolutions - 2535 (XXIV) of 10 December 1969, 3236 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974 and 3376 (XXX) of 10 November 1975 - have placed
Palestine question at the core of the Middle East conflict, by channeling efforts towards the search for a comprehensive solution, by reaffirming the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, by recognizing the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole representative of the Palestinian people, and by establishing the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. There can be no doubt at all that the full implementation of those resolutions would contribute decisively to a comprehensive final settlement of the question.
The Republic of Zaire places its hopes in the United Nations, which, as part of its historic responsibilities, gave a State to the Jews of the Diaspora and decided to create a Palestinian Arab State - and it must proceed to establish that State.
In the international community's continued consideration of the situation in Asia, four other problems are of concern to it - namely, Afghanistan, Kampuchea, the Korean question and the Iran-Iraq war.
The first two questions result from the violation of the principles of the sovereign equality of States; respect for the sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of States; non-interference; non-use of force or the threat of the use of force in international relations; and the peaceful settlement of disputes. These illegal acts are in conflict with the spirit of the Charter, without which free rein would be given to the excesses of irrational urgings.
That is why Zaire believes that a just and lasting settlement of the questions of Afghanistan and Kampuchea must be found through the withdrawal of all foreign forces from those territories, whose peoples aspire to live in peace, independence, honour and national dignity, and to remain full members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries.
With respect to the Korean question, my delegation urges continuation of the dialog between the two Koreas, in the clear interest of their people.
In Asia, furthermore, two brother countries - Iran and Iraq - which are also members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, are waging an endless war that has caused countless loss of life and considerable material damage, while the United Nations remains powerless to produce an appropriate framework for negotiations on halting hostilities. My delegation once again urgently appeals to
those two brother nations to come to an understanding so that reconciliation and fraternity may be achieved.
In Central America, we must encourage the implementation of the Contadora Act on Peace and Co-operation in that region, in accordance with the expressed wishes of the signatory States.
The achievement of international peace and security, which are the primary purposes of the United Nations, should be sought by all Member States with a view to creating » climate of confidence between peoples. But, unfortunately, peace is constantly threatened by acts of terrorism, which have now assumed disturbing dimensions. Resolution 40/61, adopted by the fortieth - commemorative - session of the General Assembly, invited all States to take all appropriate measures at the national level with a view to the speedy and final elimination of the problem of international terrorism, to fulfil the international obligations they have assumed and to prevent the preparation and organization in their territories of acts directed against other States.
The dimensions which international terrorism have taken recently are evidence of the determination of certain Member States not to implement that resolution. Hence, the present session must recommend appropriate measures to eliminate international terrorism and promote relations of trust between States.
The arms race is a powerful tool for those who follow a policy of recourse to force in international relations, a policy of intimidation and subjugation, of hegemonism and expansionism. The arms race increases the gap between the developing countries and the industrialized countries and reduces to naught the efforts to establish the new international economic order, to which the industrialized countries refuse to adhere.
Moreover, the mobilization of large material, human and financial resources for an increase in nuclear weaponry cannot be justified in any way when we know that the overwhelming majority of mankind suffers from hunger, poverty and want. This diversion of resources is pure selfishness. That explains the determination of the nuclear Powers to keep the price of the raw materials from the developing countries at the lowest possible level, for the sole purpose of building up stockpiles of them.
These same Powers are opposed to the launching of global negotiations for the establishment of a new international economic order with a view to restructuring international economic relations.
In other words, part of the economic difficulties facing the developing countries that are commodity producers are caused by the nuclear-arms race. Thus, the relations between North and South, rather than improving, are becoming worse. We see an increasing deterioration in the terms of trade, the excessive indebtedness of the third world and an even greater imbalance between industrialized countries and developing countries.
Indebtedness, which has a direct influence on the growth of the developing countries, entails considerable budgetary burdens that prevent the carrying out of investment programs. At the present time, when Africa is looking to the implementation of the United Nations program of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development, adopted by the thirteenth special session of the General Assembly, devoted to the critical economic situation in Africa, it would be highly desirable if the undertaking by the international community to provide up to 30 per cent of the financing of the program for 1986-1990 could be translated into concrete action.
Out of a desire to achieve the recovery of its economy, the Republic of Zaire has agreed to sake heavy sacrifices, accepting the plan for economic and financial restructuring proposed by the International Monetary Fund. Broadly speaking that plan consists of reducing public expenditure, freeing prices and encouraging the private sector.
Responding to the appeal of their Head of State, Marshal Mobutu Sese Seko, Founder-President of the Popular Movement of the Revolution and President of the Republic, and as proof of their fidelity and steadfast devotion to him, the people of Zaire have for four years demonstrated discipline and a spirit of sacrifice. We have observed, however, that the rigorous implementation of that policy has led to restriction of investment credits, a drop in production and a galloping increase in the prices of basic necessities. Furthermore, the absence of agricultural credits means that that sector has been experiencing serious stagnation, if not outright recession, which has resulted in obstacles to improvement of the standard of living. Whereas, of course, the primary task of any Government is to foster the social conditions of its people. This situation, which has virtually throttled our economy, has also led to a reduction in the production capacity of the agricultural and industrial sectors and to increased inflation.
Is it right to expect the developing countries to be forced to continue to set aside considerable sums of money to pay off their foreign debts at a time when their export earnings have dropped sharply as a result of the fall in commodity prices?
Zaire, while reaffirming its readiness to pursue the program with the International Monetary Fund, nevertheless considers, in the light of its own experience, that the Fund's policy should take greater account of the demands of our countries' economic and social development instead of pursuing a policy that could, at the present time, be regarded as a new form of veiled colonialism.
Zaire considers that debt repayment should not be achieved at the cost of the living standards of the peoples of the third world and of investments that are necessary for their countries' progress and development.
As a seater of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries and the Group of 77, Zaire will work with the other members of those groups to achieve the goals of collective self-reliance and international co-operation tailored to present-day realities.
In this connection, Zaire intends to continue to participate actively in the work of the United Nations. It fully appreciates the reconsecrations made by the Group of High-Level Intergovernmental Experts to Review the Efficiency of the Administrative and Financial Functioning of the United Nations. My delegation will dead, with those recommendation when the Group's report is discussed by the Assembly. At this stage, however, my delegation would like to reaffirm its steadfast devotion to the principle of tbe sovereign equality of Member States enshrined in the United Nations Charter. We ardently hope that those recommendations say lead to the strengthening of the role of the United Nations and the purposes and principles of its Charter, which must not be infringed.
In concluding, I should like to draw the Assembly's attention to a situation that we unanimously deplore. On the threshold of the twenty-first century, the black race continues to be the object of scorn, while its human dignity is denied. It is against that background that the President of the Republic of Zaire, Marshal Mobutu Sese Seko, has launched the idea of creating a league of black African States. That, we feel, could serve both as a rallying point for the black diaspora around the world and as an appropriate framework for co-ordination and discussion of problems peculiar to the black race.
I wish the forty-first session of the General Assembly of our Organization every success in its work.


 On behalf of the Government and people of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, I extend our heartfelt congratulations to Mr. Choudhury on his unanimous and well-deserved election as President of the forty-first session of the General Assembly. My delegation shares fully the warm sentiments expressed by previous speakers with regard to his outstanding merits, and I am confident that under his skillful guidance this session will achieve significant results. His election is also a tribute to his country, Bangladesh.
I should also like to extend ay delegation's praise to his predecessor, Mr. Jaime de Pinies of Spain, for the efficient manner in which he performed his duties and for his achievements during the historic fortieth session of the General Assembly.
Not least we wish to express our profound admiration for the courage and untiring dedication of the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, who, despite his major heart operation, continues the fight for humanity. The Government and people of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines whole-heartedly support his efforts.
My Government hopes that the financial crisis at the United Nations will be resolved. We are aware that there are two causative factors. States are overwhelmed by the debts they have created for themselves and suffer disillusionment that in turn stems from two sources, the first being dissatisfaction about voting patterns at the United Nations and its agencies and the second the lack of priorities in certain expenditures.
There are many agencies in the world where the value of the vote is related to the size of the contribution. It is important that the united Nations not be structured in that way. The equality enshrined among us ensures that the genuine collective will of this world finds a single forum for expression.
We, the small nations of the world, whose contributions are very modest but to which the existence of the United Nations is most important, would want to see a vibrant United Nations. Perhaps the United Nations has been too ambitious, expanding too many Programs in too many areas too quickly. This has always meant the expansion of administrative costs, and in the long run we get away from serving the basic principles of the Charter.
We would hope that in the restructuring that is being undertaken the opportunities for the meaningful participation of those of us that are relatively new Members of this Organization will not be eroded.
The delegation of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines would want the administration of the United Nations to continue to put its house in order, and we pledge our support to the Secretary-General both in his pursuit of his objective and in the wider mandate of bringing peace to the troubled areas of the world.
There is a lot to be done. Let us begin.


I take great pleasure in joining previous speakers and warmly congratulating you, Sir, on your election to the presidency of the forty-first session of the General Assembly. I wish you all success in carrying out your functions.
I should also like to thank the outgoing President, Ambassador de Pinies, for guiding the work of the commemorative session of the fortieth anniversary and the special session on the critical economic situation in Africa with the competence and dynamism we have long known.
I wish also to emphasize the tireless work of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, and the importance of the difficult task he is carrying out, with a great deal of dedication, in the service of the international community. The report he has just submitted on the work of the Organization is significant in this regard. I should like to assure him of the confidence and esteem his efforts continue to enjoy with the Government and the people of Luxembourg.
The opportunity offered each country to speak freely from this rostrum should not be understood as a simple stylistic exercise or a ritual. The annual meeting in New York, which brings together, in this extraordinary city, officials from all nations the world over, should be perceived as a major event. It is the illustration, and I would even say the living demonstration, of the fact that this planet is one despite its great diversity of civilizations, cultures, races and regimes.
Hence, it is essential and vital for all of us that this forum for all nations, large and small - some with a long existence but the majority still quite young - take into account the interests and concerns of all men and women who make up an indissoluble whole. In the past, problems could be apprehended separately, but all are now intricately linked to the point whore they have become our common concerns. Conflicts among nations involve cannon dangers, to which all States represented in our Organization are called upon to bring peaceful solutions.
Happily, at its session last year the General Assembly decided to proclaim the year 1S86 the International Year of Peace.
It is more urgent and necessary than ewer before to counter the dangers inherent in local conflicts and to face up to the effects of hotbeds of tension is more Important than ever.
In accordance with the wish of the Secretary-General, my Government will soon commemorate, on a historic date - 11 November, the anniversary of the end of this century's first world conflagration - the International Year of Peace. This will use the east diverse means to heighten public awareness of the vital need to maintain peace. These activities will be based on a widespread information campaign involving both the newspaper and broadcasting media, non-governmental organizations and teaching institutions.
My intention today is not to present a detailed account of ray Government's position regarding the many subjects on the agenda of the forty-first session of the General Assembly, a week ago the Assembly heard my colleague, Sir Geoffrey Howe, on behalf of the 12 States members of the European Community, voice our concerns. I would add that we are in full agreement with the ideas that he developed on behalf of that European Community, to which we are dedicated. I shall thus confine myself to delivering a message on behalf of my Government to all those who do us the honor of listening to us today.
In order to be perfectly clear, I must say at once that the men and women of Luxembourg, who have the rare privilege of benefiting from an exceptionally high standard of living, are concerned. They are concerned for several reasons in a world perplexed by the innumerable challenges it faces.
While it is generally acknowledged that peace and the survival of mankind cannot be assured without an organization of a universal character, the continuance of what is commonly called the United Nations system is endangered by the lack of whole-hearted political and economic support from its Members.

We note with regret growing disenchantment with the co-operation represented by the United Nations. This is particularly tragic since that mistrust in regard to the Organization is being expressed while the solemn professions of faith made on the fortieth anniversary of the Charter are still echoing in our ears. The expression of that step backwards with regard to the united Nations has recently been reflected in the failure of certain Member States to pay their contributions to the budget of the Organization.
It would seem that this financial crisis is political in nature and must be treated as such. It reveals profound disagreement between Mentor States as to the role that should be played by the Organization and even by some of its specialized agencies.
I must say in this context that it seems to me to be crucial that all States Members meet the international commitments to which they have solemnly subscribed. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that after 40 years of existence we must review all the United Nations programs in order to redirect them towards spheres in which their effectiveness is not called into question and they can tackle matters of real priority, some of which are tragic in nature.
In this spirit, my country will join in any effort aimed at restructuring the Secretariat and rationalizing the use and cost of its human resources. Since the situation is still alarming, despite the economy measures adopted at the Secretary-General's initiative, this matter remains extremely urgent. Oily in this way can we create an atmosphere favorable to the restoration of confidence in the future of the United Nations.
In addition to the financial crisis, we are concerned by the flagrant disregard, after 40 years of existence by our Organization, of the principles of the Charter, and even of the decisions the United Nations has had to take when intervening actively in conflicts.
It will surprise no one if from among those principles X give pride of place to those concerning human rights. The fact that the question of human rights has become a subject of general concern internationally is in our view an undeniable success for the United Nations. We vigorously oppose the maneuvers of those who, on the pretext of budgetary difficulties, try to curtail the Organization's activities in this area.
Respect for these rights cannot be subjected to pre-conditions. This is particularly true of certain so-called collective rights, the definition of which remains ambiguous.
I wish to pay a particular tribute to those who, in many countries and often in heroic circumstances, have laid themselves open to criminal and other types of prosecution simply because they have claimed the rights explicitly recognized to then in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the instruments and covenants connected with it, such as freedom of expression, freedom of the press and freedom of assembly or association, including trade union rights.
However, those principles are barely respected and even openly flouted in many States, for instance, in the countries of Eastern Europe, whose peoples have for over 40 years been in the grip of a single, dominant ideology; in Chile, where the military authority has recently claimed the sad privilege of commemorating the thirteenth anniversary of its seizure of power? or in South Africa, where the apartheid regime, repeatedly denounced from this rostrum, continues to constitute, in my view, the greatest disgrace to mankind as this twentieth century draws to its close.
We are particularly concerned about the prospects for the future of South Africa, which is already on the brink of civil war. As the Assembly knows, we will join in any form of collective, binding pressure to bring about the end of this morally and politically unacceptable system.
With regard to respect for decisions the united Nations, I wish to pay a special tribute to all those Governments that have made troops available to the united Nations for peace-keeping purposes. We all know what risk those troops face, working under difficult conditions and with necessarily limited possibilities. It is essential that the international community act in solidarity when tiie fate of those forces is at stake.
A short time ago I was able to visit both Cyprus and Israel. No one can doubt that without the United Nations peace-keeping forces there would inevitably be a renewal of hostilities in those two areas of the world. The countries that have accepted those troops in their territories and those whose troops are in daily contact with the peace-keeping forces have an obligation to help them to carry out the delicate missions entrusted to them.
Our third cause for concern is undoubtedly connected with a phenomenon that is taking on tragic dimensions - that is, terrorism. I associate myself with the words recently spoken by the Head of a friendly neighboring Government, who called terrorism the "new leprosy". The constant threat of blackmail, the taking of hostages and the murder of innocent victims, all such wanton violence, must be resisted with the utmost determination.
I am convinced that we shall not eradicate this scourge if we remain passive and without complete and unreserved international co-operation. It must be recognized by all States that those that attack defenseless individuals or seek to sow confusion and anarchy within sovereign States deserve neither refuge nor leniency, no matter what the cause that serves as a pretext for their action.
I turn now to regional conflicts. We must note that efforts to end these have made hardly any progress in the past year, whether with regard to the pitiless invasion of, Afghanistan by a great foreign Power, the conflict between Iran and Iraq - the bloodiest since the cessation of hostilities in 1945 - or the continued occupation of a part of the island of Cyprus by a foreign force. All these acts are being perpetrated in spite of the most elementary norms of the sovereignty of all States.
With regard to the continued impasse in the peace process in the Middle East, I appeal to this Organization to make it possible to establish an international forum in which all parties concerned would participate. That forum might be coincident with, and could facilitate, the beginning of real negotiations aimed, on the one hand, at the recognition of Israel within secure and guaranteed borders and, on the other hand, at permitting the Palestinian people to exercise their right to decide freely upon their own future.
In this sad listing I cannot fail to mention the tragic fate still experienced by the Cambodian people, a people whose wish to live in harmony with its neighbors cannot be doubted. I must mention too the continued, unacceptable absence of any representative of the Korean people in this body, which claims to be universal.
We view with concern the fact that the situation in Central America has been adrift, after the hopes to which the peace initiatives of the Contadora Group had given rise. We are concerned to note that a major reversal has taken place in the establishment of democratic institutions and dialog in Nicaragua. We are convinced that foreign intervention, whatever its source and whoever its possible beneficiaries, is unlikely to foster a peaceful and democratic solution of the problems there. The only possible road is that of the Contadora initiative; along with our partners in the European Community we shall continue to support it.
It is only natural that, being on the border line in Bast-West relations, Europe should watch with interest developments in the current disarmament talks. Great hopes were born towards the end of last year after the Geneva meeting between the leaders of the two super-Powers; repeated appeals, and proposals concerning all kinds of weapons have been put forward since, by both sides. We must however note that despite all those discussions - concerning nuclear, conventional and chemical and biological weapons, and a halt to nuclear tests - the establishment of a true climate of mutual trust which is indispensable to overcoming the differences separating East and west, remains fragile because they are subject to unforeseen events.
It is at the negotiating table that we must see true progress. The very encouraging results of the Stockholm Conference on Confidence and Security Building Measures and Disarmament in Europe hold promise for the future.
My Government continues to advocate the continuation of this dialog and the establishment of a balance of forces at the lowest possible level, with respect for the security of every State. Following the success at Stockholm, we hope that the negotiations, now at an important turning-point, will not be deadlocked once again, either in forums of which we are fully fledged members, such as the mutual and balanced force reductions negotiations in Vienna, or others of crucial importance for our security.
Turning to the General Assembly, I deplore its adoption of an excessive number of resolutions which are most often repetitive. In the field of disarmament, such resolutions - and I certainly do not wish to blame their sponsors - have by and large a very limited impact on the process of dStente. When their content is controversial, all they do is place on record during the debates to which they give rise the existing disagreements, without having any influence on progress at the negotiating table.
In sum, what Luxembourg is suggesting is less paper, fewer resolutions, but rather the implementation of the Charter - of the entire Charter.
Our concerns go beyond political problems in the strict sense of the term.

While the world economy appears to be emerging from a sort of paralysis from which it had been suffering for some time, and while it appears that the phenomenon of inflation has been curbed and that a modest recovery is talking place, there remain serious structural- imbalances calling for adaptation and sometimes dramatic readjustments. That is particularly true for Africa and Latin America. In this context, we deplore the lack of effective economic co-operation in the relevant United Nations bodies. As before, what the third world needs is fewer words and more action.
The recent special session on the critical economic situation in Africa, it is true, made some progress possible in this regard. Our determination to achieve the recovery and development of that continent, which lies to the south of Europe and whose fate is particularly dear to us, calls for rapid joint efforts both by the African countries and by the rest of the world.
In general we in the industrialized world know that we must undertake new multilateral negotiations, in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade or in the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, or in international monetary bodies, with a view to redressing the present imbalances, which have had a disruptive effect on the world economy. The problem of indebtedness, which many speakers have already addressed, is a source of real concern to my country as well, inasmuch as threats to prosperity give rise to instability and to threats to world peace.
I wish to share the distress of my country and its people at the rapid technological progress which has been threatening the quality of life for future generations. Especially since the very serious nuclear accident at Chernobyl, we have considered that environmental protection can no longer be considered a trite subject for cocktail-party conversation. On the contrary, the many questions that have arisen out of that tragic event reflect the deep-seated concern of our peoples.
Soon a nuclear plant will be operating on our borders, with a maximum capacity hardly matched in the world; this gives rise to understandable anxiety among most of ray compatriots. We shall, of course, attempt to protect ourselves against all the possible risks of accident which are inherent in such an installation. But it is undeniable that if there should be a serious accident our entire population would be affected, and my Government is therefore particularly interested in the establishment and strengthening, on the international level, of binding safety standards and procedures for rapid dissemination of information and quick alert.
The current efforts in the International Atomic Energy Agency to establish international standards acceptable to all producers and users of nuclear energy have the full support of my Government. Yet I must state that at present my Government has the most serious reservations concerning the lack of acknowledgment of responsibility on the part of producer States towards their non-producer neighbors, and the lack of formal, unequivocal stipulations concerning compensation in the event of catastrophe.
My Government will continue to act in this sphere, for this is an essential, vital question for my country and its people; we think in particular of the unfortunate consequences the Chernobyl accident continues to have for all the neighbors of the USSR.
As I indicated at the beginning of my statement, it was not sty intention to give a detailed analysis of the overall problems facing the community of nations. I intended to confine myself to stating before this honorable gathering that at the heart of Europe, in a small country that has been independent for almost 150 years, concern still remains, in spite of the apparent security we have experienced.
In the face of a troubled and uncertain world, I wish to avail myself of this opportunity to reaffirm the vital role which the United Nations should continue to play in the future. Justice and progress for all people remain our permanent objectives. I reaffirm most vigorously our dedication to the continuation of the United Nations system. For indeed, is not this Organization the only body that provides a place for dialog that might prevent conflicts from turning into open confrontations? It is on that basis therefore that the peaceful settlement of disputes, in accordance with the principles of the Charter and other standards of international law might in fact be found.
Aware of our collective responsibility, which no one can escape, let us give new life to this truly world-wide Organization. Let us turn the United Nations into an even more effective instrument, more in conformity with its ideals. In acting this way, let us be inspired by the realism which Winston Churchill showed one day when he stated: (spoke in English)
"The United Nations were not created to take us to heaven but to save us from hell."


When I addressed the Assembly on 17 September 1986, as we met in special session to review the question of Namibia, I had the opportunity to congratulate the President on his well-deserved election to his post for the forty-first session. My delegation is delighted to note that he is guiding our deliberations with great skill. May his stewardship bring about a successful conclusion of our work.
Last year we commemorated the fortieth anniversary of our Organization. At that session, we all reaffirmed our hope and faith in the United Nations. We are meeting again today to continue our collective efforts to find solutions to the problems facing us.
Regrettably, since our last regular session there has been very little we can point to in the direction of progress that we have achieved in resolving the many problems facing mankind today. On the economic front, third-world nations continue to face very critical economic problems, including the pressure of crushing external debt and lack of real growth in their economies.
On the political side, the threat of nuclear catastrophe continues to threaten the world, while regional profeJoms in southern Africa, the Gulf, Central America, the Middle East, Korea, Cyprus, Afghanistan and Kampuchea remain unresolved.
The world faces a number of economic challenges. In the developing world, and especially Africa, economic prosperity remains an unattainable and distant goal for the majority of the country. Instead of moving forward, the economies of many countries are either stagnant or actually declining. This situation has been brought about by both inappropriate domestic policies and the current unfavorable international economic order Happily, an increasing number of African countries, including my own, are taking the hard steps required to reorient their economies towards increased productivity and eventual growth.
The holding, earlier this year, of a united Nations General Assembly special session on the critical economic situation in Africa testified to the determination of the nations of Africa to address their economic problems. Yet, despite the efforts that we ourselves are making to deal with our economic difficulties, these problems will not disappear until the nations of the world have been able to resolve the central issue of the relations between the nations of the rich North and the poor countries of the South. The existing international economic order is clearly exploitative and contributes a great deal to the economic problems we are facing in the third world.
Our countries continue to be essentially producers of primary commodities. Under the existing international economic order, the prices of these commodities are invariably fixed by the rich North, which provides the markets. The nations of the North have also the benefit of fixing the prices of their own products which they sail to us. Since the prices of primary products invariably remain lower than those of industrial products, we have a situation in which net real resources are flowing from the poor nations to the rich instead of the other way round. When one also bears in mind the flow of invisibles from the poor nations to the rich, the situation is clearly desperate, requiring urgent action by the international community.
Since we are unable to receive fair prices for what we export, we are forced to borrow in order to finance our development plans. The result is that debt servicing has now become a serious constraint on our development efforts. In order, therefore, to give real meaning to our reform of domestic policy, it is necessary that the international community take urgent measures to reduce the impact of debt servicing cm our economies.
At the same time, fresh efforts should be made to bring about the establishment of a new international economic order. The reluctance by the industrialized countries to agree to the establishment of a new order is clearly intended to continue the present system in which the poor are exploited to enrich those who are already rich.
The international political situation remains equally unsatisfactory. The specter of nuclear war overhangs the world as the nuclear race continues unabated and threatens to extend to outer space. The world power blocs continue to develop new and more powerful weapons of mass destruction despite the fact that existing stockpiles of weapons are already at levels that cannot be justified by any rational military purpose. We remain convinced that the survival of mankind cannot be guaranteed until real progress is made towards disarmament under effective international control. We believe that the first step in this process is the freezing of the development, testing, production and stockpiling of additional weapons. In this respect, we welcome the efforts being made by the Wiited States and the Soviet Union to reach agreement on limiting nuclear weapons.
The situation in southern Africa continues to pose a serious threat not only to regional security and peace but also to international peace and security. The major problems that bedevil our region are three: the continuation of apartheid in South Africa, the illegal occupation of Namibia by racist South Africa and South Africa's policy of destabilization against the independent African States in the region.
This Assembly is familiar with the nature of apartheid. It is a policy or system under which the white minority regime of South Africa retains in its hands all political, economic, military, scientific and social power to the exclusion of the black majority and uses that power to carry out a most extraordinary and systematic program of exploitation and dehumanization of the black majority comparable only to slave trade and Nazism. It is noteworthy that the perpetrators of this system were supporters of Nazi Germany during the last war. Indeed, as Nazism was being defeated in Europe, it was already beginning to re-emerge in South Africa.
The black people of South Africa have made every effort to end apartheid peacefully. For close to 50 years they carried out their protest against white minority rule peacefully. Regrettably, this peaceful effort was entirely fruitless and resulted only in the intensification of apartheid.The independent African countries of the region have also made concerted efforts to bring about a peaceful end to apartheid. Some of our countries have met with the leaders of South Africa and have also signed agreements with them with the aim of bringing about peace in our region. Regrettably again, these efforts have failed, and they have failed only because racist South Africa remains committed to racism and apartheid. Finally, the international community has made efforts to assist South Africa to abandon apartheid. The latest of these efforts were made by the Commonwealth and the European Economic Community missions to South Africa. Those, too, failed, and for the same reasons. Last week discussed the question of Namibia. As we saw, efforts to bring Namibia to independence have stalled because of the extraneous conditions demanded by the United States and apartheid South Africa.
I have deliberately gone into these details to show that the African people of South Africa and the independent African States of the region have made every effort to bring peace to southern Africa. We cannot, therefore, be blamed for the increase in tension that has occurred.
Instead of responding favorably to those efforts. South Africa has intensified repression of its black majority, especially under successive states of emergency. Moreover, South Africa has refused to allow Namibia to accede to independence and has instead mounted a campaign of destabilization against its neighbors. That campaign consists of a number of co-ordinated elements! the destruction of our transport infrastructure in the vain hope that having to depend on South Africa will cause the African States to support apartheid; military attacks such as those on Angola, Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe; the promotion of bandits in our countries; economic blockades such as the one against these other economic sanctions such as those recently applied against Zambia and Zimbabwe; and a variety of threats.
Because racist South Africa has refused to abandon apartheid, the black independent nations of southern Africa, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the Commonwealth, the Non-Aligned Movement and the international community in general have called for the imposition of comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa, these being the most peaceful instrument of persuasion now available, all else having failed.
Sadly, these, too, have been effectively blocked by the vetoes of the united States and Britain. Even the efforts of the European Economic Community have been effectively diluted by Britain and the Federal Republic-of Germany. Clearly this support encouraged and strengthened the racist regime in its persistent maintenance of apartheid.
We can find no reason why the United States and Britain, which fought and defeated Nazism barely 40 years ago, now find themselves firmly on the side of apartheid, other than their own racism, economic interests and misguided ideological considerations.
We again call on the United States and Britain to unblock the international process for peace. Unless that is done, the black people of South Africa and Namibia will have no alternative but to look to themselves to bring about the end of apartheid and the independence of Namibia. Were this to happen, there could no peace anywhere in the region, and that for a long time. The major Western countries would not be able to escape their responsibility.
We also call on South Africa to take the steps necessary to bring about negotiations and peace. In particular, we call on South Africa to declare apartheid null and void, lift the state of emergency in all areas and eliminate all the draconian laws, lift the ban on the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC), the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC) and other political organizations, release unconditionally Nelson Mandela and all the other political prisoners still in jail or detention and establish a dialog on the future of the country between Government leaders and the genuine and authentic leaders of the African people.
Another area of great concern to us is the Gulf region. Since the Gulf war started six years ago the loss of life and property on both sides has been considerable. In 1981-1983 Zambia joined Cuba, India and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in a Committee of Four appointed by the Non-Aligned Movement to mediate in the war. That effort, like others, failed. Recently, at the Non-Aligned summit in Harare, Zambia again called for an end to the war. While Iraq has shown willingness to end the war by negotiation, Iran, regrettably, has shown no flexibility whatsoever, insisting that the war be ended on the battlefield.
The international community cannot allow this needless war to continue indefinitely. The United Nations Charter provides the means to intervene in a situation where international peace and security are threatened. In our view, such a situation exists today in the Gulf.
Moreover, the two countries involved are both members of the Non-Aligned Movement. The continuation of the war not only weakens the two countries concerned but also affects the well-being of the Movement. For these reasons, we in Zambia believe that the peace plan proposed by Iraq offers the best chance of resolving the conflict. As the Assembly is aware, the Iraqi peace plan involves the following broad elements, the general, complete and unconditional withdrawal of troops to internationally recognized borders, a general and complete exchange of prisoners, the signing of a peace and non-aggression agreement between Iran and Iraq, non-interference by either country in the internal affairs of the other country, respect by each country for the choices of the other, and the commitment of each country to all efforts aimed at achieving stability and security in the Gulf area.
Zambia believes that if those elements are accepted, they will provide a basis for moving forward towards peace in the area.
The conflict in the Middle East continues to be another source of concern. As we have stated before, the core of the Middle East problem is the question of the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination in an independent. State of their own. Israel's refusal to concede that right, its acts of aggression against its neighbor s and its continued occupation of Arab lands only serve to compound the problem. We call upon Israel to concede the right of the Palestinian people to their own independent State and to desist from acts of aggression against its neighbors. We remain convinced that a just solution of the Middle East problem is still possible within the framework of the United Nations.
The situation in Central America continues to worsen despite the efforts of the Contadora Group to bring about peace, we commend the efforts of the Contadora countries and the Support Group aimed at bringing peace to the region. We are, however, concerned that Central America is turning into an arena for East-West rivalry. We feel strongly that those outside Central America should respect the sovereignty, national independence, territorial integrity and non-aligned character of the Central American States.
The continuing conflicts and tensions in Afghanistan and Kampuchea are also of great concern to us. We believe that the solution to these problems lies in political settlements based on the immediate withdrawal of all foreign forces from these countries and on respect for the sovereignty, national independence and territorial integrity of both countries. We believe that the people of these countries should be given an opportunity to choose their own economic, political and social systems without outside interference.
In the Korean peninsula, Zambia supports the desire of the Korean people to reunify their country through peaceful negotiations. Finally, Zambia supports the independence, territorial integrity and non-aligned status of Cyprus. We are anxious to see a lasting solution to the conflict in that divided community. For this reason, we support the efforts of the Secretary-General to bring unity to the island.
In concluding my statement, let me again stress the urgency of the racial crisis unfolding in southern Africa. The United Nations can play a meaningful role in bringing about the peaceful elimination of apartheid in South Africa and independence for Namibia, but only if it is allowed to do so by the major nations of the West. We ourselves stand ready to play our part. But if the major nations of the West continue to support apartheid by blocking all peaceful efforts to end it, the oppressed people have a right, nay, a duty, to rid their country of apartheid by all the means at their disposal, including armed struggle. If this is what they have to do, the loss in human life and property will be incalculable. This loss is unnecessary and can be prevented. Does the West have the will to prevent the unfolding catastrophe?


 Sir, your unanimous election to the presidency of the United Nations General Assembly at its forty-first session is a tribute not only to your outstanding qualities as a diplomat but to your country, Bangladesh, with which my country, the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros, enjoys fraternal and friendly relations. I should like to take this opportunity, on behalf of my delegation, to convey to you our warmest congratulations and to wish you every success in the performance of your task. I should also like to pay a well-deserved tribute to your predecessor, Ambassador Jaime de Pinies, for the ability and dedication with which he served as President of our previous session.
I also take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to the Secretary-General of our Organization, His Excellency Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for his efforts and constant dedication in the service of the United Nations. We are pleased at his quick recovery from his recent illness and we wish him the best of good health and strength for the continuation of his difficult task.
As we gather once again in this Assembly to evaluate, as is customary, the work done by our Organization, we must note that since last year's historic session, at which we celebrated the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations, the world has remained plagued by many hotbeds of tension. International relations, both political and economic, have deteriorated further, and the victims of this desperate situation are still the same - that is, the weakest and poorest nations.
Our Organization must thus continue to play its crucial and extremely important role in the world. But now, it has become the major target, subject to attacks from all sides, of those who wish to prevent it from lending a more attentive ear to the problems of third world countries. Attempts have thus been made to attempt to minimize and restrict its role by attacking the basic principles of multilateralism. It is clear that such a state of affairs is not likely to foster a climate of detente in international relations.
The numerous hotbeds of tension that disrupt our world continue to be of the greatest concern to the international community. Thus, in the Middle East, the situation has barely changed. Motivated by annexationist and expansionist designs, the Zionist entity refuses to evacuate occupied Arab territories, showing obstinate disdain for the relevant resolutions of the Organization.
Moreover, Jewish settlements, far from being" reduced in number, are proliferating in the occupied territories, as ever accompanied by harsh repression against the Arab and Palestinian population, with serious violations of human
rights and dignity.
As we have always said, there cannot be a just and lasting peace in the Middle
East as long as the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people are not acknowledged, guaranteed and effectively exercised.
Hence my country unreservedly supports the idea of organizing an international conference on peace in the Middle East, in which all the parties concerned would
participate, including, of course, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PIO), the sole legitimate and authentic representative of the Palestinian people.
The situation in Lebanon, once the land of peace, a junction between East and West, remains alarming despite the ray of hope generated by the promising prospect of national reconciliation.
We are deeply concerned by the presence of foreign forces which continue illegally to occupy that country, thereby flouting its full right to exercise full sovereignty over its national territory. It is time that the Lebanese people, which only wish to live in peace and security, regained its dignity and its right to exist in national harmony with solidarity restored among its people.
The fratricidal war between Iran and Iraq has cost the colossal sum of more than 3500 billion. Who can possibly benefit from this tragedy? Certainly not the Iranian and'Iraqi peoples, who mourn the loss of more than a million lives so far.
It is thus with deep sadness that ray country witnesses the continuation of this absurd and useless war. We welcome the repeated offers of a cease-fire made by the Iraqi Government and we reiterate our appeal to the Iranian Government to respond favorably to those offers.
Despite the glimmer of hope represented by the partial withdrawal of foreign
occupation troops, war still rages in Afghanistan, and the drain on that country's
vital forces continues. This situation is a serious threat to peace and security
in that region, particularly by reason of the constant violations of the air space of neighboring countries.
I should like to reaffirm once again our support of our brothers, the Afghan
people, and to call for the immediate withdrawal of foreign forces, in accordance with the relevant resolutions of our Organization.
In regard to Kampuchea, we can only express our deep disappointment that General Assembly decisions demanding the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of foreign troops from the territory of that country are still being disregarded.
The situation in the Korean peninsula remains a stalemate, despite the stated willingness of the leaders of those two States to arrive at a peaceful solution allowing the reunification of their homeland. Hence we appeal to the two parties to continue in their quest for a just and lasting solution, for a united Korea would provide a guarantee of peace and stability for the region.
Other sources of tension continue to feed the flames in Africa. The situation in southern Africa remains explosive and continues to be of the greatest concern, not only to the African continent but also to the whole international community.
My country, dedicated to the principles of peace, justice and equality among people, unreservedly condemns the inhuman system of apartheid and urgently appeals to the leaders of South Africa to put an end immediately to that practice of human subjugation.
Moreover, we deplore the fact that, to date, the pertinent resolutions adopted by our Organization for the independence of Namibia have not been implemented. We remain convinced that only the implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978) will make possible a peaceful and negotiated settlement of the Namibian
question.
As regards the Western Sahara, we welcome the efforts of the United Nations Secretary-General to finding a just and lasting solution to this question. We support this welcome initiative, and would urge- him to continue these efforts until
peace is restored to that region.
My country, like all the other coastal States of the Indian Ocean, is still concerned by the increasing foreign military presence in that area. This state of affairs creates a climate of tension that threatens peace and security in that part of the world.
We unreservedly support the idea of making that region a zone of peace pursuant to our Organization's Declaration in resolution 2832 (XXVI) and reiterate our desire that the International Conference for this purpose be convened in Colombo.
Outlined, the international economic situation is little better than the political situation that I have just outlined. It is characterized by a growing imbalance to the detriment of developing countries, especially the weakest of them, commonly called the least developed countries. Even though there has been a clear recovery in the rich countries of the North, the situation of the poor countries of the South has worsened, along with a negative growth rate, unacceptable indebtedness and galloping inflation, not to mention unemployment and hunger.
My country, the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros, which is one of the least developed countries, has been especially hard hit by the harmful effects of this crisis owing to the fact that it is an island country with structural problems that seriously impede its development. These include our country's isolation from major avenues of international communication, the dispersed nature of our national territory and consequent difficulties in organizing and equipping our country, the small size of the domestic market and lack of adequate infrastructures.
Even though our Government has made considerable efforts in this sphere and many projects are under way or have been completed, a lot remains to be done. That is why, in spite of the progress we achieved in recent years - thanks to the plans put into operation by our Government and the sacrifices made by our people, the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros continues to face an alarming financial situation. In spite of the implementation of unprecedented recovery measures, our country still faces problems caused by the excessive increase in interest rates and
unfavorable lending terms, which hinder our investment Programs. It is obvious that such a situation jeopardizes economic growth and causes increased unemployment.
Furthermore, the increase in the public debt of more than 300 per cent in the past three years has wiped out the effects of previous efforts, compelling the Government to devote more than one third of our export to discharging the State's commitments to creditors. This situation seriously compromises the efforts at social and economic recovery made by the Government at a time when official development assistance is becoming increasingly scarce.
We believe that renegotiation of debts, incurred sometimes on very unfavorable terms, is one of the most appropriate ways of fostering the rapid and sustained growth of the national economy. In this connection, the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros, like the other States members of the Organization of African unity (OAU), calls for the convening of an international conference on African indebtedness.
Similarly, once again this year I wish to address an appeal from this rostrum, to the international community for increased assistance to my country, in accordance with General Assembly resolution 40/223.
One of the Comorian Government's foreign policy priorities is the promotion of regional co-operation and the strengthening of our relations with all neighboring countries. This policy is based on a philosophy rooted in the principles of peace, friendship and mutual respect inscribed in the Charter of our Organization and the charter of the Organization of African Unity.
That is why immediately following our national independence the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros, having become a fully-fledged member of the major regional and international organizations, made every effort to establish political, diplomatic and economic relations, both multilateral and bilateral, with most of the neighboring countries. Thus, the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros is
among the founding members of the Preferential Exchange Zone, an economic community which includes more than 15 countries in southern and eastern Africa.
More recently, the Comorian Government joined the Indian Ocean Commission, which is made up of the islands of that subregion and of which my country is this year's president. This Commission, whose major objectives are to promote the economic development of its member states by the pooling of financial and human resources and ensure a more rational use of their potential, also has the task of ensuring preservation of their cultural heritage, without in any way changing or replacing the traditional bilateral bonds.
Thus, like the Commission, the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros maintains its own relations with all the States in the subregion on the basis of solidarity, friendship and complementarity.
I cannot conclude my statement without referring briefly - since we have the opportunity to do so - to a question that is constantly before our Assembly and is of crucial importance to the people and Government of the Comoros: the question of the Comorian Island of Mayotte. Of course, this problem is not exclusively Comorian since in many respects it is of concern to the African continent and, for reasons of right and justice, to the entire international community.
Although there has been some slight development this year, with the reception in Paris by the French Prime Minister, Mr. Jacques Chirac, of a delegation from the OAU ad hoc Committee of Seven entrusted with dealing with this question, the problem still remains. Following that Paris meeting and talks between the French Prime Minister and Mr. Ahmed Abdallah Anderemane, President of the Islamic Federal Republic of the Comoros, the French Government decided not to hold a referendum in. Mayotte. Obviously, it was with great interest that the people and Government of the Comoros noted that decision, which we feel supports our position.
It will be recalled that our Organization, in its resolution 31/4, of 21 October 1976, and subsequent resolutions, condemned and categorically rejected any referendum on the international legal status quo of the island organized on Comorian territory by France, it being understood that the referendum on self-determination organized in the Comoros on 22 December 1974 remained the only valid one for the whole archipelago.
In spite of the positive aspect of that denunciation, the status quo persists in Mayotte, and hence the problem, too, remains. This is a question of justice, and the people and the Government of the Comoros, knowing the justice of their causes, intend to pursue their claims with determination. For its part, the international community has a duty, in accordance with the principles of the Charter of the united Nations, to lend its total support until the triumph of that just cause.
I wish once again solemnly to reaffirm the profound commitment of the people and the Government of the Comoros to the Charter ideals of peace, justice and equality. For us, that Organization is art irreplaceable instrument in maintaining a balance in international relations, if the United Nations is to recover its original vocation and to play its full role, each of its Members must scrupulously respect its fundamental principles.