It is my special pleasure
to congratulate Mr. Didier Opertti, as the honoured
representative of the Group of Latin American and
Caribbean States, on his election to preside over the fifty-
third session of the General Assembly, and to extend to
him the full cooperation of the Barbados delegation. I
wish also to express our deep appreciation to his
predecessor, Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, for his effective
leadership and management of the fifty-second session of
the General Assembly — the reform Assembly.
This fifty-third session, which is coming to a close
at the dawn of the twenty-first century, compels us to
focus on the preparedness of the United Nations for the
challenges of the new millennium. It could well be a
historic session, if it resolves to equip and re-energize the
Organization to seize this great moment.
The process of global reform is under way. Barbados
strongly supports the proposals of the Secretary-General,
particularly those aimed at improving the Organization?s
efficiency and effectiveness. My delegation is pleased
with the encouraging start to this process. We would
caution, however, against reforms that are driven unduly
by staff reduction targets or predetermined by budgetary
constraints. To do so could well jeopardize
implementation of the very Programmes of Action of the
global conferences — from Rio to Rome — which
constitute the global priorities endorsed by Member
States.
Meaningful reform also obliges us to come to terms
with the financial crisis which has constrained the
Organization far too long, injuring its integrity and
necessitating the use of creative accounting methods to
keep it afloat. Prolonged non-payment of arrears by the
largest contributor is not a proud legacy to the United
Nations of the twenty-first century. Let us put this
Organization on a sound financial footing through prompt
29

settlement of arrears, without conditions, consistent with our
Charter obligations.
Reform of the Security Council is also a key
imperative if the United Nations is to remain relevant in the
twenty-first century. In particular, the Council must better
reflect the Organization?s current membership, and it must
conduct its deliberations with greater transparency.
The growing threat to global peace and security has
put the Organization?s capacity to cope under considerable
stress, underscoring the urgent need to streamline and
modernize its peacekeeping machinery. We envisaged that
the end of the cold war would usher in a new era of peace
and stability, but the changed nature of conflict has found
the Organization?s traditional machinery ill-equipped and
the political will to act severely constrained, even in the
face of unthinkable crimes against humanity.
That is why my delegation hails the successful
outcome of the recent Conference of Plenipotentiaries held
in Rome, resulting in the creation of a permanent
International Criminal Court. This landmark Statute is a
fitting complement to the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, whose fiftieth anniversary we celebrate this year.
We are pleased to recall that it was the delegation of
Trinidad and Tobago that introduced the item on the
creation of an international criminal court at the forty-fourth
session of the Assembly, in 1989.
The post-cold-war world has not become a safer place.
New eruptions of strife and the intractability of old conflicts
have worsened the fragile political situation in many
developing countries. Such instability has diverted energies
and resources from the policy priorities of sustainable
development and poverty reduction. Ninety percent of
today?s conflicts take place within countries, not between
countries. And the majority of casualties are civilians, not
soldiers; thus the heightened international concern with the
loss of life and disability of thousands of innocent victims
every year. Barbados therefore joined 121 States in Ottawa
last December in signing the Convention on the Prohibition
of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-
Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction. Its entry into
force by 1 March 1999 will come not a moment too soon.
Barbados recognizes the growing danger under which
United Nations peacekeepers carry out their duties and
laments the recent loss of life at a number of stations. We
appeal to all parties to conflicts to respect the neutral role
of these brave and dedicated servants of peace, and turn to
reconciliation and compromise; only then will they be able
to foster the domestic stability that is so critical for
sustained economic growth and for improving the living
standards of their people.
The widening scene of strife and instability threatens
global peace and security on a number of fronts. Stalled
negotiations between Israel and Palestine have renewed
our anxiety about the prospects for peace in a region
weary of conflict. The arm of terrorism has now reached
countries hitherto spared from this scourge. International
trafficking in illegal drugs and arms — in particular,
small arms — poses the most serious threat to democracy
and society in small States.
Nuclear tests have created new fears about the
proliferation issue. We will continue to support the goals
of non-proliferation, leading to the elimination of all
nuclear weapons.
Barbados will continue to condemn, in the strongest
terms, all acts of terrorism. We will work assiduously
with regional partners, the United Nations International
Drug Control Programme, and the international
community to implement the Barbados Programme of
Action to fight the scourge of drug-trafficking.
The lesson of this security situation is clear.
Remedies are beyond the capacity of individual countries,
even the most developed. The reality of global
interdependence demands a greater commitment to
collective security goals and better coordination of actions
against the global security threat.
I now turn briefly to another dimension of the global
security problem — namely, human security. In this
connection, let me acknowledge the debt of gratitude
which developing countries owe to the distinguished
Pakistani economist, the late Mahbub ul Haq, my friend
and colleague. More than any other, he made the human
condition central to modern development thinking,
especially through his pioneering work in the Human
Development Report series of the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP). His intellectual
contribution to the debate on sustainable development and
poverty reduction was substantial. It focused policy
attention on people, and in particular on the plight of
more than one fifth of the world?s population that lives in
conditions of poverty and hopelessness.
This concern with the right to development for all
people should be a central component of the discussion
on globalization and liberalization and the impact of these
30

phenomena on developing countries, especially the poorest
countries. We believe the United Nations must be the
conscience of the international community on behalf of the
poor and vulnerable in this global conversation.
My delegation therefore welcomed the recent high-
level dialogue of the General Assembly on the social and
economic impact of globalization and interdependence and
their policy implications. We found the discussions
instructive. There was broad agreement that the process of
globalization has opened new possibilities for faster
economic growth and improved living standards through the
free flow of capital across borders. However, many
developing countries have not yet shared in the fruits of this
process. And while the benefits are obvious, the associated
risks, though grave, are less evident. Who would have
envisaged that the East Asian economies would be engulfed
by a financial crisis of such a scale, and to such a degree
of volatility and dislocation as to threaten the very fabric of
their societies and, indeed, the global economy?
While many questions have been raised about the pros
and cons of unrestricted capital flows which underlie this
crisis, and the role of the Bretton Woods institutions in this
global order, reassuring answers are few. Clearly, the crisis
points in part to deficiencies in the global architecture and
governance of finance. We discern a world economy so
radically altered from that of even a decade ago that we are
obliged to focus on the deficit in our understanding of how
it works, and on how to design a new structure for its
orderly governance. Since there is as yet no settled
approach to adjustment policy towards globalization — in
particular, measures to protect the poor and vulnerable
groups — the voice of the United Nations must be raised
in debate on these critical areas of enquiry.
Small island developing States, given their
vulnerability to both environmental and economic shocks,
are following with much anxiety these developments in the
global economy. We welcome a number of ongoing studies
on the vulnerability of small island developing States. In
December 1997, an Ad Hoc Expert Group Meeting on
Vulnerability Indices for Small Island Developing States,
convened by the United Nations Secretariat, concluded that
as a group, small island developing countries are more
vulnerable than other groups of developing countries. More
recently, a high-level committee established by the
Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, and chaired by
The Right Honourable Owen Arthur, Prime Minister of
Barbados, held consultations with key international
agencies, including the World Bank, the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Trade Organization
(WTO), on the vulnerability of small island developing
States, particularly in the current global situation.
As if to reinforce this reality, just a few days ago
hurricane Georges dealt us a brutal reminder, wiping out
in a matter of hours economic growth which took years
to accumulate. We lament the heavy loss of life and the
widespread destruction of property in a number of our
sister islands of the Caribbean, as well as in the southern
United States. We join in the appeal for urgent
international assistance.
Barbados shares with developing countries the
growing concern about the impact of globalization and
liberalization, given its limited resource base and technical
capacity. We recognize that adaptation to this irreversible
process is an imperative, not an option, and that countries
will pay a high price for policy of inaction. Barbados is
therefore implementing a broad program of social,
economic and institutional reform to better manage rapid
global change while deepening its integration into the
regional economy, especially the Caribbean Community
(CARICOM). The recent conference of heads of
Government, held in Saint Lucia from 30 June to 4 July,
marked the silver jubilee of CARICOM, and gave further
impetus to the process towards a single market and
economy.
In response to the increasing policy demands of
globalization, CARICOM States have established
technical machinery, under high-level political direction,
to underpin regional negotiations under way within the
hemisphere. These negotiations will lead to a Free Trade
Area of the Americas (FTAA) in 2005. This will be the
largest and most differentiated of regional trading blocks.
We recognize that technical support will be required on
an ongoing basis to ensure that small States develop the
capacity to negotiate effectively, share equitably in the
benefits of trade and secure transition arrangements on
entry that will minimize economic dislocation.
At the wider international level, Barbados was
pleased to host in May 1998 the sixty-seventh session of
the Council of Ministers of the African, Caribbean and
Pacific (ACP), as well as the meeting of the twenty-third
joint ACP-European Union (EU) Council of Ministers.
These consultations focused on future ACP-EU relations,
in particular, the structure of cooperation following the
expiration of the Lomé Convention in the year 2000.
Following those gatherings, Barbados assumed the
presidency of the ACP Council of Ministers, which will
31

today, 29 September, launch formal negotiations for
successor arrangements to the Lomé Convention. Here
again, the participation of CARICOM will be bolstered by
the technical work and direction of the regional negotiating
mechanism. CARICOM States will seek opportunities for
fruitful cooperation and information-sharing with other ACP
members during the course of these critical negotiations.
Even a passing reference to ACP-EU relations triggers
our concern about the long-standing and still unresolved
issue of banana exports from CARICOM States to the
European Union. The WTO decision on this matter, if
implemented, will have a devastating impact on affected
countries? economies and on the livelihood of large sections
of their populations. Moreover, it would create uncertainty
about investment and the overall prospects for development
in the region. CARICOM States remain deeply seized of
this question and hope that a satisfactory solution of this
grievance can be reached soon.
My delegation looks forward to the special session of
the General Assembly in September 1999, at which the
Barbados Programme of Action for the Sustainable
Development of Small Island Developing States will be
reviewed. Within the framework of the Alliance of Small
Island States (AOSIS), we will participate actively in the
preparatory process, including the planned donors?
conference in February 1999. We believe that conference
will provide a useful opportunity to foster support for a
portfolio of priority projects that will boost implementation
of this Programme over the next several years.
We attach similar importance to the meeting of the
Commission on Sustainable Development scheduled for
April 1999, which will help deepen our preparation for the
special session. That meeting will focus on sustainable
tourism and oceans, the virtual lifeline of small island
developing States. It will underline our concern with the
preservation and sustainable management of our marine
resources and highlight our anxiety over the use of the
Caribbean Sea for the trans-shipment of nuclear and other
hazardous materials through this fragile marine ecosystem.
That is why CARICOM States will seek recognition of the
Caribbean Sea as a special area in the context of
sustainable development.
The special session will be an important landmark in
the implementation of the Barbados Programme of Action.
Barbados is proud of this international Programme that
bears its name. It remains a sound blueprint for policies
which support the sustainable development of small island
developing States, taking into account their special needs
and vulnerabilities. We believe that with the continued
cooperation and support of our international partners we
can strengthen the implementation of the Programme of
Action and consolidate its long-term viability.
Let me conclude by saying that the fifty-third
session of the General Assembly has before it many
critical issues for consideration. My delegation believes,
however, that none has higher priority than renewed
commitment to this indispensable Organization and to the
strengthening of its capacity to meet the challenges of the
new millennium. Small island developing States believe
deeply in the United Nations. It has placed their
vulnerability firmly into the consciousness of the
international community. But more than that, this is the
only institution which embodies the goals of peace and
security, sustainable development, democracy and social
justice, which define our common humanity.
Barbados pledges its full commitment and support to
this universal mission.


Let me first of all,
through you, Sir, congratulate the President of the fifty-
third session of the General Assembly upon his election. I
am confident that our important work will be guided in a
most productive way. I would also like to thank the former
President, Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, for his relentless work
and creativity to bring about consensus on the Secretary-
General?s important reform proposals for the United
Nations.
Before proceeding to my statement, I would like to
report that this afternoon an important resolution on the
situation in Kosovo was adopted by the Security Council.
The resolution is a firm response to a stark reality. The
Council spells out what Belgrade must do now towards
achieving a political situation and to avoid a humanitarian
disaster. Their deeds and not their words will determine
further Security Council action. Also, the Kosovo Albanians
must act in accordance with the demands in the
resolution. As a Council member, and now as its
President, Sweden has worked persistently for such a
clear message to be sent by the Security Council. I trust
that it will be heard and understood.
Sweden aligns itself with the statement made
yesterday by my Austrian colleague, Mr. Wolfgang
Schüssel, on behalf of the European Union.
Economic turbulence, persistent poverty and
environmental degradation provide a sombre background
to this session of the General Assembly. So do crises and
conflicts, terrorism and nuclear test explosions and, of
course, the political and financial realities affecting the
United Nations itself.
We receive early warning signals, but early action
rarely follows. Isolationism and unilateralism could easily
re-emerge.
Many are concerned about the difficulties they face
in meeting the requirements of a globalized international
community. The positive aspects of globalization —
integration and economic progress — offer the best
opportunities we have ever known for achieving peace,
democracy and development. When trade, economies and
financial markets do not recognize any borders, politics
must be global as well.
The United Nations has to continue to reform in
order to remain relevant. The Swedish Government stands
firmly behind the reform efforts of the Secretary-General
to streamline the Organization, to focus more on its core
activities and to introduce a stringent and up-to-date
management culture.
Member States cannot shy away from their
responsibility for the Organization. United Nations reform
is not a cost-cutting exercise, but one of rendering the
Organization more effective. It cannot be reformed under
the threat of political and financial crisis. No Member
State has the right to set conditions for fulfilling Charter
obligations. All debtors must pay their assessed
contribution in full, on time and without conditions.
I will speak today of five key areas for global
response, international cooperation and common action.
First, we must strengthen cooperation to eradicate
poverty. Poverty is not only lack of material resources. It
is also lack of knowledge and influence over one?s own
32

life. It is a question of justice. The principle at stake is that
of equal rights and opportunities for all. A prerequisite for
success in the fight against poverty is that the poor
themselves are involved in a partnership based on common
ethics and mutual trust.
Democracy, development and peace are closely linked.
Empty stomachs do not provide a sustainable ground for
democracy. Individual human security and the security of
the planet must be given as much recognition as the
security of States.
Putting an end to poverty is imperative. Large
economic inequalities and lack of civic infrastructure create
friction between individuals, between groups, between
countries. Marginalization spurs violent conflicts. Security
cannot be seen primarily in a military perspective.
Development and economic integration play a much greater
role in preventing serious conflicts.
In an increasingly globalized world the fight against
poverty is a common interest and a common duty. Only on
the basis of solidarity can we create a world which respects
the equal rights and value of all its people. It will require
not only efforts by poor countries, but also by richer
countries.
Therefore, I regret that only four countries meet the
United Nations aid target of 0.7 per cent of gross national
income. Sweden is proud to be one of them. The seven
largest economies on average contribute only 0.19 per cent.
Free trade still remains to be fully achieved.
Remaining barriers which prohibit poor countries from
making use of their comparative advantages are counter-
productive and must be abolished. The trade policies of
industrial countries should also facilitate regional
cooperation among developing countries.
The Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Debt Initiative
must be strengthened, as the debt crisis creates vicious
circles for weak economies. The international financial
system has proved to be insufficiently adapted to political
and social realities.
Secondly, we must strengthen cooperation to promote
human rights. Societies which respect human rights are
more stable and more peaceful. Repression spurs rebellion,
violence breeds violence.
This year we commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It has given
hope to people all over the world. It has inspired human
rights advocates to expose violations in their own
countries. It has encouraged Governments to take action
to protect and monitor respect for human rights. But
much remains to be done.
Primitive expressions of public vengeance have no
place in a civilized legal system. Today, a majority of the
Member States have abolished the death penalty or placed
it under a moratorium. This is sometimes done in
response to public opinion, but also frequently as a result
of political leadership and with the support of
international norms and standards.
Economic, social and cultural rights create the basis
for a sustainable society with strong democratic
participation. The exploitation of children drastically
illustrates the importance of these rights. A convention on
child labour should be agreed at the next international
labour conference, and urgent national and international
measures should be taken to combat the most disgusting
form of exploitation — child prostitution.
The use of child soldiers is another fundamental and
increasingly frequent violation of the rights of the child.
It is vital to achieve international standards against
involving children under 18 as combatants and to
combine this with practical and preventive measures to
help and protect children in need.
The rights laid down in the Universal Declaration
apply to all. Special norms for vulnerable groups are
necessary to ensure that they can be equal with others.
The principle of non-discrimination is of particular and
critical importance for individuals who belong to ethnic,
linguistic or religious minorities or to indigenous peoples.
This principle should be complemented with national
mechanisms to ensure effective participation in society.
Few measures would be more important to prevent
conflicts within and among States.
The adoption of the Rome Statute for the
International Criminal Court is a milestone in the struggle
against genocide, crimes against humanity and war
crimes. Sweden will become a party, and I urge all States
to do the same. It is imperative to close the gap of
impunity.
Thirdly, we must strengthen cooperation to deepen
democracy. The United Nations should increasingly
become a leader in worldwide efforts to strengthen and
deepen democracy. It is essential to develop civil, open
33

and pluralistic societies; to promote equal participation of
all women and men in political life; and to ensure
independent media, freedom of speech and the rule of law.
I suggest that the time has come to look systematically
at how the United Nations system as a whole can be even
more effectively put to use to promote democracy.
Already in 1795 Immanuel Kant stressed the strong
connection between peace and democracy:
“If the consent of the citizenry is required in order to
determine whether or not there will be a war, it is
natural that they consider all its calamities before
committing themselves to so risky a game.”
(Perpetual Peace)
Democracies seek security in cooperation with one
another rather than through deterrence — in openness rather
than in secrecy. Democracies also have a proven record in
dealing with internal tension and strife without resorting to
violence.
Strengthening democracy helps prevent violent
conflict, by allowing for differing views and interests. A
democratic culture provides the ground for reconciliation.
The common values inherent in democracy also
provide fertile ground for peaceful cooperation to build
society. The free exchange of ideas, people and goods
creates interdependence and common norms. The future
becomes a shared opportunity.
This is illustrated by developments during the last
decade in Sweden?s own neighbourhood, the Baltic region.
For half a century, the Baltic was a deep trench separating
East and West. The same sea today unifies free countries in
blossoming trade, political cooperation and people-to-people
contacts.
Fourthly, we must strengthen cooperation to bring
about disarmament. In May this year, two States — India
and Pakistan — exposed their nuclear ambitions by
conducting a series of test explosions. These aspirations
endanger international peace and security, as well as
stability in the region and international non-proliferation
and disarmament efforts. This was why Sweden and Japan
took the initiative to prepare a Security Council resolution
deploring the testing. After a decade of great promise in the
field of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, the
spectre of nuclear weapons is again at the centre of
attention.
The possession of nuclear weapons — by any
State — cannot be indefinitely accepted as legitimate. On
9 June, I and my colleagues from Brazil, Egypt, Ireland,
Mexico, New Zealand, Slovenia and South Africa made
a joint ministerial declaration on nuclear weapons. In the
declaration, we urge the five nuclear-weapon States and
the three nuclear-weapon-capable States to clearly commit
themselves to eliminating their nuclear weapons and
nuclear capability and to start work immediately on
practical steps to this end. We also set out a series of
mutually reinforcing measures providing a road map to a
world free from nuclear weapons.
At this session of the General Assembly, the eight
nations will follow up the declaration with a draft
resolution. This initiative has already been presented from
this rostrum. We invite all Member States to join us in
supporting this draft resolution and, inter alia, call for the
accession by all States to the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, the entry into force of START
II and negotiations on START III, the prompt de-alerting
of nuclear weapons and the withdrawal of non-strategic
nuclear weapons.
New and forceful impetus is urgently needed to
regain the momentum for nuclear disarmament. It is
necessary to counteract the tendency to assign new
importance to nuclear weapons. These weapons must
neither be given increased emphasis in defence planning
nor be seen as a means to counter threats from other
weapons of mass destruction.
The world needs a new international agenda for
complete nuclear disarmament. We must at the same time
redouble our efforts to rid the world of all biological and
chemical weapons.
The threat of terrorist use of weapons of mass
destruction adds to the urgency of disarmament efforts.
Strict adherence to international agreements, strengthened
verification and controlled weapons destruction are
essential parts of a long-term strategy against terrorism.
International control regimes to limit the transfer of
technology that could be used to produce weapons of
mass destruction as well as other armaments must be
further developed.
The proliferation of small arms and light weapons is
a serious threat to peace, security and development. Such
34

weapons have been the primary cause of casualties in
almost every recent conflict on the United Nations agenda.
Practical and concrete measures — such as collection,
safe storage and destruction in the context of peacekeeping
operations — should be the focus in dealing with small
arms and light weapons. Therefore, the Swedish
Government supports the Mali initiative for a West African
moratorium on the production and transfer of such
weapons.
I warmly welcome the forthcoming entry into force of
the Ottawa Convention. This is a major step in the struggle
against the plague of anti-personnel landmines. Concerted
efforts will be needed to ensure its full implementation as
well as the adherence of the largest military Powers.
Fifthly, we must strengthen cooperation to prevent
armed conflict. Stable peace does not suddenly turn into
military conflict. War normally breaks out after a period of
gradual deterioration. Prevention has the best prospects of
success at the earliest possible stage of such a process.
The need for early action is obvious. Nevertheless,
decisions are taken at a late stage — often too late. There
are strong forces at work which obstruct early action —
forces hiding behind arguments about sovereignty, public
opinion and national interest; forces defining security as
stability and order, rather than dealing with the underlying
causes of conflicts.
After almost two years on the Security Council we are
more convinced than ever of the urgent need to build
political commitment for preventive measures and to
develop, hone and refine preventive instruments. It is a
question of political will. It is a matter of allocating
resources. It is about looking for solutions that are
sustainable over the long term, even when strong forces
want to focus on short-term needs alone.
National responsibility for conflict prevention is
fundamental. International law makes every State
responsible for its international behaviour. States should
also be expected to account for their internal actions, which
often have major external consequences. Sovereignty should
stand for responsibility and accountability.
Conflict prevention is also an international
responsibility. The United Nations possesses a wide array
of instruments for preventive action. Lessons have also
been learned from a wide range of peacekeeping operations.
A new generation of peacekeeping operations is
emerging, often with a flexible mix of civilian, military
and police components. International service is a key task
for the Swedish armed forces, and increasingly also for
the Swedish police.
To be effective, the United Nations — and, in
particular, the Security Council — must act promptly,
unitedly and in unison with regional actors. Several
regional organizations have identified conflict prevention
and peaceful settlement of disputes as key tasks. The
growing network of European security organizations is
one example, cooperation between African States another.
Cooperation with regional actors is crucial but
complex in today?s growing grey zone of conflicts —
domestic in origin but international in impact. They often
involve neighbouring countries as recipients of refugees,
as weapons suppliers or even as participants. In such
situations, the United Nations must be faithful to its
global principles, but must also find a way of engaging
regional actors in peaceful solutions that guarantee the
legitimate security interests of all.
When regional leadership is available, the role of the
United Nations should be one of providing support and,
when international military peace operations are needed,
authorizing and monitoring. When regional leadership is
lacking, the United Nations must be ready to lead.
I have highlighted five key areas and objectives for
the United Nations: the eradication of poverty, the
promotion of human rights, the deepening of democracy,
the achievement of disarmament and the prevention of
armed conflicts.
Yet the uniqueness and strength of the United
Nations lies not in any single field of activity, but in the
totality of them all. Peace, security, democracy, human
rights, social justice, humanitarian relief, sustainable
development and prevention are inseparable.
In a time of difficult political and financial
challenges for the Organization, it is important that we
spell out our expectations and priorities. We will have to
work hard to allow the United Nations to realize its
potential. We owe it to the United Nations — and to each
other — to give it the chance to succeed.


Allow me, at the outset, to congratulate you and the
Government and people of Uruguay on your election as
President of the General Assembly at its fifty-third
session. I would also like to take this opportunity to
express my deep appreciation and gratitude to your
predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, for
his successful and distinguished management of the last
session.
I would be remiss if I failed to pay tribute as well to
the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan,
for his efforts to promote the authority of this
Organization and achieve its noble aims and objectives
and those of its Charter. I note in particular his report on
the work of the Organization, and I emphasize that he
may count on the full support and cooperation of my
delegation in his efforts to establish peace and security in
the world.
Jordan has always believed in the noble aims and
objectives of the Charter of the United Nations. We have
made every possible effort to maintain international peace
and security, particularly in the Middle East, a volatile
region whose peoples have, for over half a century,
suffered from the scourge of war and from conflicts and
disturbances and who have lived under difficult
circumstances characterized by confrontation and
polarization. Jordan, under the leadership of His Majesty
King Hussein Ibn Talal, has always been an oasis of
security and stability. It has always raised the voice of
reason and moderation and as a result has had to shoulder
heavy burdens that have exhausted its natural, financial
and economic resources and placed an additional strain on
its development process.
Throughout the past decades, Jordan has made
continuous efforts to achieve a peaceful and honourable
settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It continues to
strive towards that goal by upholding the peace treaty
which it reached with Israel within the framework of the
Madrid Conference, and it continues to support efforts to
reach an agreement on the Palestinian, Israeli and other
tracks.
However, the peace process remains deadlocked,
despite the efforts to move it forward, including the
initiative being made by the United States on the
Palestinian track. As we recognize the centrality of the
Palestinian track as regards the peace process, we value
the positive stand taken by the Palestinian leadership and
its sincere desire to reach an agreement that would end
5

the deadlock on this track and result in the full and clear
acceptance of this initiative.
We therefore demand that the Israeli Government
declare its full acceptance of the United States initiative,
carry out its commitment under the agreements and remove
all obstacles to reaching an agreement on redeployment and
other outstanding issues. This would make it possible to
achieve real progress on this track with a view to ending
the deadlock, resuming and attaining the objectives of the
peace process and ensuring the legitimate national rights of
the Palestinian people, including the right to establish their
independent State on their national territory.
Citing security considerations as pretexts for
obstructing actual progress will further undermine the
security of every party in the region. Security cannot be
enhanced except through a just and honourable peace, one
which is convincing to the peoples of the region and one
which they can defend.
The occupied city of Jerusalem has been the most
important component of the Arab-Israeli conflict throughout
its various stages. It is part of the Arab territories occupied
in 1967. Therefore, any consideration that apply to those
territories also apply to Jerusalem, in particular Security
Council resolution 242 (1967).
We call upon Israel to cease and void all actions that
would change the status of the Holy City. Under the Oslo
accords concluded between Israel and the Palestine
Liberation Organization, it was agreed that the final status
of the city was to be decided in final status negotiations.
Any unilateral actions taken before the conclusion of those
negotiations would constitute a violation of the Oslo
accords and of all resolutions of international legitimacy.
Until the status of the city is finally decided, it should
remain open to all adherents of the three divine,
monotheistic religions. Jordan has for many years assumed
responsibility for maintaining the sanctity of the city of
Jerusalem and has also taken it upon itself, under the
circumstances of the occupation, to take care of and
preserve the Holy Places.
On the other hand, Israel should desist from all
unilateral actions against the Palestinian people, such as
closures, sieges, arrests, the demolition of homes, the
confiscation of land and the building of settlements in the
occupied Palestinian territory, including Jerusalem. Israel
must lift the restrictions that hinder the development of the
Palestinian economy and enable the Palestinian people to
start establishing normal economic relations with the
outside world, free from domination and from economic
control. It must also deal with the Palestinian people as
its partners in the peace process, partners who are looking
forward to living side by side with Israel on the basis of
good neighbourliness and equality, not as a people under
occupation.
With regard to negotiations on the other tracks,
Israel must prove its seriousness about resuming
negotiations with Syria and Lebanon from the point at
which they ended, ensuring its withdrawal from the
Syrian Arab Golan to the borders of 4 June 1967,
implementing Security Council resolution 425 (1978) by
unconditionally withdrawing from southern Lebanon and
reaching peace agreements with both of them, on the road
towards achieving a comprehensive peace in the region.
Five decades have passed since the tragedy of the
Palestinian refugees began. The United Nations Relief and
Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East
(UNRWA) continues to carry out its duties towards the
Palestinian refugees — a recognition by the international
community of its responsibility with regard to this
tragedy. However, in recent years UNRWA has been
suffering from severe financial crises, which sometimes
threaten to suspend or put an end to its services and the
completion of its work. We would therefore like to
emphasize once again that Jordan attaches the utmost
importance to the continuation of UNRWA?s work,
especially given the fact that Jordan hosts the largest
number of Palestinian refugees and provides services to
them above and beyond the budget of UNRWA.
Jordan has consistently called for UNRWA to
continue its work until the refugee problem is completely
resolved through the return of refugees to their land and
homes and/or their compensation in accordance with
General Assembly resolution 194 (III). The expiry of the
five-year transitional period under the Oslo accords does
not mean that UNRWA?s mission is over or that there is
no longer any need for it to exist. The basic condition for
the end of UNRWA?s mission is an agreement on a final
solution to the refugee problem and on the full and
complete implementation of that agreement.
We understand the continued existence of UNRWA
and its work from three perspectives: the human, the
political and the legal. To ignore any of them would
prejudice international responsibility for the tragedy of the
refugees, who have been displaced from their homes. We
therefore appeal to the donor countries to continue to
make contributions to UNRWA, increasing them as much
6

as possible in proportion to the natural increase in the
numbers of refugees and the need to satisfy their basic
humanitarian needs. We also appeal to all financially able
States to provide the necessary financial support to
UNRWA.
We draw your attention to the fact that were UNRWA
to stop providing services to refugees, this would in itself
constitute an additional obstacle to the peace process, in
addition to destabilizing the region through the frustration
caused by increased poverty among the refugees and the
deterioration of their economic situation.
It is indeed sad that while the world celebrates the
fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights we still talk about the
deteriorating situation of the Palestinian refugees and their
human basic rights. On this occasion, we are called upon to
work for increased commitments to respect and to find an
effective international mechanism to implement
international instruments relative to human rights, away
from selectivity and double standards. We are also called
upon to establish a balance between these international
instruments, on the one hand, and the national systems and
laws in force in various countries of the world, without
prejudice to the principle of State sovereignty, on the other.
We therefore feel that we should recall the appeal made
from this rostrum by His Royal Highness Crown Prince El-
Hassan for the establishment of a new international
humanitarian order. In this spirit, my country participated
and supported the adoption of the Statute of the
International Criminal Court in Rome earlier this year.
Cooperation and coexistence among different religious
and ethnic groups requires a formula for dialogue among
civilizations and religions to replace the concepts of conflict
and fear of foreigners which has emerged recently.
Dialogue among religions will highlight the common
denominators among the different beliefs of the world?s
peoples and would explain their foundations to the other
parties, thereby making it easier to understand and to
coexist with one another.
The desired inter-religious dialogue is the best way to
confront the incipient manifestations of animosity and the
attempts to distort the image of Islam and Muslims,
whether those living in their home countries or those who
have emigrated to non-Muslim countries. It is necessary to
have a deeper understanding of Islam and the Muslims,
away from the blind bigotry which leads to unfair
generalizations about, and the stereotyping of, over one
billion Muslims. From that narrow view, bigotry leads to
animosity towards Islam and the Muslims on the basis of
actions committed by a minority which is farthest
removed from Muslims and the tolerant concepts of
Islam.
The question of human rights leads us to mention
the continued suffering of the Iraqi people over the past
eight years as a result of economic sanctions. While we
call upon the Government of Iraq to fully and
meticulously comply with all Security Council resolutions,
to cooperate fully and constructively with the United
Nations towards that end and to commit itself to
repatriating Kuwaiti prisoners of war and missing persons,
we call upon the international community to relieve the
suffering of the Iraqi people. We also emphasize the
independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of both
Iraq and Kuwait.
Other peoples in the region, like the Libyan and
Sudanese peoples, have suffered and continue to suffer
from sanctions. Others who were not targeted by
sanctions have also suffered from the impact of these
sanctions. My country, Jordan, was the first to suffer
tremendous damage to its economy as a result of the
sanctions imposed on Iraq. Nevertheless, we have not
only patiently persevered; we have made our best efforts
to abide by Security Council resolutions out of respect for
international legitimacy.
Weapons of mass destruction constitute a dangerous
source of tension and instability. The Middle East region
has been afflicted with the existence of these weapons.
Perhaps the ideal solution to dispose of weapons of mass
destruction and to end the tension and instability caused
by their presence is by concluding international treaties
establishing zones free from nuclear weapons and other
weapons of mass destruction in various regions of the
world, including the Middle East.
We view with utmost concern nuclear tests carried
out recently in South-East Asia in the context of an arms
race which, if continued, would have extremely dangerous
consequences. A majority of the world?s countries have
for a long time committed themselves to international
guarantees that would prevent the proliferation and use of
nuclear weapons. It is very unfortunate that some would
depart from this moral commitment which had previously
prevented them from falling into the trap of a vain
nuclear arms race in that region. In this regard, we call
upon all countries that have not yet done so to accede to
the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) in
order to safeguard international peace and security and
7

contribute to the attainment of the goal of general and
complete disarmament. This would enable humanity to rid
itself of the terror of nuclear weapons and other weapons
of mass destruction.
We view with particular sensitivity the threat posed by
weapons of mass destruction. Israel possesses and is
developing a nuclear-weapons arsenal. The possibility of a
confrontation between it and other States that have such
weapons or other weapons of mass destruction, such as
chemical and biological weapons, makes us live under the
threat of these weapons and the dangers of their use at any
moment. Therefore we demand that a regional security
mechanism be established and that a forum be established
to discuss this matter in a way that would ensure the
removal of this threat. In this context, there is a need to
establish conflict-resolution and conflict-prediction centres
in the region to anticipate such disputes before they occur
and to prevent them from happening and escalating.
The comprehensive concept of security — a concept
that is in conformity with the new developments and
concepts that have matured recently, particularly after the
end of the cold war and the disappearance of the policy of
polarization — has become a wide concept that carries
within it all concerns and problems — economic, social,
political and humanitarian. These problems may lead to the
marginalization and frustration of large sectors of society
that would in turn sow the seeds of instability and
disturbances which lead to the escalation of existing
disputes and the creation of new ones. It would also lead to
the growth and spread of terror to a disturbing extent.
Jordan has for so long called for the rooting out of the
scourge of terrorism by eliminating its causes and by
establishing justice and political solutions, accepted and
preserved by peoples. We have also called for confronting
terrorism with all the firmness needed and for the concerted
and systematic international action required under the
umbrella of the United Nations, guided by its Charter, to
find appropriate and effective mechanisms to combat
terrorism.
We therefore condemn the two terrorist attacks in
Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam. We also condemn most
strongly terrorist acts of all kinds and forms wherever they
originate. In this context, it is worth noting the ceaseless
efforts made by the Organization of the Islamic Conference,
as emphasized at its Twelfth Summit Conference, held at
Tehran in December 1997, to establish a code of conduct
that would unify State views on terrorism and action by
these States to combat and eradicate it.
The General Assembly is meeting while the world
witnesses conflicts and struggles in various regions like
the Balkans, Asia and Africa. In Kosovo, massacres are
still being committed against innocent civilians despite the
recent Security Council resolution on that question. In
Afghanistan, the Congo and other places, fighting
continues despite international efforts to stop the
bloodshed and find solutions within the framework of the
Charter and the principles of international law.
Peacekeeping operations are among the most
important activities undertaken by our Organization for
the promotion of world peace, security and stability.
Jordan has always believed in the noble goals of these
activities and for several years has participated in them.
The world has made important steps towards the
disposal of anti-personnel landmines, which every year
kill thousands of innocent people and leave thousands
more with permanent disabilities, preventing them from
exercising their natural right to life. In recognition of the
importance of the Convention banning anti-personnel
mines, Jordan has decided to accede to it. Her Majesty
Queen Noor has sponsored the international effort to rid
humanity of this dangerous threat, thereby embodying
Jordan?s belief in the humanitarian dimensions and the
noble goals of the Convention.
During the past few years we have witnessed
developments that have left a deep impact on the world
economy, including the transition to a market economy,
the removal of economic barriers and the trend towards
a globalized economy. Such developments place burdens
on developing countries and their economies. This
requires finding the necessary means to avoid the negative
impact of these developments on these countries and to
help them adapt their economies to the changes and
prepare them to join the World Trade Organization
(WTO).
Among these modalities is a commitment by wealthy
countries to increase official development assistance, to
find comprehensive solutions to the problem of external
debt, to integrate developing countries into the world free-
trade system, and to improve terms of trade.
As a developing country, Jordan has suffered from
economic problems, which grew worse following the Gulf
war of the early 1990s. With the help of the International
Monetary Fund (IMF), Jordan has pursued structural
adjustment policies that have resulted in tangible progress.
Jordan has succeeded in reducing its budget deficit and
8

the size of its external debt. It has improved its
macroeconomic indicators, reformed financial regulations in
its banking sector and energized the role of the private
sector. Yet we still face a difficult economic situation
owing to regional conditions and to the impact on our
economy of the crisis in countries of South-East Asia, with
many of which we maintain close economic ties. Our
exports to those countries have been adversely affected by
the crisis.
Improving the economic situation in our region
requires the removal of barriers and restrictions that
obstruct the flow of goods and services among the countries
of the region, and cooperation among those countries in
confronting the economic and environmental challenges
before us. We are all aware that the problems and
challenges we are confronting are increasing in scope and
in complexity; most of them defy individual or immediate
solution. We need increased cooperation to deal with them
on the basis of the interdependence and interrelationship of
events throughout the world.
We live in one world, a world in which distances are
shrinking and barriers disappearing. For international
cooperation in the interest of humanity to be sustainable,
we must all avoid confrontation and abide by international
law. No State should be above the law. We must therefore
foster democracy in the international system; that system
should be free of hegemony and inequality. The United
Nations should be viewed as the framework of that
cooperation; this would build smaller States? confidence in
justice.
As we stand on the threshold of the third millennium,
we hope that dialogue among peoples and civilizations will
be strengthened. We hope that attitudes and actions will be
defined by the fact that what we do today will affect future
generations. Our concern for future generations obliges us
to create conditions that are better than those of the past.
We can do this only with mutual understanding and
coexistence, and only with the political will to create a
better world. We are confident that future generations
deserve that from us, and we are confident that we can
provide it.


Allow me, first of all, to congratulate you, Mr.
President, on your election to the presidency of the
General Assembly. Secondly, allow me to express the
profound regard and warm ties that unite Argentina and
Uruguay, an ongoing relationship that was already under
way at the beginning of the nineteenth century.
We also extend our appreciation to Ambassador
Udovenko for the courage, balance and impartiality he
exhibited during the course of his mandate.
In a globalized world, peace and security, economic
stability and growth are more than ever indissolubly
linked. The economic and financial crisis that concerns us
today should boost our commitment to the economic
reform process which we are carrying out in our region.
Trade and foreign investment are clearly sources of
opportunity and incentives to growth and competitiveness.
But it is also clear that in recent decades the free
movement of capital flows has been one of the main
engines of economic development for many countries.
19

In order to dispel its negative effects, globalization
requires educational, social and environmental policies that
benefit all of society in a balanced and equitable manner.
We feel it is damaging to succumb to the temptation of
imposing restrictions on international trade in order to
thwart the spread of economic crisis, or to resort to
hampering or placing conditions on the flow of financial
resources in order to moderate their volatility.
In Latin America, countries such as Argentina have
made sustained and coherent efforts to consolidate their
financial situation, contain the budget deficit and provide
assurances to foreign investment by helping to create a
solid economic environment for the region, which is
increasingly being seen with new eyes.
A few days ago, the Presidents of the Rio Group,
meeting in Panama, expressed their resolve to continue
managing economic policy mechanisms in a responsible
manner that guarantees stability and growth. Accordingly,
financial institutions and those countries with the capacity
to provide assistance should understand the problems that
this critical economic situation presents to countries that
find themselves in the eye of the storm and act accordingly.
The Southern Cone Common Market (MERCOSUR)
is today a model of economic foundations based on
freedom and democracy in which cooperation is the very
essence of the system.
As an illustration of the excellent relations in the area
of security and defense, Argentina pressed for the adoption
of the Political Declaration of MERCOSUR, Bolivia and
Chile as a Zone of Peace, which was signed at the
MERCOSUR summit held in Argentina on 24 July 1998.
The recent nuclear tests in South Asia constituted a
step backwards with regard to regional and global security.
These tests delay the economic development and well-being
of the population. Argentina, together with countries that
have renounced the military use of nuclear technology, has
urged the States of that region to stop conducting tests and
to adhere to the international instruments in force.
Argentina, for its part, has offered to share fully its
experience in peaceful nuclear cooperation. Allow me to
recall that Argentina was the first country that, having
mastered the nuclear fuel cycle, chose to limit its own use
of this technology.
We feel proud of the steps our country has taken in
the last decade related to non-proliferation issues. In the
nuclear field, we ratified the Treaty for the Prohibition of
Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean
(Treaty of Tlatelolco) in 1994 and the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) in 1995, and
have become a member of the Nuclear Suppliers Group.
In the chemical and bacteriological field, we have
promoted the Joint Declaration on the Complete
Prohibition of Chemical and Biological Weapons â€” the
Mendoza Agreement â€” of 1991, a commitment originally
limited to Argentina, Brazil and Chile, which was later
extended to most Latin American countries. We have also
adjusted our domestic legislation strictly to control
exports related to dual-use chemical, bacteriological and
missile-related substances and technologies, in accordance
with existing international instruments. Last July, as a
follow-up to the Mendoza Agreement, we adopted the
Ushuaia Declaration, which established the Southern Cone
Common Market (MERCOSUR) as an area free of
weapons of mass destruction. Hence, Argentina has taken
the decision to assume greater responsibility in this field.
In turn, this decision has allowed us to continue
exchanges of advanced technology.
In relation to conventional weapons, we strongly
support the United Nations Register of Conventional
Arms, to which we regularly provide information. We
also support other important initiatives recently adopted
within the framework of the Organization of American
States (OAS), such as the Inter-American Convention
against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in
Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and Other Related
Materials and Other Appropriate Actions. Small arms
constitute another source of international concern. It is
worth mentioning that regional and international seminars
have recently been held in Buenos Aires on this topic.
We are not indifferent to the grave scourge of
antipersonnel mines. In 1995, Argentina established a
moratorium on the export of mines and more recently, in
December 1997 at Ottawa, I had the honour to sign, on
my countryâs behalf, the Convention on the Prohibition of
the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-
Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction.
In our hemisphere we work earnestly and in a spirit
of compromise to overcome all differences by means of
negotiation. As we gradually resolve the few pending
bilateral disputes, we will definitively consolidate our
region as a zone of peace. We trust that in coming
months we shall see important developments in that
regard. Friendship among peoples is the best guarantee
against conflict.
20

We are convinced that the United Nations presence in
Haiti, in keeping with the desire of the Government of that
country, will help to consolidate democracy and contribute
to the prosperity of the Haitian people.
The resurgence of terrorist attacks comes as a harsh
reminder that no State is immune to terrorism. My country
firmly supports the initiatives under way to supplement with
new conventions the network of anti-terrorism norms now
in force, leading to enhanced international cooperation and
to establishing the obligation of all States to bring to justice
and punish those responsible for these acts. The Argentine
Government continues to make every effort to clarify the
acts of terrorism committed against the Israeli embassy and
the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association in Buenos Aires.
Let me highlight the fact that on 2 September 1998 the
Argentine Republic signed the International Convention for
the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings. Likewise, next
November Argentina will host the second specialized inter-
American conference on terrorism.
Severe global humanitarian crises, usually
accompanied by forced displacement of populations,
constitute another issue that affects international peace and
security. Argentina has joined in the international
communityâs efforts, with bilateral assistance programmes
and with such initiatives as the â€œWhite Helmetsâ€ initiative.
In that context, intergovernmental and non-governmental
organizations devoting their energies to the solution of this
type of crisis deserve our recognition.
To grow and develop, peoples need to live in peace.
We are dismayed to see that conflicts which could be
overcome, such as those in Cyprus, the Middle East, the
Great Lakes region of Africa, Angola and the Balkans,
particularly Kosovo, persist in spite of the international
communityâs efforts to resolve them. The situation of
refugees, especially children, who are victims of these
conflicts is a source of particular concern.
In 1998 Argentina will mark the fortieth anniversary
of its participation in peacekeeping operations. Our
contribution has cost the lives of Argentine citizens who
helped to make this a more secure and stable world. The
vast experience acquired over these 40 years has been
embodied in the Argentine joint training centre for
peacekeeping operations, and in the Argentine gendarmerie
training centre that specializes in civilian police operations
abroad.
Argentinaâs natural interest in the South Atlantic is
reflected in our participation in the Zone of Peace and
Cooperation of the South Atlantic, which brings together
24 African and Latin American countries from both
shores of the Atlantic. I am particularly proud to
announce that, on 21 and 22 October, Argentina will be
the site of the fifth Ministerial Meeting of the countries
members of the Zone.
Unfortunately, there remains an important unresolved
issue in the South Atlantic: the sovereignty dispute
between the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom
of Great Britain and Northern Ireland over the Malvinas
Islands, a dispute whose existence has been unequivocally
recognized in many resolutions of the General Assembly
and of the Special Committee on the Situation with regard
to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting
of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, as
well as in various other international forums. I reiterate,
with the same conviction as always, the legitimate and
well-founded rights of Argentina in that long-standing
dispute. And, with the same conviction as always, I urge
the United Kingdom to heed the call of the international
community and observe United Nations resolutions calling
upon both Governments to resume negotiations on all
aspects of this question.
The end of the cold war showed us that far more
complicated problems have been resolved through frank,
open dialogue and with a determination to reach a
mutually acceptable agreement. I see no reason why the
question of the Malvinas Islands should be an exception.
Proceeding on firm footing, we have rebuilt our bilateral
relationship and, for the benefit of the Argentine and
British peoples, have strengthened political, trade and
cultural ties. Evidence of this is the visit which President
Carlos Menem is to make to the United Kingdom in the
near future, for which both parties are engaged in
enthusiastic preparations and which has generated high
expectations at all levels.
Similarly, we have left behind the misgivings and
resentments of the past, learning from our mistakes and
creating a climate of mutual trust in the South-West
Atlantic, which is today enabling us to cooperate in the
conservation of fishery resources and in exploration for
hydrocarbons. That cooperation renders still more
incomprehensible todayâs lack of communication between
the islands and the mainland. There are few places in the
world with such an unnatural situation. It is beyond doubt
that restoring direct ties between the mainland and the
21

islands would contribute to resolving the problem. We have
no doubt about this.
Once again, I expressly reiterate Argentinaâs sincere
desire to pursue a frank dialogue without preconditions. We
hope that the British Government understands the full
meaning of our offer and that it will respond accordingly.
To the islanders I reiterate our unwavering commitment to
full and unconditional respect for their way of life, their
culture and their institutions. Our national constitution so
provides, and that is the desire of the Argentine people.
There have been concrete advances on vital questions.
The creation of a permanent international criminal court is
one such example. Similarly, the recent special session of
the General Assembly devoted to the world problem of
drugs adopted innovative documents of great importance.
This year marks the fiftieth anniversary of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and of the adoption
of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide. In these 50 years, the international
community has become aware of the vital importance of
human rights: today it no longer accepts what was once
tolerated.
The deterioration of the environment, in its various
forms, is one of the problems urgently requiring concrete
answers and effective commitment by governments and
civil society. Argentina will have the honour of hosting the
fourth Conference of the Parties to the Framework
Convention on Climate Change, from 2 to 13 November of
this year.
We are convinced that a substantial part of our efforts
to reform the Organization should be geared to designing a
mechanism of closer and more effective cooperation with
the Bretton Woods institutions.
With regard to reform of the Security Council, we
believe that situations born out of the Second World War
cannot prevail indefinitely. It is necessary to find
democratic solutions that will allow for periodic renewal
within the modalities preferred by each region. The viability
of this reform will necessarily depend on the degree of
consensus reached. There are several aspects to be borne in
mind. The first is that the reform must be legally valid,
which means not forcing interpretations of the Charter with
regard to the majorities required by Article 108. Further,
the reform must be founded on political legitimacy. Any
increase in the number of permanent members should allow
for a rotation open to all States of the respective regions.
The crisis of our Organization is fundamentally one of
participation. Many small and medium-sized countries
feel excluded. Only by allowing greater participation in
the Security Council will we be living up to the
democratic ideals of the end of this century.
The vitality of democratic ideals in the region was
confirmed with the signing on 24 July of the Ushuaia
protocol, which reaffirms the democratic clause in the
countries of the Southern Cone Common Market
(MERCOSUR), Bolivia and Chile.
The visit by the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan,
to the countries of our region last July was a very
significant event. Argentina had the opportunity to
demonstrate its clear commitment to assuming its global
responsibilities. The Secretary-General recognized this,
especially as regards peacekeeping.


I congratulate you, Sir, on
your election to the presidency of the General Assembly
at its fifty-third session. We wish you well in our shared
endeavours in the United Nations and offer you our full
cooperation. We would like to thank your predecessor for
his commitment and contribution, and to commend him
for his work throughout the last year.
I first addressed the Assembly as Foreign Minister
in 1977. Since then I have for many years had the
privilege to attend General Assembly sessions, but
without ministerial responsibility. I acknowledge with
gratitude the confidence of successive Prime Ministers.
To me, this also signifies the consensus on the national
interests and the foreign policy of India. When I
addressed the General Assembly in 1977, it was in many
ways a turning point in the history of India. The Janata
Government was a coalition of many factions, which
united in the restoration of our people?s faith in
democracy. Since then we have had many changes of
Government, but the people?s political awareness and
their faith in the institutions which uphold our
constitutional system has been unwavering. Today, when
I come to this rostrum as Prime Minister, I come on
behalf of another coalition. India has demonstrated that
democracy can take root in a developing country. I am
confident that the Indian experience will prove that
democracy can also provide the basis for stable, long-term
economic growth in developing societies. That is the path
that the people of India have chosen, and I stand before
the Assembly today as the symbol of this new resurgent
India.
16

The world of the 1970s has receded into history. The
shackling constraints of the cold war are gone. The
distinguishing feature of the last two decades has been the
spread of democracy worldwide. By force of example, we
have been one of the authors of the triumph of democracy.
From this flows our desire to see the democratization of the
United Nations itself. An international body that does not
reflect, and change with, changing international realities
will inevitably face a credibility deficit. We therefore
support a revitalized and more effective United Nations,
one that is more responsive to the concerns of the vast
majority of its Member States and is better equipped to
meet the challenges that are ahead of us in the twenty-first
century.
The Security Council does not represent contemporary
reality; it does not represent democracy in international
relations. Following the end of the cold war, it acquired the
freedom to act, but experience shows that the Council has
acted only when it was convenient for its permanent
members. The experience of Somalia does not do credit to
the Security Council — and there are other examples too.
Peacekeeping operations cannot be a reflection of ulterior
political priorities and perceptions.
There is only one cure: to bring in new blood. The
Security Council must be made representative of the
membership of the United Nations. Developing countries
must be made permanent members. This is a right to which
the developing world is entitled. The presence of some
developing countries as permanent members is inescapable
if the responsibilities of the Security Council are to be
effectively discharged, particularly when we see that the
Council acts almost exclusively in the developing world. It
is only natural that on decisions affecting the developing
world, these countries should have a say, on equal terms.
Along with other measures, the Security Council too must
be reformed, expanding its non-permanent membership so
that more developing countries can serve on it. But that
alone is not enough, because as long as effective power in
the Council rests with the permanent membership, the
interests of the developing world will not be promoted or
protected unless developing countries are made permanent
members on a par with the present permanent members.
Only this will make the Council an effective instrument for
the international community in dealing with current and
future challenges.
The new permanent members must of course have
the ability to discharge the responsibilities that come with
permanent membership. India believes it has that ability,
and, as we have said before from this rostrum, we are
prepared to accept the responsibilities of permanent
membership, and believe we are qualified for it.
It will be a great day when democracy becomes the
universal norm, and when the United Nations reflects that
democracy in its institutions and functioning. However,
open democratic societies have one scourge to contend
with: terrorism. The challenge before countries like mine
and other democracies is to maintain our openness,
safeguard individual rights, and at the same time give no
quarter to terrorists. Several speakers before me have
recounted the terrible toll that terrorists have exacted
worldwide, taking advantage of the trust that characterizes
open societies. I recall that the Group of Seven summit
almost two decades back identified terrorism as one of the
most serious threats to civilized societies. Events since
then, including the blowing up of the Air India Kanishka
aircraft and the Pan Am flight over Lockerbie, and the
recent bombings in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam, have only
established the correctness of that judgement.
Terrorism is one threat that affects us all equally.
Terrorism takes a daily toll around the world. It is the
most vicious among international crimes, and the most
pervasive, pernicious and ruthless threat to the lives of
men and women in open societies, and to international
peace and security. In India, we have had to cope with
terrorism aided and abetted by a neighbouring country for
nearly two decades. We have borne this with patience, but
none should doubt the strength of our resolve to crush
this challenge. Its tentacles have spread around the world.
Today, it has links with illicit trade in drugs and arms and
with money-laundering. In short, terrorism has gone
global and it can only be defeated by organized
international action.
Let us make up our minds once and for all: terrorism
is a crime against humanity. Unilateral steps can hardly
stand scrutiny in an open society, let alone in the eyes of
the international community. It should be the primary task
of all open and pluralist societies to develop collective
means for tackling this menace. At its summit meeting in
Durban, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries called
for an international conference in 1999 to develop such a
collective response. We earnestly recommend that the
1999 conference launch the process of negotiations on an
international convention to provide for collective action
17

against States and organizations which initiate or aid and
abet terrorism.
Now, at the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, there is a growing realization
that economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights
form a seamless web. Analyses carried out in recent years
by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees amply reflect the vicious cycle of how violations
of economic, social and cultural rights inevitably lead to
violations of civil and political rights. In defining its index,
the Human Development Report gives a higher weighting
to economic criteria for developing countries; this weighting
is reduced for developed countries, highlighting the
importance of the right to development for developing
societies. It is therefore a matter of concern that the
absolutism that some are seeking to advocate in the
promotion of human rights is often at the cost of the right
to development.
India has ratified both the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Other institutions in
our country — the National Human Rights Commission, a
free media and an independent judiciary — all serve to
ensure that the rights set out in international human rights
statutes are enjoyed by all citizens. We also remain
convinced that unless progress is made on economic, social
and cultural rights, including the right to development, the
world will continue to witness international conflict leading
to migrations, displacement of people and human rights
abuses.
In the closing years of the twentieth century, the
challenge of nuclear disarmament is another of the priorities
facing the international community. We have successfully
prohibited chemical and biological weapons in recent
decades. The present century has witnessed the
development and the tragic use of nuclear weapons. We
must ensure that the legacy of this weapon of mass
destruction is not carried into the next century.
For the last half-century, India has consistently
pursued the objectives of international peace, along with
equal and legitimate security for all through global
disarmament. These concepts are among the basic tenets of
our national security. India has, over the years, sought to
enhance its national security by promoting global nuclear
disarmament, convinced that a world free of nuclear
weapons would enhance both global security and India?s
national security.
The negotiations on a Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-
Ban Treaty (CTBT) began in 1993 with a mandate that
such a treaty would contribute effectively to the non-
proliferation of nuclear weapons in all aspects, to the
process of nuclear disarmament and, therefore, to the
enhancement of international peace and security. India
participated actively and constructively in the
negotiations, and sought to place the Treaty in a
disarmament framework by proposing its linkage with a
time-bound programme for the universal elimination of all
nuclear weapons.
It is a matter of history that India?s proposals were
not accepted. The Treaty, as it emerged, was not accepted
by India on grounds of national security. We made
explicit our objection that, despite our stand having been
made clear, the Treaty text made India?s signature and
ratification a precondition for its entry into force. Mindful
of its deteriorating security environment, which obliged us
to stand apart from the CTBT in 1996, India undertook a
limited series of five underground tests, conducted on 11
and 13 May 1998. These tests were essential for ensuring
a credible nuclear deterrent for India?s national security in
the foreseeable future.
These tests do not signal a dilution of India?s
commitment to the pursuit of global nuclear disarmament.
Accordingly, after concluding this limited testing
programme, India announced a voluntary moratorium on
further underground nuclear test explosions. We conveyed
our willingness to move towards a de jure formalization
of that obligation. In announcing a moratorium, India has
already accepted the basic obligation of the CTBT. In
1996, India could not have accepted the obligation, as
such a restraint would have eroded our capability and
compromised our national security.
India, having harmonized its national imperatives
and security obligations and desirous of continuing to
cooperate with the international community, is now
engaged in discussions with key interlocutors on a range
of issues, including the CTBT. We are prepared to bring
these discussions to a successful conclusion, so that the
entry into force of the CTBT is not delayed beyond
September 1999. We expect that other countries, as
indicated in article XIV of the Treaty, will adhere to it
without conditions.
After protracted discussions, the Conference on
Disarmament in Geneva is now in a position to begin
negotiations on a treaty that will prohibit the production
of fissile materials for nuclear weapons or other nuclear
18

explosive devices. Once again, we are conscious that this is
a partial step. Such a treaty, as and when it is concluded
and enters into force, will not eliminate existing nuclear
arsenals. Yet we will participate in these negotiations in
good faith in order to ensure a treaty that is non-
discriminatory and meets India?s security imperatives. India
will pay serious attention to any other multilateralinitiatives
in this area during the course of the negotiations in the
Conference on Disarmament.
As a responsible State committed to non-proliferation,
India has undertaken that it shall not transfer these weapons
or related know-how to other countries. We have an
effective system of export controls and shall make it more
stringent where necessary, including by expanding control
lists of equipment and technology to make them more
contemporary and effective in the context of a nuclear
India. At the same time, as a developing country, we are
conscious that nuclear technology has a number of peaceful
applications, and we shall continue to cooperate actively
with other countries in this regard, in keeping with our
international responsibilities.
A few weeks ago, at the Non-Aligned Summit in
Durban, India proposed, and the Movement agreed, that an
international conference be held, preferably in 1999, with
the objective of arriving at an agreement before the end of
this millennium on a phased programme for the complete
elimination of all nuclear weapons. I call upon all members
of the international community, and particularly the other
nuclear-weapon States, to join in this endeavour. Let us
pledge that when we assemble here in the new millennium
it will be to welcome the commitment that mankind shall
never again be subjected to the use or threat of use of
nuclear weapons.
The decade of the 1990s has fallen far short of
expectations. Nowhere is this more apparent than on the
global economic scene. The sense of triumphalism that
heralded the wave of global capitalism is now giving way
to caution and realism. What was initially seen as an Asian
flu is now spreading to other continents.
The hypothesis that unfettered capital flows would
foster economic development, with the global financial
markets adjusting the exchange rates, stands falsified. What
we have seen is the growth of a large volume of “virtual
money” that has not been generated by productive
economic activity. But the power of the “virtual money” is
real, evident in the fact that national regulatory mechanisms
are unable to cope with the impact of its rapid movement
in and out of currencies. Its volatility in the short run
follows not economic logic but rumour and sentiment,
with results that are self-reinforcing. In developing
countries and in western financial capitals, there is now
a growing acceptance that premature liberalization of
capital markets has been a primary cause of the current
crisis.
Does it mean that the world should turn back from
globalization? Our answer is an emphatic “No”. Rising
economic interdependence is a phenomenon driven by the
technological imperative, but we must learn how to
manage the change. India has not been affected as
severely as some other countries, largely because we
adopted policies that were more prudent. But a drop in
commodity prices by 30 per cent in a year and a
reduction in net capital flows to the emerging markets by
50 per cent will have a negative impact on growth
everywhere, including in the developed world.
I must emphasize that democratically elected
leadership in an open developing society such as India
also faces another challenge. We cannot let an unbridled
free market system aggravate existing economic and
social disparities. In fact, we need policy instruments to
reduce disparities, thus creating a more stable
environment in the long term. Such policies are necessary
in accountable democracies and are in no way
inconsistent with managed liberalization.
It is high time that we begin a new international
dialogue on the future of a global and interdependent
economy. This is a task for the sovereign States
represented here and cannot be left solely to the dynamics
of an unregulated market place.
I think I speak for all of us when I say that we are
on the threshold of a new age. This is an overused phrase,
but we are all aware that an exciting new universe is
within our reach. Several centuries ago, Isaac Newton
described his scientific discoveries as pebbles on the
beach, while the ocean of truth lay undiscovered. It was
modest of that great scientist to so describe his work, but
I believe that we are now actually sailing
in the ocean of truth. We have made exciting discoveries
and will make many more which will move humankind
forward.
And yet there is also an uneasy feeling that all is not
well. The world is not at ease with itself. In almost all
parts of the world forces are bubbling under the surface
tranquillity that threaten the gains of the last century and
19

seek to lead the world towards bigotry, violence and
unhealthy exclusivism.
India has a message — not a new one, for almost all
religions have expressed the thought before. But we have
preserved the tenets of freedom, equality and tolerance in
our daily lives. If the world of the twenty-first century is to
be a better place than the world we have seen so far, these
values must prevail. History also shows that these are easier
to prescribe than to observe. And yet, as we move towards
ever closer interdependence, there is no alternative. The
world and its leaders must summon the will to rise to the
occasion and enter the new age with a new outlook. This is
the task before us, and I declare India?s readiness to make
its full contribution in the testing times ahead.
I close with an ancient “sloka” from the Rig Ved as
composed thousands of years ago in Sanskrit, the oldest
language in the world:
“Svastir manushebhyaha
Oordhvam Jugatu beshajam
Sam no astu dvipathe
Sam Chathusthpate
Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti”
This means: Let all human beings be blessed with
prosperity. Let all flora and fauna which are life line of all
creatures grow abundantly. Let there be harmony with all
two-legged creations. Let there be harmony with all four-
legged creations. Let there be peace, peace, peace.


This is my first General
Assembly as Prime Minister. I was here as Foreign
Minister, when the waves of change were sweeping away
the cold-war era. I recall the optimism shared by many
about a more humane and harmonious international system.
I remember the sounds of joy as freedom, democracy and
the market economy rang victorious on a global scale.
Indeed, significant changes have taken place since
then. New States have joined the family of nations. A
broader and deeper commitment to contemporary values has
taken root. The international climate long dictated by
ideological divisions has withered away. At no time in
recent history have nations become so close to each other
around shared values.
Yet this is not the full story. The late twentieth
century is full of paradoxes and competing currents. For the
fortunate among us, the world has never offered more —
better education, better health care, greater prosperity. But
these fruits are denied to the vast majority of the planet?s
population. The number of people who live in dire poverty
is growing.
Admittedly, our overall security environment has
improved. But the resurgence of aggression, extreme
ethnic nationalism, tribalism, religious fundamentalism,
racism, xenophobia and cultural discrimination pose new
threats to international peace and stability. Cultural and
religious intolerance is breeding more conflicts than ever
before. International terrorism, openly sponsored by some
States, has become a formidable threat to civilized
societies. The interconnected groups that engage in
terrorism, organized crime and drug-smuggling challenge
our security and well-being.
The threat of nuclear confrontation between the
super-Powers has been eliminated; the danger of the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction still looms
on the horizon.
The two contradictory trends in the world — one
towards fragmentation and conflict, the other towards
globalization and cooperation — require a careful and
sober analysis. This new dialectic defines the framework
in which we have to operate. The integrity of the nation
State, and the demands of an even more interdependent
world must be harmonized and balanced.
The United Nations was our collective response to
the challenges of the past. It was built on the ashes of the
Second World War. The bitter experiences of that war left
their imprint on the Charter, the rules that govern its work
and its structure. To its credit, this Organization has
helped bring peace, prosperity and hope to millions of
people around the globe. Indeed, over a span of 53 years
the United Nations has managed very complex
humanitarian emergencies, from civil wars to the mass
movement of refugees and health epidemics. For millions
of people around the world, the United Nations is not a
faceless institution. It is the difference between peace and
war. It is food for those on the borderline of starvation
and medicine to those on the brink of death. But, above
all, the United Nations remains our hope for a better,
peaceful and secure future.
In this time of challenge and change, the United
Nations is more important than ever. It is here at the
United Nations that we must fight together against the
forces of destruction. It is here that we must strive to
strengthen democratic institutions, to further promote and
protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms, and
to punish those responsible for crimes against humanity.
It is here that we must open the door to development
for many nations trapped in poverty. Their misery is a
24

challenge to all of us. But, above all, the United Nations
must promote justice so that peace may endure.
As we stand at the threshold of a new millennium, it
is our duty to chart a new course for the United Nations
and set a common standard for the behaviour of nations.
I suggest that we should focus greater effort on the
following areas.
The first is preventing conflicts in potential crisis
areas. I believe there is no shortage of information on a
brewing crisis. By the time a crisis is addressed at the
United Nations, it has already taken on critical proportions
and often reached a point of no return. Bosnia is the most
tragic example. Regional organizations should play a more
effective role in defusing tensions from their onset.
Regional organizations and the United Nations should
establish an effective mechanism for coordination and
consultation.
The second area is peace-building. We must devise a
new approach to peace-building to provide lasting security.
Even when a ceasefire is holding or elections have taken
place, the social and institutional grounds appear to be very
shaky. The United Nations must have both a programme
and experts to help countries emerge from conflicts.
The third area is sustainable development. If the
United Nations is to maintain its credibility for its
Members, it must enable people to lift themselves out of
poverty. There must be more effective coordination between
United Nations aid, international efforts and contributions
from donor countries. Obviously, funding is a major
concern, but a coordinated and streamlined strategy is
equally important.
The emphasis recently placed by the United Nations
on the problems of Africa is an encouraging starting point.
It should give direction to our efforts to eliminate poverty
in all regions where we witness human misery.
The fourth area is one standard for all. Despite all
solemn declarations, international conventions and the legal
framework, there seems to be no end in sight to
discriminatory practices and double standards. The division
of the world along religious, ethnic and cultural fault lines
is an invitation to disaster. We must all ensure that no
nation in the world feels discriminated against on the
grounds of its cultural or religious identity.
My final point pertains to the fight against terrorism.
We have to eliminate this major threat to our citizens and
nations. I share the views expressed by President Clinton.
We have to place the combat against terrorism at the top
of our agenda. There must be no excuses, no false
justifications.
The demands on the United Nations have grown
enormously. We all agree that reform is vital. We support
the Secretary-General in his substantive reforms. We
believe that reform must be comprehensive. It must also
include the reform of the Security Council. Piecemeal
efforts and inadequate measures do not offer a solution.
The representative character of the Security Council must
be enhanced to meet the expectations of the largest
segment of the United Nations membership. The Council
must become more responsive and transparent. Reform
must render this organ more accountable, effective and
democratic, so that it can exercise authority and offer
moral guidance.
Turkish foreign policy is defined by a blend of our
history, culture and geostrategic location at the crossroads
of Asia and Europe. It corresponds to the aspirations of
our people for peace, stability and prosperity. As a secular
democratic country with a predominantly Muslim
population, we combine our national heritage with a
strong commitment to modernism.
On all the issues and disputes that figure on the
agenda of the international community, our policies are
clear and consistent. We oppose aggression and believe
that any breach of international law and legitimacy must
not be condoned. We have always advocated the
resolution of disputes through peaceful means and
dialogue. Turkey has been an active actor in the efforts to
contribute to the peaceful settlement of outstanding
disputes. We participate extensively in peacekeeping and
peace enforcement operations.
We live in a region where there are major currents
of instability and conflict. Indeed, almost every major
issue that consumes the international community — from
the Balkans to the Caucasus, from the Middle East to the
Gulf — affects our security and well-being. Conscious of
these challenges, we have assumed an important role in
contributing to the efforts aimed at peacefully resolving
conflicts and preserving security and stability. We are
actively promoting regional peace through regional
cooperation initiatives. Both the Black Sea Economic
Cooperation and the Economic Cooperation Organization
are cases in point.
25

The Balkan region is a test case with regard to the
challenges we face in the post-cold-war era. It is here that
we must prove that multicultural and multi-ethnic societies
have a chance to live in peace and harmony. We thought
that we had all drawn our bitter lessons from the tragedy of
Bosnia and Herzegovina. We must never allow it to happen
again.
However, the recent violence in Kosovo is similar to
what transpired in Bosnia and Herzegovina; it is of the
same making, the result of the same mentality. Within the
territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
Kosovo must regain its autonomous status in a manner that
satisfies all the ethnic groups.
Regional stability is a prerequisite for international
peace. That is why we have taken a number of initiatives
to resolve outstanding problems with some of our
neighbours. A problem that has preoccupied Turkish-
Bulgarian relations for almost half a century has recently
been resolved successfully in good faith by the two
countries. This achievement demonstrates vividly that even
the most complex issues can be resolved if there is political
will and courage on both sides.
Several interrelated problems, mostly pertaining to the
Aegean and inherited from the past, continue to mar
Turkish-Greek relations. It is our ardent hope that these
questions will be addressed between the two countries
through a meaningful dialogue, without excluding any
United Nations-agreed method of peaceful settlement. We
call upon the Government of Greece to dedicate itself to a
dialogue with Turkey.
The question of Cyprus is at a critical juncture. The
course pursued by Greece and the Greek Cypriots poses a
serious threat to the security of the Turkish Republic of
Northern Cyprus and of Turkey. It is also detrimental to
peace and stability in the eastern Mediterranean.
On the military front, the policies of the Greek/Greek
Cypriot camp have heightened tensions on the island. The
clock is ticking for the deployment of the S-300 missile
system.
On the political front, the decision of the European
Union to start accession negotiations with the Greek
Cypriot side has altered all the parameters and the
established framework for a settlement. Regrettably, this
process serves only to perpetuate the division of the island.
Turkey fully supports the initiative tabled at this
critical time by President Denktas¸ on 31 August 1998.
This proposal of historic importance foresees the
establishment of a Cyprus confederation. We believe this
proposal provides a perspective for a just and lasting
settlement. It corresponds to the realities of the island. It
protects the vital and legitimate interests of all the parties
concerned. It aims at preserving the integrity of the
island. It is in line with the United Nations approach to
reaching a freely negotiated and mutually acceptable
settlement to the Cyprus issue.
We believe that the proposed confederation can
finally open an avenue for peace and reconciliation based
on a common destiny for the two peoples in Cyprus.
The impasse in the Middle East peace process and
the continuing plight of the Palestinian people are a
source of great concern for Turkey. An incomplete peace
exposes the Middle East to the risks of further instability.
It also dims the prospects for the people of the region to
enjoy an economically and socially sound future.
Turkey is a friend of the Arab nations. We share a
common history and a rich cultural heritage. We value
these strong bonds. Turkey is also a friend of Israel. We
are, therefore, all the more concerned by the lack of
progress in bringing a permanent state of peace and
stability to the Middle East.
In the same vein, we look forward to the
reintegration into the international community of Iraq,
with its territorial integrity intact, through the full
implementation of the Security Council resolutions and
the lifting of the sanctions.
The crisis in Afghanistan also threatens peace and
stability within the wider context of the region. The
Afghan conflict can only be overcome through inter-
Afghan dialogue and the establishment of a broad-based
Government. The United Nations should have a central
role in this regard.
The overall situation in the Caucasus is a major
destabilizing factor. It has a direct bearing on our security
and well-being. We call for the urgent settlement of the
Nagorny Karabakh dispute and the termination of the
Armenian occupation of Azeri territory. The Armenian
leadership must commit itself to the efforts of the Minsk
Group of the Organization for Security and Cooperation
in Europe. It is our sincere conviction that the interests of
26

the Armenian people will be better served by focusing on
a peaceful future, rather than militancy.
Peace and stability in the Caucasus also require the
resolution of the Georgian/Abkhaz conflict, with full respect
for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia.
Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia are our neighbours,
with which we wish to work together for our common
prosperity and security.
At the threshold of a new millennium, our agenda for
the twenty-first century must be inspired by the vision of
the founding fathers. We must rededicate ourselves to the
purposes and principles of the Charter. We must fulfil our
pledge to succeeding generations. To this end, we must join
our forces to maintain international peace and security.
Turkey, for its part, is prepared to assume its share as
an actor in the preservation of international peace, security
and prosperity. In fact, I would like to take this opportunity
to state from this rostrum that we are a serious contender
for the Security Council in the year 2000. Turkey is eager
to place its assets at the service of regional and global
peace and stability as a member of the Council.
The Charter is a contract among nations to combine
our efforts to realize the aspirations and goals of the
peoples of the world. It is high time that we fulfilled its
terms. It is also time to build on the progress we have made
for the cause of peace, security and prosperity of the global
community. We must now give a new direction to our
efforts. As the world turns a new leaf, let us rise to the
occasion.