Let me first congratulate
you, Sir, on your election to the presidency of the fiftieth
session of the General Assembly. I wish you a successful
presidency. Appreciation is also due to your distinguished
predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Amara Essy, who provided
the leadership during the forty-ninth session of the General
Assembly.
The General Assembly is meeting in the midst of
hectic schedules of events to commemorate the fiftieth
anniversary of the United Nations. Some of us have become
preoccupied with these celebrations. We should ask whether
these activities are merely media events or could seriously
contribute to a better United Nations. Will the high point
of the fiftieth anniversary be reduced to a special
commemorative meeting condensed into a declaration of
good intentions which no one seriously cares for, or
should we resist the tendency to celebrate, to expend
millions on galas and parties and to eulogize through
rhetorical speeches the anniversary of the establishment of
the United Nations? After all we cannot even answer the
basic questions of where we stand and what the United
Nations is, whipping boy or serious, enduring player.
Admittedly it is easier to raise questions than to find
answers. But these questions must be raised and they
deserve to be answered. In its fiftieth year the United
Nations system finds itself criticized for being unable to
handle basic and critical political, economic and social
issues. Despite earlier hopes of a just world order
following the end of the cold war, what we still see is a
United Nations which dances to the grating music of the
major Powers, in total disregard for the high principles
and objectives pledged at its formation. We will have to
conclude that the narrow national interest of the few is
still what the United Nations is all about. Also, the
principle which largely moves the major Powers, that
what they need for themselves must influence their
dealings with the needs of others, is fully operative,
making nonsense of interdependence, social compassion
and justice.
And so we must forget the promise of an
international political leadership that can collectively

come to grips with the myriad issues for a shared survival.
Confrontation between States, intra-State conflicts,
economic and military threats, the dehumanizing effects of
poverty: all these are heightened rather than diminished by
the end of the cold war. The contradictory impulses of
interdependence and isolationism are more evident than
ever before. Not only is humanitarianism drying up fast, but
what survives is replete with conditionalities. The United
Nations presents a shattered image with a threadbare moral
authority, despite the important early successes in
decolonization and the subsequent elimination of apartheid.
The victors of 1945 have clung tenaciously to the
levers of power. They control the high ground, exercising
influence and power as nakedly as when they were colonial
Powers. Only the masks have changed. The multilateral
organizations created on the eve of war’s end were and still
are structured to further their economic interests and the
pursuit of their strategic political goals. The Security
Council, the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund have merely become the instruments of power
perpetuation. Less than six months ago, we witnessed the
use of the United Nations to push through, draconian-like,
the nuclear non-proliferation Treaty. Before the ink was
dry, some of the nuclear Powers proceeded to test their
diabolical weapons. What, may I ask, qualifies some
countries to possess the means of mass destruction in
perpetuity? It is time that the nuclear-weapon States
committed themselves to nuclear disarmament through a
programmed reduction of their nuclear arsenals within a
specific time-frame, beginning with the immediate cessation
of all nuclear tests and culminating in their total
elimination. Soon it may be too costly and too late.
Perversely, the major Powers not only continue to
compete in developing ever more destructive conventional
weapons but also compete to sell arms. And when some
developing countries buy arms the Western-controlled
media accuse them of indulging in arms races.
We seem to have inherited a world in which moral
considerations have no real role to play in which acts of
realpolitik have no moral consequences. Tears appear to be
shed about the human tragedies in Bosnia, Rwanda, Liberia,
Somalia and Chechnya, but many have become desensitized
to the horrors that flash across our screens. The Charter
incorporating the idealism and dreams of 1945 is more
honoured in violations of it than in adherence to it. Tell us:
How have the principles of the Charter on the non-use of
force and the illegality of claiming territory acquired by
aggression been of help to the Bosnians? What protection
or solace has the genocide Convention been to those
slaughtered in Rwanda, Bosnia, Cambodia and Chechnya?
The lesson for the peoples of these countries is clear: no
international order or international ethos will be defended
unless the major Powers see that their vital interests are
at risk.
The United Nations has been party to the double talk
in Bosnia, insisting that morality has no place in peace-
keeping since the impartiality that peace-keepers had to
maintain required them to eschew making any judgement
about the rights and wrongs of the situation. I ask the
United Nations whether there can be a middle ground
where genocide and “ethnic cleansing” are concerned. I
ask the Secretary-General of the United Nations whether
he is obliged to defend the moral principles in the United
Nations Charter or whether he should console the dying
and the bereaved by saying that there are others elsewhere
who are suffering worse fates.
Is there not, in the context of the larger picture, a
special role for the United Nations to provide
international leadership? Clearly the major Powers have
failed to provide leadership, choosing only to act in
furtherance of their national or domestic political
interests. They continue to harp on human rights and the
sanctity of human life but they act only when they run no
risk.
Admittedly, blame must also be apportioned to many
of us in the third world. Some of us have led our people
down the path of despair and misery. With the demise of
colonialism there was the promise of freedom and
development. Yet many succumbed to the temptations of
creature comfort, failing to further the rights and welfare
of our own people. But then, when we were colonies, the
only form of government we knew was authoritarian
colonialism. It is too much to expect some of us, at the
midnight flag-lowering, suddenly to become democratic
and sophisticated.
The threat of a brutalized world has never been more
evident than in the Serb programme of “ethnic cleansing”
in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the massacres in Rwanda.
For a long time the major Powers were opposed to taking
strong measures against the Serbs. We are seeing
belatedly some sense of purpose in the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization (NATO) bombings and efforts to
negotiate a solution. However, we should be cautious
about rushing towards solutions that reward aggression
and genocide. It is possible that some in the West and in
the United Nations had longed for Bosnia’s quick defeat.
It would have saved them from making any decision. But
2

the Bosnians refused to oblige. In Rwanda the European
troops withdrew when the massacres began. And in Somalia
failure to understand the situation led to the victims fighting
their United Nations saviours.
The United Nations Secretariat must take some of the
blame for all these brutalities. In Rwanda it truly shirked its
duty, while in Bosnia it sent in a protection force which
was instructed not to protect the Bosnians. Why it should
be called the United Nations Protection Force
(UNPROFOR) has been a mystery until recently. It was
there to protect itself. It makes a distinction between
peace-keeping and peace-enforcement. If there is peace to
keep, why are military forces needed? Are not the forces
put there because of the possibility of breaches of the
peace? And when there are breaches the forces must stop
them, if peace-keeping is to be meaningful. But, instead,
when peace is broken the United Nations threatens to
withdraw and leave the victims to their fate.
Fortunately, in Palestine, another historical flash point,
efforts continue to be made towards durable peace. That
peace process must result in a Palestinian homeland, a
viable State at peace with its neighbours. The attempts to
weaken the present Palestinian leadership by undermining
its credibility will only result in the rise of extremism and
a protracted and bloody intra- Palestinian conflict which
will spill over into Israel and elsewhere.
The absence of international leadership and
commitment is evident in the area of development as well.
The rhetoric of development is increasingly devoid of
meaningful content. The North has turned its back on
commitments relating to development assistance. Yet such
is the concern for the survival of insects and plant life that
human development must be stopped if it is suspected it
might endanger a few animals or plants. That there are
plenty of the same species elsewhere is considered
irrelevant. And so one-fifth of the world’s population
remains mired in poverty, having been denied development
assistance by the rich and the powerful. The latter have
retreated into their regional clubs and cosy arrangements for
perpetuating unconscionable levels of consumption. Some
of the countries of the South have tried to pull themselves
up literally by their bootstraps. But the moment they appear
to succeed the carpet is pulled out from under their feet.
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) privileges are
withdrawn and their records on human rights, democracy,
and so on, are scrutinized in order to obstruct their progress.
Some among the more successful countries of the
South have been enticed to join the rich and the strong, so
they may not lend what little strength they have to their
compatriots.
Commitment to the environment should not be
turned into an occasion for recrimination and the pointing
of fingers. Worse, it should not be politically
instrumentalized to disadvantage the South. Development
can take place without irreparable damage to the
environment. Forcing the developing countries to remain
undeveloped in order to preserve the environment for the
rich is manifestly unfair. Yet the environmental obstacles
placed in the way of the poor South will do just that,
beggaring the poor to enrich the already rich.
Poverty itself creates an environment that is as
damaging to humanity as any other kind of environmental
pollution. Obviously, we need to determine our priorities.
Do we keep the poor permanently poor so that the rich
can enjoy the environment, or do we sacrifice the
environment a little in the interest of relieving poverty?
We in Malaysia accept that economic development
should not be at the expense of other groups or future
generations. Environmental sustainability, social equity
and a culture that allows for the fulfilment of human
needs must replace the culture of materialism. The
Western consumer society, which is spreading world
wide, requires ever-increasing consumption to keep
production and profits continually rising. For this, more
fuel is needed, and the trend in the use of fossil fuels in
recent years is alarming. Yet very little is being done to
curb such wasteful use of a depleting resource, while the
development of renewable resources, such as hydropower,
meets with all kinds of objections. Progressively
industrializing Malaysia has the capacity and the
resources to design and implement a model of
development sensitive to the needs and cultural values of
developing countries without imitating the flawed Western
model. We ask only that misguided crusaders should keep
out. These modern-day imitations of the Communist
agitators would do well to look to their own countries’
wasteful consumption and carbon-dioxide emissions.
Social disintegration is a serious problem as the
world’s population becomes more urbanized. This is not
helped by the West’s seeking to impose its moral values.
The institutions that hold society together are now being
undermined. At the Beijing Women’s Summit, despite a
consensus cobbled together to alleviate the sufferings of
women, the mad quest for personal freedom took one
more tradition-bashing step. People, it seems, cannot be
free unless they have sexual freedom, a freedom that
3

rejects the inhibitions of traditional and religious values, of
marriage and family as institutions of society. Sexual
freedom will render fidelity meaningless as much as it
renders marriages anachronistic. The new liberalism extends
to a new definition of the family, which is to include
homosexual pairs, unmarried women with children by
unknown fathers, groups of men and women living together
with no fixed partners, and many other combinations.
If the West wants to be liberal and sexually free, that
is its right. What is wrong is the attempt to impose its
morality, or lack of it, on the rest of the world, and in
Beijing that was what it tried to do. The United Nations
should not lend itself to this kind of undemocratic disregard
for the rights of others.
Of late there has been much talk about reform of the
United Nations. Clearly, there is a need for this after 50
years of the United Nations carrying the tattered baggage of
the last world war. Surely the results of that war cannot be
reflected in the structure and procedures of the United
Nations for ever. It has to end some time, and the fiftieth
anniversary is as good a time as any for burying the relics
of past follies.
Since democracy seems to have displaced religion as
a faith, it is fitting that there should be democratic reforms
in the United Nations. Some of those countries which had
vested themselves with infallibility and permanency have
now become second-raters. New players have emerged that
should be accorded recognition. A more equitable
representation on the Security Council is a must. This
means that permanent seats should be given to regions,
possibly determined by a regional mechanism.
The veto power should be dropped. Under no
circumstances must the Security Council be made an
instrument of any one country.
Reform must also extend to the financing of the
United Nations. It is wholly unacceptable that Member
States, especially the rich ones, should fall into arrears with
impunity and yet exercise special rights and influence. The
membership rules must be applied to one and all. New
bases for assessment should be laid down, taking into
consideration the wealth, or lack of it, of Members.
Various global taxation schemes, including modest
levies on global air travel, a tax on global speculative flows
of capital, a tax on the exploitation of mankind’s common
assets on the seabed and a tax on the trade in weapons of
war, have all been proposed. Of those, the last one, based
on the principle that he who profits from the tools of war
must contribute to the maintenance of peace, merits
urgent attention and adoption.
Reform of the United Nations also requires the
cleansing of the bureaucratic Augean stables in the
Secretariat. The morale of the international civil service
is at its lowest ebb. The excesses and the fat must be
trimmed, but failure to do so must not be used as an
excuse for not paying dues or for opting out.
It is heartening to note that the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and
other United Nations economic agencies have now
acknowledged that linking trade and non-trade issues
serves no useful purpose either for the developed or for
the developing countries. Unemployment in the developed
countries is due not to workers’ in developing countries
working hard to compensate for their lack of other
competitive advantages, but, rather, to the profligate ways
of the developed nations, with their high wages and
unemployment benefits. Why it is assumed that workers
in developed countries would work when they are to be
paid for not working is a mystery on a par with the idea
that people would be happy and productive if the diligent
were paid as much as the indolent.
The reform of global institutions must encompass the
Bretton Woods institutions. Their energies and resources
must be channelled towards the battle against the
pollution caused by poverty worldwide. The Bretton
Woods institutions have to cease acting as debt collectors
for the mighty and the rich bankers, who, in turn, must
learn to live within the rules of their own creation, with
regard to taking commercial risks which go hand in hand
with the pursuit of gain. A return to their original
mandates — to promote balanced development, in the
case of the World Bank, and to enforce monetary and
fiscal responsibility in all countries, irrespective of their
status in the global economy — is a first priority. Reform
must include a re-evaluation of the governance
arrangements at the Bank and the Fund through a
realignment and reallocation of quotas and shareholdings
that take into account the changed structure of the world
economy. New arrangements for governance must
recognize the growing clout of the newly emerging
economies that now contribute to a rising share of global
output, to trade and to capital flows.
The debt millstone weighs heavily on the poor. This
burden must be eased, especially for the poorest nations of
Africa and Asia. Malaysia hopes that effective actions will
be taken forthwith, taking into account decisions made at
the forty-ninth session of the General Assembly on finding
a durable solution to the external-debt problem of
developing countries.
While bilateral debts extended by donor countries have
over the years been restructured and rescheduled — though
with humiliating conditions imposed by the Paris Club of
creditors — multilateral institutions, led by the World
Bank, have steadfastly refused to consider restructuring debt
owed to them. The World Bank continues to increase its
profit levels and amasses reserves which today stand in
excess of $16 billion. Why are these reserves, built from
payments by developing countries, not used for debt relief?
And why do we allow the intransigence of one or two
countries to preclude the issuance of special drawing rights
by the International Monetary Fund? These and other issues
must feature in a reform of the Bretton Woods institutions.
The conclusion of the Uruguay Round and the
establishment of the World Trade Organization offer a
glimmer of hope for rule-based trading relationships.
Malaysia applauds and welcomes the underlying principles,
and we pledge ourselves to play by the mutually agreed
undertakings.
Regrettably, powerful trading nations threaten, through
unilateral actions, to undermine the carefully negotiated
agreements. The deliberate creation of regional trading
blocs, the introduction of managed trade and the attempts
to link human rights, environmental considerations and
labour codes to trade are major threats which, if
implemented, would dim the hope of a free environment for
trade. We reject such attempts. The new protectionism will
return the world to a bygone era when trade wars led to
military confrontations.
Finally, we have the new threats with the advent of
the information age. The poor countries have long suffered
from biased reporting by the world media, controlled by the
developed world. Now the computer network created for
the spread of knowledge and information has become
polluted by the irresponsible dissemination of filth through
it. Someone is making money from this filth.
The world community must find a way to keep out
such filth and to provide for legal action to be taken against
its purveyors by aggrieved countries, even when they
broadcast from outside their borders. They should be
allowed to bring these miscreants to trial in the aggrieved
countries, under their laws. After all, we have already had
many instances of extraterritorial application of the laws
of some countries without so much as a by-your-leave.
Freedom of information is fine, but even in this age
of freedom we cannot allow morals to be completely
undermined in order to enrich the merchants of porn and
filth.
When all is said and done, we still have to admit
that the United Nations is the only truly multinational
Organization where the voices of small nations can be
heard. We support the United Nations, but we must
correct the tendency to make it an instrument of the rich
and the powerful. The United Nations must stand on the
side of the collective needs of people and nations in order
to serve all mankind.


I have the honour to
make the following statement on behalf of His Excellency
Mr. A. S. M. Mostafizur Rahman, the Foreign Minister of
Bangladesh, who, though present in New York, is unable
to attend this Assembly for reasons of health.
“I warmly congratulate Mr. Diogo Freitas do
Amaral on his unanimous election as President of
this historic fiftieth anniversary session of the United
Nations General Assembly. His election is a tribute,
not only to him personally, but to his great country,
Portugal. I am confident that he will do great honour
to the legacy of his predecessor, His Excellency Mr.
Amara Essy of Côte d’Ivoire, to whom we owe deep
appreciation, not least for his sponsorship of the
establishment, on 14 September, of the Open-ended
High-level Working Group on the strengthening of
the United Nations system.
“Let me also commend our Secretary-General,
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for his dedicated and
untiring efforts to promote the effectiveness of this
world body.
“In this fiftieth anniversary year, the United
Nations has reached a critical turning-point in
appraising its past and in charting a viable course for
its future, based on the renewed commitment, trust
and consensus of its Member States.
“The world of today is obviously quite different
from that of 1945. Then, the United Nations, in the
wake of the devastating global conflagration that
was the Second World War, was called upon
to save succeeding generations from the
scourge of war'.
In the wake of the cold war, the United Nations is
now called upon to consolidate and secure an
uncertain and amorphous peace.
13

“The end of the cold war had fuelled hopes that
the United Nations, freed from nuclear and ideological
confrontation, would devote its full attention to
building a peaceful and more equitable world; tackle
the challenge of world poverty; advance regional
conflicts to resolution; distribute the benefits of peace
dividends; and move towards fulfilling the unrealized
premises of the Charter, especially with regard to
collective security.
“These hopes were belied. The world of the
1990s is more dangerous in many ways than the cold-
war era. There is greater tension in more places, a
further degradation in the quality of life and many
more complex issues of law and ethics, management
and practical cooperation. Negative impulses have
assumed a variety of dimensions within States,
between groups of States and globally.
“Within States, nations have come under siege
from multiple threats, retarding their capacity to act
effectively or independently. Political instability has
fuelled an economic breakdown, and economic
backwardness has created political upheaval in a
never-ending vicious circle. Long-suppressed national,
ethnic and cultural rivalries have resurfaced,
unleashing bigotry, extremism and violence. They
have generated powerful centrifugal forces that have
not only threatened to but actually breached
established boundaries. Demagogues, political
separatists and fringe groups are being encouraged and
supported by external forces to challenge the
legitimacy of Governments and their capacity to
govern.
“On another plane, fears are surfacing that the
bipolar world of the past 50 years could now assume
a North-South configuration, not between opposing
political and social systems, but between rich and poor
nations. Anxiety is increasing in the South that their
interests are being marginalized; that development
resources are being diverted or are dwindling; that
their potential to act as partners in revitalizing the
world economy is being ignored; and that new
constraints and conditionalities are being selectively
imposed.
“Globally, new forces are emerging that no State
acting alone can control but which threaten the
legitimacy of all States. Pollution, eco-damage,
devastating diseases, speculative dealers and money-
launderers, organized crime, arms smugglers and
terrorists have eaten into all societies, vitiated values
and crippled development. Rapid technological and
transnational processes are reducing the ability of
States to act on their own or to regulate domestic
policies affecting the movement of goods, services,
labour and capital. Tensions over resources are a
case in point. Forty per cent of the world’s
population live on the banks of rivers or lakes
shared by two or more countries. Dams and
irrigation projects cause serious tension and actual
conflict.
“Ironically, at a time when the United Nations
is in greater demand then ever before and its
capacity stretched to the limit, a serious campaign of
vilification has been launched against it. It has been
charged with mismanagement, inefficiency,
corruption, excessive costs and over-staffing. Its
growing membership, in the wake of decolonization,
has been termed irresponsible, obstructive and
divisive, and it has been accused of indiscriminately
exercising the so-called tyranny of the majority'.
This tarnished image, propagated by a few but
rejected by many, has left deep scars that have
diminished the United Nations.
“It is against this background that I now turn to
some of the priority concerns facing Bangladesh.
“First and foremost is the financial crisis that
threatens to undermine the United Nations. The
Secretary-General has declared that the United
Nations is already technically bankrupt. The
financial situation has to be placed on an adequate
and sustainable footing and its deterioration urgently
reversed.
“Bangladesh has consistently held that the
current financial difficulties were primarily a cash-
flow imbalance due mainly to the failure by some
Member States, in particular some major
contributors, to fulfil their Charter obligations in full
and on time. These Member States must give
practical effect to their commitment to the United
Nations by paying their assessed contribution in full
and on time, including all arrears. Capacity to pay
remains the fundamental tenet in determining
Member States’ contributions. To proceed on the
basis that simply a revision of the scales of
assessment would provide a panacea to all financial
ills is simplistic and misleading. It will neither
change the aggregate amount of revenues available
14

to the United Nations nor guarantee better cash flows
or prompt payment. While it is likely that for some
time to come the bulk of United Nations revenues will
come from assessments and voluntary contributions,
Bangladesh supports exploring the possibility of
providing independent revenue sources for the United
Nations through various international transactions and
taxation.
“Bangladesh supports the reform efforts that have
been initiated to revitalize and restructure the main
organs of the United Nations and to achieve a more
dynamic interrelationship for them. We intend to
participate actively and constructively in the open-
ended, high-level Working Group on United Nations
reform which is to review the Secretary-General’s
Agendas for Peace and Development, respectively, and
the report submitted by Member States and
independent commissions. While we support the idea
that the broad objective of the reform is to strengthen
the response and efficiency of the United Nations
system in promoting the goals of development,
security, justice and equality and to improve
accountability and responsibility, we reject pursuit of
reforms of a purely mechanical or managerial nature.
It seems ironic that the yardstick for determining what
should or should not be pruned has been applied
selectively in the past, with peace-keeping operations
approved by the Security Council proliferating at the
cost of development programmes. Catchwords of cost-
effectiveness, financial stringency, trimming
management, redundancy, waste and inefficiency seem
intended more to constrain control and reduce the
United Nations role than improve its capability of
responding to the needs of the international
community.
“Our position with regard to Security Council
reform has concentrated more on strengthening the
transparency and efficiency of the Council’s mandate
than on enlargement of the permanent membership.
While we fully support enlargement of the overall size
of the Council to reflect the growth in membership of
the United Nations, we believe that an increase in
permanent members should be considered only on the
basis of the most stringent criteria, and on the basis of
global recognition and consensus. We are opposed in
principle to creating new centres of privilege or
distinctions that can distort the principle of sovereign
equality.
“Bangladesh welcomes the consensus achieved
in the outcomes of the major conferences in Cairo,
Copenhagen and Beijing on population, social
development and women, which supplement the
results of the Earth Summit, the children’s Summit
and the Vienna Conference on Human Rights.
Together they have forged a meaningful and
comprehensive social agenda that has reinforced
poverty eradication and people-centred sustainable
development. It must be emphasized, however, that
social development is dependent on economic
growth, which can be fuelled only in an international
economic environment which is conducive to it.
“The global society is only as strong as its
weakest link. The plight of the least developed
countries assumes special relevance and importance
in this 1995 mid-term review year of the least
developed countries’ Programme of Action for the
1990s. Their continuing crises calls for immediate
remedial action especially in increasing official
development assistance, writing off debts and
assuring greater trade access on preferential terms.
“Bangladesh has followed closely and supports
strongly the evolution and development of the
Secretary-General’s Agenda for Peace. We agree
with the priority emphasis that has been placed on
preventive diplomacy and conflict-prevention
measures and recognize especially their cost-
effectiveness. We believe that regional efforts and
regional agencies should be utilized more frequently
and their capacity strengthened. Bangladesh has
actively contributed to the peace-keeping mission of
the United Nations and has always favourably
responded in providing troops. We have closely
examined and positively responded to the request for
the provision of stand-by troops. We are also
favourably inclined to support a rapid-reaction
capability for providing humanitarian assistance.
“At plenary meetings the General Assembly
will have occasion to address in greater depth some
of the most pressing and critical political issues on
the agenda, including the ongoing conflict in Bosnia
and Herzegovina, in which prospects for a
negotiated solution have considerably brightened on
the basis of the Contact Group’s Peace Plan and the
Geneva Declaration of Principles of
8 September 1995; the continuing peace efforts in
the Middle East and the new interim agreement
between Israel and Palestinian leaders as a follow-up
15

to the Oslo Agreement; the status of democracy and
human rights in Haiti; and the review of the work of
international tribunals established in former
Yugoslavia and in Rwanda. Given the fluidity and
rapid evolution of events in some of these crises, it is
our hope to comment on them at length during
consideration of the specific item.
“Let me say in conclusion that there is no doubt
in our mind that the United Nations remains the only
forum where we can meet the challenges of the future
by drawing upon our combined solidarity and
willingness to confront them together. Bangladesh
reaffirms its firm and unwavering commitment to this
world body and the pursuit of its great goals.”


Forty-five years
ago, in 1950, a destructive hurricane battered my island
country. It destroyed our small homes, levelled our
sugar-cane fields, left death and destruction in its path and
made Antigua and Barbuda a destitute colony. It was the
very worst hurricane that Antigua and Barbuda had ever
experienced. Several hurricanes were to strike us after
1950, including Hurricane Hugo in 1989.
Thirty-five days ago, however, Hurricane Luis visited
its fury on my small island developing State. For more than
48 hours, its mighty gusts blew the roofs from thousands of
homes, schools, churches, government buildings, hotels. Its
sustained winds, exceeding 160 miles per hour, uprooted
many of Antigua and Barbuda’s old trees, decapitated
thousands of stately palms, and deposited the leaves and
broken limbs of our evergreen trees everywhere. The
swollen sea sent surf and sand swirling into the lobbies and
beachfront rooms of our hotels — the source of our
national income. Sheets of rain, carried relentlessly by the
winds of Hurricane Luis, made everything wet and
everyone weary. Our electricity and telephone systems were
destroyed when thousands of poles succumbed to the fury
of its winds, snapping cables and smashing equipment as
they fell to the earth. Our fishermen lost their boats, our
farmers lost their fields, and our people lost some of our
courage. Nature appeared to have declared war on us.
When the ferocious winds of Hurricane Luis subsided, 48
hours after landfall, the verdant, lush, tropical vegetation
that had drawn millions to our shores over the years had
disappeared; our islands were a mere caricature of their
previous glory. The engine of our economy has stalled;
tourism, the source of Antigua and Barbuda’s income, has
been severely compromised and we may not be able to
restart the industry for several weeks. Fishermen and
farmers, storekeepers and hotel workers are now without
incomes; thousands are jobless. The threat of creeping
poverty hangs over a people that, 14 years ago, at the end
of 150 years of colonialism, had started to enjoy an
improved standard of living, higher than ever recorded in
our 350-year modern history. Forty-eight hours after
Hurricane Luis had traversed the Caribbean, the
vulnerability of small island States was again made
manifest. Dominica, Guadeloupe, Saint Kitts and Nevis,
Saint Maarten, Anguilla and Montserrat all suffered a fate
similar to Antigua and Barbuda’s. Coming on the heels of
Luis, Hurricane Marilyn would batter the island of Saint
Thomas. Small island States and territories, thriving and
robust on one day, were paralysed and incapacitated
within 48 hours.
Development is not sustainable if 17 hurricanes are
to trample through our region each year; yet climate
experts have given us notice that the phenomenon known
as global warming will generate a greater number of
“extreme weather events”, more ferocious and monstrous
in each succeeding year. Hurricane Luis was 700 miles
wide; its wind gusts reached almost 200 miles per hour;
and its sustained winds exceeded 160 miles per hour. It
was unique in its size and devilish in its fury.
There may never be sufficient evidence to link the
global warming phenomenon to any single hurricane; but
the pattern is evident. I draw the Assembly’s attention to
a study entitled “Confronting Climate Change”, published
by the Cambridge University Press. In it we read:
“If global temperatures continue to rise in
accordance with current predictions, increases in the
number and severity of storms, floods, droughts, and
other short-term weather extremes may be one of the
earliest observed and most dramatic effects.”
8

Carbon dioxide emissions, caused by the burning of
petroleum, coal, wood and gas, since the start of the
industrial revolution in Western Europe 200 years ago, have
begun to warm the planet and to place the survival of small
islands in jeopardy.
Three years ago, at the Earth Summit in Rio, Brazil,
the nations of the world had their representatives sign the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
I read from the Convention:
“The ultimate objective of this Convention and
any related legal instruments that the Conference of
the Parties may adopt is to achieve ... stabilization of
greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a
level that would prevent dangerous [man-made]
interference with the climate system.” (article 2)
Earlier this year, the nations of the world met in
Berlin, Germany, to consider a proposal matching this
objective and linked to this Convention; it was put forward
by 41 vulnerable small island States. Many industrialized
countries, guilty of emitting into our Earth’s atmosphere
billions of tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse
gases, would not then agree to any reduction in these gases.
We cannot stand idly by, experience the deadly effects of
global warming, and be satisfied with promises. Harmful
production, wasteful consumption and dangerous disposal
patterns continue to characterize the behaviour of the largest
industrialized States. They sow the wind; small island
States reap the whirlwind. In the South Pacific, where
defenceless small island States predominate, another large
industrialized State chooses to explode several nuclear
bombs, euphemistically called “nuclear devices”. We
remain opposed to the testing of all nuclear weapons. If
those bombs are as harmless and as safe as that State
claims, then why not test them on its own soil? The same
disregard for the weak and small States holds for the
transboundary movement of hazardous wastes, especially
shipments of nuclear wastes through the Caribbean Sea. We
are dreadfully afraid of an accident and equally fearful of
the impact of news of an accident on our development.
We have done much of what is required of us to
ensure that our development proceeds apace and with few
setbacks. Evidence of our intelligent use of our meagre
resource base is captured in the annual Human
Development Report published by the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP). For example, my
Caribbean country shares a common currency with five
other small island States and one territory. We call it the
Eastern Caribbean dollar. Its value has remained unchanged
since 1976. For almost two decades, self-discipline and
probity have been the hallmark of the Eastern Caribbean
Central Bank.
Hurricane Luis has severely disabled four of the
seven economies which share the currency — Dominica,
Saint Kitts and Nevis, Montserrat, and Antigua and
Barbuda. And unfair attempts by Central American
banana producers to eliminate the English-speaking
Caribbean’s 3 per cent of the world market share threaten
to undo the other three economies — those of Grenada,
Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. The
Eastern Caribbean dollar (EC$) can only remain stable if
our economies earn foreign exchange. Unfair trade, just
like hurricanes, can devastate our vulnerable small island
States’ economies and make the earning of foreign
exchange impossible.
We share a currency, and we share a university. The
University of the West Indies is soon to celebrate its
fiftieth year of continued existence, having graduated an
overwhelming number of professionals from the 17 States
and territories of the English-speaking Caribbean which
call it their own. This year my Government provided 73
scholarships to the most deserving youth in Antigua and
Barbuda, with amounts ranging from $EC 54,000 to
$10,000 each. We intend to build the national capacity to
ensure that sustainable human development is more than
a wish.
We share a currency, we share a university, we share
a judiciary. The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeals has
demonstrated that justice and cost-effectiveness can be
twin handmaids of small island States. Eight of us also
combine our national defence forces to form a Regional
Security System (RSS). Though small by any standard,
we have succeeded in increasing our defences
exponentially, while containing defence costs
significantly. The recent invasion of the Comoros Islands
by a mercenary band which took its President hostage and
seized power there serves as a reminder of the security
constraints facing small island States.
Our efforts at regional collaboration extend beyond
a common currency, a university, a judiciary and a
defence force. You have recently pronounced, Sir, on the
success of “interlocking, regional building blocks” in
Europe. Thirty years ago, before many of our Caribbean
countries were independent and free, we commenced that
process by creating, in 1965, the Caribbean Free Trade
Agreement (Carita). Carita has metamorphosed into the
Caribbean Community and Common Market (Caricom),
9

and earlier this year the Association of Caribbean States
(ACS) was formed by all the States and territories which
share the Caribbean Sea. More than 200 million people
form this new market. Antigua and Barbuda has done much
of what is required of it to achieve sustainable
development. The results of our many and varied efforts
cannot bear fruit if, year after year, hurricanes destroy that
which we have created. We look to the United Nations to
help in persuading the industrialized countries to adopt the
Toronto targets, as a first step in our common effort to
ensure the survival of this planet which we all share.
We have faith in the United Nations because the
image of the United Nations in my country and region is
positive and good. When a volcano threatened to erupt on
the neighbouring island of Montserrat and my country
offered safe refuge to half of that island’s population, the
United Nations Resident Representative in Barbados led a
United Nations team of experts to Antigua; they came to
determine how the United Nations could assist. Following
the devastation wrought by Hurricane Luis, the United
Nations Development Programme Barbados country office,
the Department of Humanitarian Affairs, the World Health
Organization and several other United Nations agencies and
bodies quickly launched an international appeal to help us
reconstruct. The most distinguished citizen of Antigua and
Barbuda, His Excellency the Governor-General, was also
quick to agree to be the Chairman of the UN 50 National
Committee. This willingness serves as a measure of the
high regard in which the United Nations is held.
My small island State can also boast that it has paid
its contribution to the United Nations in full; we owe no
arrears, despite the burden which membership dues and
peace-keeping operations impose on our limited resources.
We can only encourage the wealthy and the powerful to
pay their obligations. For us the United Nations is more
than a symbol; more, too, than an instrument for the narrow
national interests of Antigua and Barbuda. For us, the
United Nations is the guarantor of international law, an
agent for international peace and security, a catalyst for
development and prosperity.
The Secretary-General has noted that the greatest
threats to peace are adverse social and economic conditions
within States and among States. As a consequence, during
the past three years the international community has
convened six global conferences to plot the course of
human history in the coming century and beyond.
Collectively, the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development, the World Conference on
Human Rights, the First Global Conference on the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing
States, the International Conference on Population and
Development, the World Summit for Social Development,
and the Fourth World Conference on Women collectively
create a multifaceted framework of action; this will be
completed by the Second United Nations Conference on
Human Settlements (Habitat II), in 1996. These
conferences act as a guide to Member States as they seek
to address the challenges inherent in the interrelated areas
of peace and development.
States must now seek to implement the several
Programmes of Action. We are particularly gratified by
the extent to which the last two conferences build on the
positions which we took at the Global Conference on the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing
States. In particular, my delegation would wish to
emphasize the importance of empowering women. The
inclusion of women in the councils of the Government of
Antigua and Barbuda, and at senior levels in the public
service and the private sector, gives credence to the
earnestness of our commitment to the advancement of
women. Without the full and equal participation of
women, sustainable development cannot be achieved.
In congratulating you on your election to your high
office, Mr. President, my country is very cognizant of the
role which Vasco da Gama played in bringing distant
worlds together. Today we find in you the same foresight
and imagination displayed by your most well-known
citizen. These qualities are necessary for leading this
historic fiftieth session of the United Nations General
Assembly. We congratulate Foreign Minister Mr. Amara
Essy, the President of the forty-ninth session, on his
sterling stewardship of this Organization.
At several junctures in its 50-year history, the
purpose and goals of this United Nations have been
redefined. In 1945, following the end of the Second
World War, the United Nations was created as a policy
instrument of the victorious Powers to prevent further
large-scale destruction and massive loss of life. For more
than a decade the United Nations was focused on
preventing a third world war.
In 1957 a little country in Africa twisted the tail of
its colonial master, and Kwame Nkrumah emerged from
jail in Ghana to lead his country and to redefine the
purpose of this United Nations. When the United Nations
was created in 1945, colonialism defined the relations
between the powerful and the weak, between Europe and
much of Asia and Africa. The adoption of resolution
10

1514 (XV) in 1960 turned the United Nations into a policy
instrument to end colonialism.
For more than a decade after 1960 the focus of the
United Nations was to destroy colonialism and apartheid.
My small island nation did not even enter into the
consciousness of the founders in 1945. We are the
beneficiaries of the struggle to end colonialism. The
presence here of small island States is mere happenstance,
since few expected that there could be any such creation as
a micro-State, seated in this Hall as an equal of the
mightiest and the largest States. In that regard, we would
wish to welcome the island State of Palau to membership
in this Organization.
But by 1970 the United Nations had begun to address
inequities in international trade and development, and the
search for a more just international economic order
displaced the concerns of 1945. In the 1970s, also, the cold
war exploded. Regional wars in southern Africa, Central
America and the Middle East were fuelled by the two
super-Powers. By the end of the 1980s the constraints
imposed by the cold war and the demands on our resources
for peace-keeping made the United Nations a much more
complicated instrument than it had ever been.
Today our United Nations must struggle with the
unfinished business of earlier decades. Small island States,
in the 1990s, aware that their very existence is at stake,
have tried to make the United Nations focus on the
environment and development, especially climate change.
If we fail in this quest, this civilization will destroy us and,
in the process, destroy itself. Island States are much like the
canary in the coal mine; we are the messengers, signalling
the danger to the rest of the world.
Having suffered through Hurricane Hugo and
Hurricane Luis, we thank the many Governments,
institutions and people who have come to our rescue. The
people of Antigua and Barbuda are aware of the
vulnerability of small islands. We know our history and we
know the role played by small States in shaping the present.
My Prime Minister, the Honourable Lester Bryant Bird, has
applauded the people of Antigua and Barbuda for their
resilience and indomitable will in the face of adversity. If
we can endure 200 years of chattel slavery, and 150 years
of brutal colonialism, then surely we can recover from two
nights of a horrible hurricane, he has said. We believe that
small island States at this United Nations can also shape the
next five decades in human history. We are here for that
purpose, and we intend to succeed.


It is indeed fitting that
this historic fiftieth session of the General Assembly is
being presided over by Mr. Freitas do Amara of Portugal,
a distinguished teacher of law, an experienced
parliamentarian, and the founder of one of the major
political parties that helped to return vibrant democracy to
his homeland. He will meet the challenges of this office
with the intellect and skill that have marked his service to
his country and region.
His Excellency, Mr. Amara Essy, who presided over
the forty-ninth session of the General Assembly, has my
warmest appreciation of his leadership through a complex
agenda.
I salute the Secretary-General as well as the women
and men of the Secretariat, the specialized agencies and
other bodies of the United Nations for their extraordinary
work during this difficult time in the Organization’s
history.
I embrace the representatives of Palau, the newest
Member State — our sister in the South Pacific region.
We of Solomon Islands, a politically stable
democracy, live in peace, but we have known the cruelty
and havoc of modern war. Not only did the Battle of
Guadalcanal in the Second World War inflict damage on
our natural environment, leaving behind untold numbers
of dangerous armaments, but it caused adverse effects on
human and economic development as well. We number
less than 400,000 people of diverse ethnic origins, speak
some 87 distinct languages in various dialects, and live
together on hundreds of islands spread over 1600 square
kilometres of ocean. We live in a part of the world of
exquisite beauty with a delicate marine and forest ecology
that is critical to our well-being and survival.
From the perspective of my country, peace and
development are inextricably linked. The Agenda for
Development and the Agenda for Peace make this as clear
as the brilliant and pollution-free waters of our sun-
drenched lagoons. In his latest report on the work of the
Organization, the Secretary-General observed that
development:
“the foremost and most far-reaching task of our time
... must be seen in its many dimensions — in the
contexts of peace, the economy, environmental
protection, social justice and democracy”. (A/50/1,
para. 182)
Each is critical for development, but without peace the
other dimensions shrink like characters in stories for
children.
We applaud the Secretary-General’s efforts to
implement the Agenda for Peace. The development of a
framework for coordinating the planning and
implementation of complex field operations is welcome.
In its efforts to broker peace, the United Nations has
wrestled with seemingly intractable problems. Solomon
Islands, one of the least developed countries, living in
peace, gladly contributes its financial share to peace-
keeping and supports initiatives to protect United Nations
personnel and to aid civilian populations.
8

Yet, ethnic strife and armed conflict rage in many
places with suffering and devastation beyond
comprehension. The violation of human rights continues.
Poverty saps the creativity and vitality of thousands of
millions. Vast numbers of children, especially female
children, do not have their basic needs met and many do
not survive infancy or early childhood. Solomon Islands,
which reaffirms its commitment to the Convention on the
Rights of the Child, applauds the work of the United
Nations Children’s Fund. Minimal education, illiteracy,
labouring in unspeakable conditions, prostitution and life on
the streets are the conditions of many children. The mass
media with an educational purpose have a powerful role in
changing all of this as Solomon Islanders living in
communities separated by the sea have learned. Moreover,
many of the world’s women continue to face serious
economic and social discrimination as the 1995 Human
Development Report to the United Nations Development
Programme demonstrates. The education of women in
Solomon Islands is critical to them, their children, their
families and the nation. Without it, sustainable development
and the levelling of population growth are unattainable
goals.
Solomon Islands applauds the steps taken by the
United States of America and the Russian Federation to
reduce their nuclear arsenals in accordance with Start I, on
the reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms. We
look forward to agreement on and implementation of the
Treaty on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic
Offensive Arms (Start II).
Solomon Islands and its sister States in the Pacific
region fearfully watch the ominous nuclear-weapons tests
of France and the People’s Republic of China. We
especially deplore the fact that France is conducting them
in the South Pacific with its fragile marine ecology
essential to the lives of island peoples. Recent reports in the
French media indicate that the potential danger of these
tests is far greater than we have been led to believe. The
threats to people, animals and plants — even the genetic
foundations of life — are terribly real. Do we need
additional evidence of this after Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
Why are more nuclear tests really required? How valid is
the concept of nuclear deterrence now? If, as France claims,
nuclear-weapons explosions on Mururoa Atoll and
Fangataufa Atoll in French Polynesia are so safe, why not
set them off in the soil of the mother country? Its presence
in Polynesia and New Caledonia makes France our
neighbour in the Pacific where a post-cold-war redefinition
of the region is well under way. Do good neighbours
endanger the environment that sustains them? Are we not
gambling away the future of humankind at the nuclear-
weapons dice table? To the nuclear-threshold States, these
tests send the wrong signal. The Pacific is certainly the
wrong place; now, today, is the wrong time; and for
international cooperation, this is the wrong policy.
Global warming, as the intergovernmental climate-
change experts are now confirming, continues. The
consequences for the small island States are most serious,
including the potential impact of sea-level rise. They
threaten our agricultural and fish production, thereby
endangering our economy and undermining our ability to
develop. Clearly, this global problem requires a global
solution, but the industrial countries must take the lead if
joint solutions are to be successfully implemented.
Solomon Islands is contributing to the quest for
international peace and security in a number of ways.
Towards disarmament, we have ratified the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and we
took an active part in the NPT Review and Extension
Conference, joining in the consensus to extend the NPT
indefinitely. We ratified the Treaty of Rarotonga
establishing the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone.
Establishing nuclear-free zones is an important initiative
towards creating a non-proliferation regime in cooperation
with other States. Solomon Islands, along with others,
made two submissions to the International Court of
Justice on the legality of the use or threat of use of
nuclear weapons, a matter now before the Court.
Solomon Islands is participating in the process for
the completion of a comprehensive test-ban treaty by
September 1996. We believe that a comprehensive test-
ban treaty is the fulcrum upon which nuclear disarmament
will be raised from dream to reality. Ultimately,
disarmament is a question of courage and overcoming
fear. It begins within, and its achievement must come
from within as well — inside them and us, inside you and
me.
As for environmental issues, Solomon Islands is a
State party to the United Nations Framework Convention
on Climate Change and fully supports the Berlin mandate,
which includes the Alliance of Small Island States
protocol. With so much of our present and future
economy based on our forests and marine life, we
embrace the Convention on Biological Diversity, which
Solomon Islands acceded to this year, the Barbados
Programme of Action, the Nouméa Convention, and the
International Coral Reef Initiative. We support a global
programme of action to protect the marine environment
9

from land-based activities. Concerned about the shipment
and importation of hazardous and radioactive wastes in the
South Pacific region, Solomon Islands endorses the Waigani
Convention recently adopted at the twenty-sixth South
Pacific Forum, held in Papua New Guinea, and calls for the
rehabilitation of former nuclear-weapon test sites and
assistance to the peoples who were forced from those
places.
We live in a world of disturbing, often cruel, contrasts.
These, sustainable development has to address. In his report
on the work of the Organization, the Secretary-General
states that
“development at its core must be about improvement
of human well-being, the removal of poverty, hunger,
disease and ignorance, ensuring productive
employment and the satisfaction of priority needs of
all people in a way that can be sustained over future
generations; ... the emerging consensus on the priority
and dimensions of development should find expression
in a new framework for international cooperation”.
(A/50/1, para. 182)
Solomon Islands views this emerging consensus as the
beginning of a new diplomacy that puts people at the heart
of development. The new diplomacy should work
vigorously to implement the programmes of action crafted
at the World Summit for Children, the Earth Summit, the
World Conference on Human Rights, the International
Conference on Population and Development, the World
Summit for Social Development, the Global Conference on
the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing
States and the Fourth World Conference on Women. After
Habitat II, in Istanbul next year, we do not require more
large conferences, for the time being at least. Rather, we
need international will and partnership, political
commitment, and thoughtful, decisive action to ensure that
these programmes of action are implemented.
As the Declaration of Barbados affirms,
“Small island developing nations are particularly
vulnerable to natural as well as environmental
disasters and have a limited capacity to respond to and
recover from such disasters.” (A/CONF.167/9, annex
I, part one, section III, para. 1)
Limited in size and with vulnerable economies, they must
depend on a narrow resource base and upon international
trade, without the means to influence its terms. Solomon
Islands and the other small island developing States require
international partnership and cooperation to achieve and
maintain sustainable development.
The new diplomacy based on people-centred
development has at its heart a spiritual dimension which
embraces the ideals of democracy, tolerance, peaceful
coexistence, justice and the rights of persons and peoples.
It cares for the environment and rejects greed and
intolerance. This new diplomacy will be a reflection of an
agenda for democracy and tolerance, which Solomon
Islands believes should be formulated to complete the
triad of agendas. Such an agenda ought to be a basis for
reforming the United Nations in general and the Security
Council in particular. For Security Council reform to
work, it must put people at the centre instead of a
dominating nation, group of nations or region.
Committed to democracy and tolerance, Solomon
Islands calls for renewed consideration of the exceptional
situation of the Republic of China on Taiwan in the
international context, on the basis of the principle of
universality and in accordance with the established model
of parallel representation of divided countries at the
United Nations. The Republic of China’s standing as the
fifteenth largest trading nation in the world, with the
twentieth highest gross national product and the largest
foreign-exchange holdings, its continuing assistance to
many developing countries and its efforts to strengthen
international economic cooperation are obvious and
cannot be ignored by the world’s highest forum. In
addition, the Republic of China’s contribution to world
peace and its unfailing support of United Nations
activities are undeniable evidence of its qualifications to
receive proper consideration for having a seat at the
United Nations. Solomon Islands therefore calls for a
renewed focus on the issue of readmitting the Republic of
China as a Member of the United Nations.
Solomon Islands believes in a United Nations that
calls for tolerance and works to practise it, a United
Nations that promotes the values of diversity, tolerance,
pluralism, peace, justice, solidarity and responsibility
towards others and unknown future generations. Here,
differences in race, religion, language and political
doctrine are not obstacles, but challenges to
understanding, compassion, insight and patience.
The only hope for humanity is world peace, to be
achieved by a change in attitude from one of “mine and
my world” to one of “we and our world”.
10


I should like to begin by
extending to you, Sir, my warmest congratulations on your
election as President of the General Assembly. This is not
merely a recognition of your long experience and your
outstanding ability and diplomatic skill, but also a reflection
of the esteem in which your country, Portugal, is held in
the United Nations. We are certain that under your able
guidance the work of this very important session of the
General Assembly will be a landmark in the history of the
Organization.
I should also like to pay a warm tribute to the
Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Boutros
Boutros-Ghali, for the determined leadership which he has
demonstrated on vital issues and for his reports on the work
of the Organization, which have already resulted in the
adoption of a series of measures, providing working tools
for the activities of the United Nations. Cyprus is
particularly grateful to the Secretary-General and his
dedicated staff for their untiring efforts to find a just and
lasting solution to the question of Cyprus on the basis of
United Nations resolutions.
In April 1945, when it was obvious that the world
was breaking up into two armed camps, delegates from
the then independent nations met to create a world
organization capable of building an era of peace and
international cooperation out of the chaos and conflict of
the Second World War. They drafted the United Nations
Charter, a document of principles and norms, aimed at
effectively dealing with aggression and improving human
rights and economic and social conditions for people
everywhere.
For five decades the spirit of the Charter was kept
alive under very difficult circumstances, even when in
many cases the United Nations took the blame for the
failings of its Member States. It is an indisputable fact
that the United Nations, despite its shortcomings, has
managed the transforming of colonies into independent
countries, restoring democracies and promoting the rule
of law. It has also been successful in resolving conflicts
in many parts of the world — in Namibia, in
Mozambique, in Angola, in Cambodia, in Central
America and in the Caribbean — and it has provided the
inspiration for the drafting of major arms-control treaties.
Its peace-keepers have saved thousands of lives, fed
1

millions of people, and helped to restore a degree of
normality in areas of conflict.
Equally, it has played an important role in promoting
human rights and stimulating economic recovery, monetary
stability and growth in the developing world. Furthermore,
over the past 50 years there has been a series of United
Nations-inspired conferences which dealt with major issues
that vitally affect the peoples of the world. More recently,
United Nations-sponsored conferences, including the Earth
Summit at Rio, the Vienna World Conference on Human
Rights, the Cairo International Conference on Population
and Development, the Copenhagen World Summit for
Social Development and the Beijing Fourth World
Conference on Women, have left their indelible imprint on
the history of mankind. On the other hand, there have been
reversals — in Rwanda United Nations efforts failed to
avert genocide, and in Somalia the tragedy continues.
Equally distressing is the unabated bloodshed in the
Balkans, while United Nations efforts on the problem of my
country are still to bear fruit.
Fifty years of existence provide an important
opportunity to look back, to reflect on both our successes
and failures. But it is also an opportunity to look forward,
to determine where we can and should go from here,
especially now, when the cold war, now ended, has
regrettably generated a wide range of security problems
stemming from economic, political or social tensions or
issues of nationalism. The complex nature of the challenges
calls for multilateral action and an integrated approach.
Drawing from the lessons of the past and the challenges of
the present, we must open up new ways to use the
mechanisms provided originally by the Charter.
In this context, the continuing debate on the Agenda
for Peace has stimulated new thinking about the particular
changes needed to re-equip the United Nations for its role
in this field, so as to vindicate the vision of its founders.
From this rostrum I have had the opportunity to present in
some detail our views on the proposed conceptual
orientations. I do not need to stress that my country is fully
committed to these goals. The recent history of Cyprus can
be seen as a case study, demonstrating the need for such an
initiative and the importance of further expanding its
concepts.
Under the United Nations Charter disarmament and
arms control are integral parts of international peace and
security. Though for decades progress towards disarmament
and arms control was made impossible by the rigidities of
bipolarization, the latter’s demise has now opened up new
possibilities.
In the last two years we have witnessed major
achievements, the most important of which was the
decision to extend indefinitely and unconditionally the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,
along with the strengthening of the review process for the
Treaty and the adoption of a set of principles and
objectives for nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament.
Furthermore, we will soon be entering into commitments
for the conclusion of the comprehensive test-ban treaty
and the negotiation of a treaty banning the production of
fissile material for nuclear purposes. These should be seen
as products of the momentum which has built up in the
disarmament field since the end of the cold war. We
share the view that much still needs to be done in the
areas of both non-conventional and conventional weapons,
for, as long as military threats to security exist, the
disarmament and arms-control process will continue to be
an essential element of international security.
The reduction of forces and armaments alone cannot
provide for or guarantee international security, but it can
reduce the risk of an outbreak of military conflict and can
contribute to confidence-building and conflict resolution.
In this context, I would like to remind this body of my
proposal for the complete demilitarization of the Republic
of Cyprus: the withdrawal of the Turkish occupation
forces, the disbanding of the National Guard of Cyprus,
the handing over of all its arms and military equipment to
the custody of the United Nations Peace-keeping Force
and the placing into a United Nations account of all
money saved from the purchase of arms, to be used for
infrastructure development projects beneficial to both
communities. I feel that our proposal reflects not only our
good intentions but also the spirit of the times.
Unfortunately, it was rejected by Turkey.
Genuine security also includes economic well-being,
protection of human rights and environmental
sustainability. All these dimensions function together, in
an interlocking and mutually reinforcing way, as
foundations of peace. There is much concern today that
the United Nations should have an agenda and working
method of direct relevance to the economic and social
needs of societies in which individuals or groups are
deprived of their freedom or of the basic necessities on
which human life depends. Newspapers and television
screens air these needs daily. The international
community’s ability to offer a decent and secure existence
to all its citizens is called into question by the numerous
2

human tragedies, atrocities of war, terrorism, traffic in
illegal drugs and long-term ecological degradation of our
planet.
It is self-evident that global cooperation and effective
action is a sine qua non for effectively combating these and
other evils tormenting world society. Our most important
goal must be the implementation of our existing
commitments, as provided for in the Charter. In placing the
emphasis on this, we are setting no modest objective. What
we should recognize is that the body of principles and
commitments which have been built up over the last 50
years cover the full range of civil, political, economic and
social issues.
Our task should be to reduce the obvious gap between
accepted principles and everyday practice, to apply these
principles without discrimination and at the same time to
consider ways of strengthening further the existing
mechanisms. In this context, we must face up to the
problem of holding to full account those who flout the
authority of the United Nations, persistently refuse to
respect the rights of others and choose to disregard the
international commitments which they have freely accepted.
When I speak of the need to uphold the authority of
the United Nations, I feel entitled to use as an example the
experience of my country and its people. Since 1974, when
Turkish forces invaded Cyprus, 37 per cent of the territory
of the Republic has remained under military occupation by
Turkey. The Turkish occupation troops, instead of
withdrawing after repeated calls by solemn Security Council
and General Assembly resolutions, are increasing in number
and modernizing their military equipment, thus posing not
only a serious threat to the security of our region but also
a challenge to the authority of the United Nations. The
Secretary-General has stated in his reports to the Security
Council that the area of Cyprus under occupation by the
Turkish forces is the most militarized area in the world.
Another point of particular concern to us is the
massive violation of the human rights of the displaced
persons who were forcibly evicted from their homes by the
Turkish occupation forces and whose homes and property
have been usurped by illegal settlers imported from Turkey
to Cyprus in an effort to change the demographic
composition of our population and colonize the part of
Cyprus occupied by the Turkish forces. All these flagrant
human rights violations have been committed against my
country despite a number of General Assembly and
Security Council resolutions calling on all States to respect
the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and unity
of the Republic of Cyprus and to avoid any actions which
could change the demographic structure of the island.
Turkey’s defiance extends also to resolutions calling
for the withdrawal of foreign forces from the Republic of
Cyprus, the return of the refugees to their homes under
conditions of safety, the humanitarian issues of the
missing persons and the implementation of the third
Vienna agreement, regarding the living conditions and
welfare of persons in enclaves in areas under the control
of the Turkish occupation forces.
On this solemn occasion, I wish sincerely to express,
on behalf of the people of Cyprus, the Government and
myself, deep appreciation for the solidarity offered us by
the Assembly. I ask that its most valuable support be
reinforced with added emphasis, for it is high time the
resolutions of the United Nations on Cyprus were
implemented if a just and lasting solution is to be arrived
at without further delay. We must remember that failure
to uphold international law and respect for human rights
in one situation sets a precedent for similar failures
elsewhere, with often catastrophic consequences. Recent
experiences have demonstrated this all too blatantly.
At every turning point in modern history, nations
convene to shape a new world order. This is another such
historic turning point, and the United Nations is the forum
for the world order we must build. We have, I believe, a
collective responsibility to understand the nature of the
new, post-cold-war role of the United Nations, to continue
our effort towards the institutional reforms needed to re-
equip the United Nations for its role and to make
commitments of the human and financial resources
necessary for the United Nations to carry out effectively
its mission. We believe that the topics of prime
consideration should include the restructuring of the
Security Council, the system of international security as
provided for in the Charter, the further development and
implementation of the basic concepts of An Agenda for
Peace and An Agenda for Development and the finances
of the United Nations.
It is now generally accepted that the Security
Council’s membership must be increased so as to become
more representative of the Organization’s membership. It
is also recognized that it has to improve the effectiveness
of its decision-making to deal with the challenges of
international security in the future. Openness in its
proceedings, democratization in its decision-taking
procedures, and broader consultation by the permanent
members with non-permanent members and with those
3

outside the Council whose interests are affected by a
particular issue before it, will contribute to the effectiveness
of this all-important United Nations body.
On the other hand, we should ensure that the General
Assembly, the universal organ of the United Nations, where
the sovereign equality of Member States is democratically
depicted, be fully respected and utilized more, if we are to
serve well the peoples of the world.
It is of paramount importance to recognize that, for
peace and stability to be maintained and for democracy to
be rooted, economic and social development is
indispensable. That is why we welcome the efforts of the
United Nations to answer social and economic problems,
though the United Nations was created primarily as a
political body to address political issues. Today, however,
more than ever, we must face social and economic
challenges, for it is not enough to bring forth the end of
strife and violence. It has been correctly said that if we
contain violence but ignore poverty we will sooner or later
discover that we have simply traded one misery for another.
The historic Middle East accord offers a good example
in this respect, where what has been achieved in the course
of the peace process should be cemented by the economic
support of the international community, thus ensuring a just
and lasting peace in the Middle East.
Never in the history of mankind has the awareness of
interdependence and globalism been so strong as it is today,
and never has mankind had so much technological know-
how at its disposal. Building upon the accumulation of 50
years of United Nations experience in multilateral relations
and the everlasting principles and ideals of the United
Nations Charter, we can and must do everything within our
power to bequeath to coming generations a better world,
where security, democracy, human rights and prosperity
prevail and are shared by all.


Since the United Nations was founded, Mexico has made
a committed and enthusiastic contribution to its positive
development. Without exception, Mexico has effectively
promoted the principles, the letter and the spirit of the
San Francisco Charter. Today Mexico confirms before the
world its unswerving commitment to peace, development
and collective understanding, which are the inspiration of
the United Nations.

We have had five decades of collective diplomacy,
controversy over the scope and limitations of multilateral
action, difficult adaptations for the United Nations to a
world that is constantly changing at a dizzying pace; five
decades in which the ship of the United Nations has often
been pounded by the waves of intolerance, of the
arbitrary and irrational use of power and force and of
overt violations of the norms of international law. Despite
the pounding it has received, the ship remains afloat.
Today it has 185 nations on board, and it is still
mankind’s best alternative for bringing future generations
to a safer and stabler port than the one we inherited at the
end of the Second World War.
In these first 50 years the foundations have been laid
for building a new civilization at a higher level for
peaceful coexistence between nations. Never before in
history has mankind possessed an instrument as universal
and spirited as the United Nations. The general debate in
this fiftieth anniversary year is an appropriate occasion for
us to pledge ourselves to preserving the achievements of
the United Nations and outlining the form it should take
in the next century. Clearly, the world cannot do without
the United Nations, but it is also obvious that its
structures are in need of far-reaching changes in order to
be up to the challenges of the present day.
The recurring topic is the need to reform the
Organization, and the main issues are, among others, the
following:
First, Mexico attaches priority to the examination of
the reform of the Security Council and has proposed an
increase in the Council’s membership, strictly respecting
the principle of equitable geographical distribution in the
15

context of a genuine reform of its working methods,
including reconsideration of the use and the existence of the
veto power.
A second issue is the limitations on the role of the
Secretary-General, which have very significantly curtailed
his ability to act.
Thirdly, there is the failure of a large number of
Member States to meet their financial obligations.
A fourth issue is the extreme bureaucratization of
some of the specialized agencies of the United Nations
system and the lack of coordination of their activities, as
well as the lack of political support by the Members for
other agencies, such as the United Nations Industrial
Development Organization (UNIDO), which carry out very
useful functions.
The enthusiasm generated by the end of the bipolar
confrontation has lessened due to the emergence of vast and
painful ethnic, religious and regional conflicts, especially in
the former Yugoslavia and in several countries in Africa —
conflicts whose resolution we must urgently seek.
Fortunately, there are reasons for optimism, such as the
progress achieved in the negotiations in the Middle East,
which we must acknowledge and continue to encourage.
We view with special satisfaction the progress of the
negotiations toward a firm and lasting peace in Guatemala,
to which the Secretary-General and the Group of Friends,
among them Mexico, have greatly contributed.
The issue of disarmament has for many years been a
priority on the agenda of the international community. Just
a few months ago, we agreed on the indefinite extension of
the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. At
the same time, we reaffirmed by consensus important
commitments relating to disarmament, including agreement
by all nuclear weapon States to make systematic and
progressive efforts to reduce nuclear weapons globally, with
the goal of eliminating these weapons within a programme
of general and complete disarmament. We now need to
establish deadlines for the attainment of these objectives
and remain vigilant, through the review mechanism we also
approved at the Conference, in monitoring the commitments
entered into.
Nevertheless, the vast majority of members of the
international community are clearly dissatisfied with the
pace of the negotiations on the subject. It would seem that
the necessary political will does not exist to take advantage
of the detente between the major military Powers to move
ahead in the sphere of disarmament. Rather, the fear
persists that this process may be reversible. This of course
makes it advisable to redouble efforts to make progress
on disarmament issues, as well as to devote attention to
a specific programme of mutual confidence-building
measures among States.
The conclusion in 1996 of a treaty of universal
validity proclaiming an absolute ban on nuclear-weapon
tests in all environments is the priority task in the
disarmament field. This treaty, currently being negotiated
in Geneva, should be opened for signature before the
beginning of the next session of the General Assembly.
With a view to speeding up the attainment of that
objective, all the nuclear-weapon States should embrace
the “zero option”, as the United States of America, France
and the United Kingdom have already done.
The Government of Mexico is extremely concerned
at the recent decisions by the People’s Republic of China
and France to conduct nuclear-weapon tests despite
repeated calls by the international community for them to
desist from such action. We condemn those tests and
reiterate our respectful but firm appeal to these countries
to proclaim a moratorium which will remain in force until
the nuclear test-ban treaty is concluded. The States parties
to the Treaty of Tlatelolco and the member States of the
Treaty of Rarotonga will be submitting a draft resolution
to that end for consideration by the Assembly. Moreover,
we share the view of those States that have indicated their
support for the immediate launching of negotiations to
ensure the prohibition of the production of fissionable
materials for nuclear weapons, which was indeed another
of the commitments agreed to by consensus at the Review
and Extension Conference of the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
Along with the efforts to bring about nuclear
disarmament, impetus must also be given to the process
of conventional disarmament. Mexico supports and is
encouraging the negotiation of conventional-disarmament
agreements which will ensure transparency and limit the
manufacture and trade in and transfer of certain types of
conventional weapons, both regionally and worldwide.
In the Conference on conventional weapons now
under way in Vienna, Mexico will promote the
prohibition of the use, production, storage and transfer of
land-mines and will submit proposals on the use of
small-calibre weapons, cluster bombs, flechettes and
air-fueled explosives.
16

The fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations give us
an opportunity to reflect on what has been achieved and on
what we need to change. It should be recalled that the past
year has also marked the fiftieth anniversary of the
institutions established at the memorable Bretton Woods
meeting. The agreements that set up the International
Monetary Fund and the World Bank have promoted
economic cooperation over the five decades following their
establishment. The globalization of production, of trade and,
above all, of finance, is undoubtedly a stimulant to
economic development. Yet it could cause crises which
these financial institutions are not at present able to meet
effectively.
Mexico recognizes and is grateful for the support
received from the international community in the financial
crisis it has experienced. The enormous efforts being made
every day by the Mexican people to resolve this situation
would have had to be even greater if we had not been able
to count on the support of the international community,
both from friendly Governments and from multilateral
agencies. Nevertheless, we must acknowledge that the
Mexican crisis has afforded evidence of the vulnerability of
the international financial system as a whole.
For the modern State, and especially for developing
countries, the successful conclusion of our structural-change
process requires a stable international financial system, the
timely and effective financial support that the international
financing institutions can extend to us, and the ability of
those institutions to detect and prevent crises facing
member countries in the external sector.
Let me now comment on the economic situation in my
country. Mexico decided to face head-on the problems
which led to the financial crisis head-on and to establish
immediately, with the support of the international
community, a strict economic programme entailing dynamic
but necessary adjustment measures.
We have taken difficult decisions, with a clear
purpose: to recognize the need for adjustment while
mitigating its costs to the fullest possible extent and at the
same time constructing a new platform for the sustained
development of the economy.
As of now, inflation in Mexico is markedly declining,
as are interest rates; productive activity in key sectors of
the economy is beginning to regain its dynamism; and the
Mexican economy is continuing its process of structural
transformation with a view to maintaining and increasing
our competitiveness. The balance of trade, which was in
severe deficit, is now showing a surplus, and we are
continuing to look for other markets in the world, be they
developed or developing, in order to diversify our trade.
We fully recognize the social costs of the crisis, and
steps are being taken to mitigate its effects. To assess the
situation in its true light, however, it is not sufficient to
consider only the cost of the present economic policy.
The still greater cost that would have been incurred if
decisive action had not been taken in this serious situation
must also be taken into account.
Mexico will continue to insist not only on the
application of existing treaties in force, the universally
recognized principles of law and the decisions of
international tribunals, but also on the major contribution
made by some United Nations resolutions to the
development of international law.
Therefore, we denounce in this forum, mankind’s
highest, any attempt to apply, on an extraterritorial basis
the laws of a State to citizens of third countries, as the
misnamed “Freedom and Democratic Solidarity with Cuba
Act” would do. We appeal to the sense of justice, equity
and international solidarity of the United States Congress
to stop what would be, if passed, a clear violation of
international law and an unacceptable political precedent
for the rest of the world.
As a further clear demonstration of our commitment
to the rule of law as a standard of conduct, and in
response to the appeal made by the Secretary-General in
his document entitled “An Agenda for Peace”, Mexico
would be prepared to withdraw the reservation made in its
statement of acceptance of the compulsory jurisdiction of
the International Court of Justice if other countries did the
same.
Mexico supports the principle of shared
responsibility among nations for the major issues of the
new world agenda: the maintenance of a just peace in the
world, the fight against poverty, moves to ensure
international financial stability, free trade, the battle
against drug trafficking, the regulation of migratory
movements, with strict respect for the human rights of
migrants, the strengthening of democracy, and the
protection of human rights. Furthermore, on a selective
basis, we think it is appropriate to formulate action
programmes through world conferences, such as the
International Conference on Population and Development,
in Cairo, and the World Summit on Social Development,
in Copenhagen; and the incorporation of women in our
17

society on equal terms on the basis of the recent Beijing
Declaration and Platform for Action.
Drug consumption and trafficking have become one of
the principal threats to the health and welfare of societies,
endangering their economic, political and social structures.
Drug trafficking and related illicit activities, such as the
illegal traffic in arms, money laundering, terrorism,
corruption and other criminal activities, constitute the most
important challenge to the administration of justice in many
countries.
It is essential for the international community to
redouble its efforts to eliminate the demand, production,
supply, trafficking and illegal distribution of drugs. It is
vital to forge new consensus around an international
strategy against drug trafficking. For this reason, the
President of Mexico, Mr. Ernesto Zedillo, has proposed the
holding of an international conference to work out propose
new solutions to this problem. The tenth anniversary of the
United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances seems a
particularly appropriate time for such a gathering.
We trust that the General Assembly at this session will
see merit in and find full justification for our proposal,
which has already been endorsed by a significant number
of countries, and we reaffirm, of course, our readiness to
engage in broad dialogue on the scope and content of this
initiative.
New forms of intolerance, racism and xenophobia
threaten world peace. The United Nations must carry out an
urgent analysis of the growing significance of international
migratory flows in all geographical regions which are today
affected by such destructive attitudes. We call on the
international community to initiate a dialogue which will
make it possible to find constructive solutions to this
phenomenon, in a context of full respect for the human
rights of migrants and their families, including workers’
rights.
Starting with this general debate, the United Nations
is entering upon a period as full as of uncertainty as of
opportunity. The twenty-first century will differ from all the
preceding centuries in that, for the first time, we shall have
the opportunity of building a truly world-wide civilization,
and, by the same token, a set of universal values to guide
and modulate the activity of all States. The emergence of
a collective awareness, the inexhaustible talent of human
beings and the desire that negotiation and understanding
should prevail over any idea of force or imposition are the
cornerstones of a new world order in which there will be
room for the richest and most noble contributions of all
peoples.
In the phase the United Nations is now entering,
Mexico will maintain its unswerving support for the
greatest causes of mankind. As part of this commitment,
we shall bring the moral qualities, the pacifist vocation
and the spirit of solidarity of the Mexican people to bear
on the building of an international system capable of
improving the human condition and ensuring the dignity
and survival of mankind and of the planet that we share
with one another.