Forty-seven years ago I was a young man of 21, and,
like thousands of others of my generation, I had gone off to war to help keep
freedom alive. Forty-seven years ago this month the war was finally over, and
I was looking forward to peace and the chance to begin my life in earnest:
1945 marked a moment of promise, not just for me, but for all of mankind. A
great struggle against dictatorship had been fought and won. Across the
globe, we all looked forward to a future free of war, a world where we might
raise our children in peace and freedom, and this institution, the United
Nations, born amidst the ashes of war, embodied those hopes and dreams like no
other.
But the hopes and dreams of 1945 remained unfulfilled: communist
imperialism divided the world in two, our hopes for peace and our dreams of
freedom were frozen in the grip of cold war, and, instead of finding a common
ground, we found ourselves at Ground Zero. Instead of living on Churchill's
The President returned to the Chair.

"broad, sunlit uplands", millions found that there was, as Arthur Koestler so
chillingly wrote, "Darkness at Noon". Instead of uniting the nations, this
body became a forum for distrust and division among nations and, in a cruel
irony, the United Nations, created to free the world of conflict, itself
became conflict's captive.
I too lived through those disputes; I sat where you sit, proudly so; I
served in this Assembly and I saw, in my time, the consequences of the cold
war's hot words on the higher missions of the United Nations. Now, 47 years
later, we stand at the end of another war, the cold war, and our hopes and
dreams have awakened again. Driven by its own internal contradictions and
banished by the peoples' undying thirst for freedom, imperial communism has
collapsed in its birthplace, and today Russia has awakened democratic,
independent and free; the Baltic States are free; and so too are Ukraine,
Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and the other independent States joining the
nations of Central and Eastern Europe in freedom.
The fear of nuclear Armageddon between the super-Powers has vanished, and
we are proud to have done our part to ensure that our schoolchildren do not
have to practise hiding under their desks for fear of nuclear attack, as the
generation before them did. I am proud also to salute the courageous leaders
with nuclear responsibilities Presidents Yeltsin, Kravchuk, Nazarbayev,
Shushkevich who joined me in ending the super-Power stand-off that risked
nuclear nightmare. This is the first General Assembly session to seat you as
truly independent and free nations, and to you and the leaders of the other
independent States, I say welcome home: we are now truly united nations.

With the cold war's end, I believe we have a unique opportunity to go
beyond artificial divisions of a first, second and third world to forge
instead a genuine, global community of free and sovereign nations, a community
built on respect for principle, on peaceful settlement of disputes, on
fundamental human rights and on the twin pillars of freedom: democracy and
free markets. Already, the United Nations, especially the Security Council,
has done much to fulfil its original mission and to build this global
community.
United Nations leadership has been critical in resolving conflicts and
brokering peace the entire world over, but securing democracy and securing the
peace in the century ahead will be no simple task. Imperial communism may
have been vanquished, but that does not end the challenges of our age,
challenges that must be overcome if we are finally to end the divisions
between East and West, North and South, that fuel strife and strain and
conflict and war.
As we support the historic growth of democracy around the world, I
believe the community of nations and the United Nations face three critical,
interrelated challenges as we enter the twenty-first century.
First, we face the political challenge of keeping today's peace and
preventing tomorrow's wars. As we see daily in Bosnia, Somalia and Cambodia,
everywhere conflict claims innocent lives; the need for enhanced peace-keeping
capabilities has never been greater; the conflicts we must deal with have
never been more intractable, the costs of conflict higher.
Second, we face the strategic challenge of the proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction, truly the fastest growing security challenge to
international peace and order.

Third, we face the common economic challenge of promoting prosperity for
all, of strengthening an open, growth-oriented, free-market international
economic order while safeguarding the environment.
Meeting these challenges will require us to strengthen our collective
engagement; it will require us to transform our collective institutions; and,
above all, it will require that each of us look seriously at our own
Government and how we conduct our international affairs. We too must change
our institutions and our practices if we are to make a new world of the
promises of today, if we are to secure a twenty-first century peace.

With you today I would like to discuss these three challenges:
peace-keeping, proliferation and prosperity. And I should like to use this
opportunity to begin to sketch how I believe the international community can
work together to meet these three challenges and how the United States is
changing its institutions and policies to catalyze this effort.
Let me begin with peace-keeping. The United Nations has a long and
distinguished history of peace-keeping and humanitarian relief. From Cyprus
and Lebanon, to Cambodia and Croatia, the blue beret has become a symbol of
hope amid all that hostility. And the United Nations has long played a
central role in preventing conflicts from turning into wars, and strengthening
peace-keeping capabilities can help buttress these diplomatic efforts. But,
as much as the United Nations has done, it can do much more.
Peace-keepers are stretched to the limit while the demands for their
services increase by the day. The need for monitoring and preventive
peace-keeping putting people on the ground before the fighting starts - may
become especially critical in volatile regions. This is especially the case
because of the rapid and turbulent change that continues to shake Eastern
Europe and Eurasia. Across the lands that once were imprisoned behind an iron
curtain, peoples are reasserting their historical identities that were frozen
in communism's catacomb.
Where this is taking place in a democratic manner with tolerance and
civility and respect for fundamental human rights and freedoms, this new
democratic nationalism is all to the good. But, unfortunately, we need only
look to the bloody battles raging in places such as the former Yugoslavia to
see the dangers of ethnic violence. This is the greatest threat to the
democratic peace we hope to build with Eastern Europe, with Russia and

Eurasia, even more than economic deprivation. We fully support the efforts of
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Conference on Security and
Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), the Western European Union (WEU), the
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and other competent regional
organizations to develop peace-keeping capabilities.
We are convinced, however, that enhanced United Nations capabilities are
a necessary complement to these regional efforts, not just in Europe and
Eurasia, but across the globe.
I welcome the Secretary-General's call for a new agenda to strengthen the
ability of the United Nations to prevent, contain and resolve conflicts across
the globe. Today I call upon all Members to join me in taking bold steps to
advance that agenda. I will therefore be discussing with my colleagues the
merits of a special meeting of the Security Council to discuss the
Secretary-General's proposals and to develop concrete responses in five key
areas.
First, robust peace-keeping requires men and equipment that only Member
States can provide. Nations should develop and train military units for
possible peace-keeping operations and humanitarian relief and these forces
must be available on short notice at the request of the Security Council and
with the approval, of course, of the Governments providing it.
Secondly, if multinational units are to work together, they must train
together. Many nations for example, Fiji, Norway, Canada and Finland have
a long history of peace-keeping and we can all tap into that experience as we
train for expanded operations. Effective multinational action will also
require coordinated command and control and inter-operability of both
equipment and communications. Multinational planning, training, field

exercises will be needed. Those efforts should link up with regional
organizations.
Thirdly, we also need to provide adequate logistical support for
peace-keeping and humanitarian operations. Member States should designate
stockpiles of resources necessary to meet humanitarian emergencies, including
famines, floods and civil disturbances. This will save valuable time in a
crisis.
Fourthly, we will need to develop planning, crisis management and
intelligence capabilities for peace-keeping and humanitarian operations.
Fifthly, we must ensure adequate equitable financing for United Nations
and associated peace-keeping efforts.
As I said, we must change our national institutions if we are to change
our international relations. So let me assure you that the United States is
ready to do its part to strengthen world peace by strengthening international
peace-keeping.
For decades, the American military has served as a stabilizing presence
around the globe. And I want to draw on our extensive experience in winning
wars, in keeping the peace, to support United Nations peace-keeping. I have
directed the United States Secretary of Defense to place a new emphasis on
peace-keeping. Because of peace-keeping's growing importance as a mission for
the United States military, we will emphasize training of combat, engineering
and logistical units for the full range of peace-keeping and humanitarian
activities and we will work with the United Nations to best employ our
considerable lift, logistics, communications and intelligence capabilities to
support peace-keeping operations. And we will offer our capabilities for
joint simulations and exercises to strengthen our ability to undertake joint
peace-keeping operations.

There is room for all countries, large and small, and I hope all will
play a part.
Member States, as always, must retain the final decision on the use of
their troops, of course. But we must develop our ability to coordinate
peace-keeping efforts so that we can mobilize quickly when a threat to peace
arises or when people in need look to the world for help.
I have further directed the establishment of a permanent peace-keeping
curriculum in United States military schools. Training, plainly, is a key
element. The United States is prepared to make available our bases and
facilities for multinational training and field exercises. One such base,
nearby, with facilities is Fort Dix. America used these bases to win the cold
war and today, with that war over, they can help build a lasting peace.
The United States is willing to provide our military expertise to the
United Nations to help the United Nations strengthen its planning and
operations for peace-keeping, and we will also broaden American support for
monitoring, verification, reconnaissance and other requirements of United
Nations peace-keeping or humanitarian assistance operations.
And, finally, the United States will review how we fund peace-keeping and
explore new ways to ensure adequate American financial support for United
Nations peace-keeping and United Nations humanitarian activities. I do
believe that we must think differently about how we ensure and pay for our
security in this new era.
While the cold war may have ended, the super-Power nuclear arms
competition, regional competition, weapons of mass destruction continue. Over
20 countries have, or are developing, nuclear, chemical or biological weapons

and the means to deliver them. At a time when the United States and its
former adversaries are engaged in deep, historic cuts in our nuclear arsenals,
our children and grandchildren will never forgive us if we allow new and
unstable nuclear stand-offs to develop around the world.

We believe the Security Council should become a key forum for
non-proliferation enforcement. The Security Council should make clear its
intention to stem proliferation and sanction proliferators. Reaffirming
assurances made at the time the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons was negotiated, I propose that the Security Council reassure the
non-nuclear States that it will seek immediate action to provide assistance,
in accordance with the Charter, to any any non-nuclear-weapon State party to
the non-proliferation Treaty that is a victim of an act of aggression or an
object of threat of aggression involving nuclear weapons.
I also call for the indefinite renewal of the nuclear non-proliferation
Treaty when it is reviewed in 1995. I believe we must explore ways we can
strengthen linkages between the suppliers "clubs", the nuclear-suppliers
group, the Australia Group, the missile-technology control regime and United
Nations specialized agencies.
Here I would like to note the productive efforts of the United Nations
Special Commission (UNSCOM) to dismantle the Iraqi weapons-of-mass-destruction
programme, and the continuing good work of the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA). But as the United Nations organizations adapt to stop
proliferation, so too must every Member State change its structures to advance
our non-proliferation goals.
In that spirit I want today to announce my intention to work with the
United States Congress to redirect the United States Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency (ACDA) to refocus its talents on providing technical
support for non-proliferation, weapons monitoring and destruction, and global
defence conversion. Under the direction of the Secretary of State, ACDA

should be used not only in completing the traditional arms-control agenda but,
just as importantly, in providing technical assistance on our new security
agenda.
Even as we work to prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
we must be realistic and guard ourselves against proliferation that is already
taking place. Therefore, we are working towards a cooperative system for
defence against limited ballistic missile attacks. We fully intend to have
other nations participate in this global protection system.
While expanded peace-keeping capabilities and improved non-proliferation
efforts will be critical for building an enduring peace, shared economic
growth is the long-term foundation for a brighter future well into the next
century. That is why I stated yesterday, during a moment of international
uncertainty, that the United States would be strongly engaged with its global
partners in building a global economic, financial and trading structure for
this new era.
At the same time, I urged that our global responsibilities lead us to
examine ways to strengthen the Group of Seven (G-7) coordination process, and
I affirmed America's support for a European integration that opens markets and
enhances Europe's capability to be our partner in the great challenges that we
face in this new era. While the exact form of integration is, of course, for
Europeans to determine, we will stand by them.
Economic growth is not a zero-sum process. All of us will benefit from
the expanded trade and investment that comes from a vibrant, growing world
economy. To ensure that the benefits of this growth are sustained and shared
by all, fair and open competition should be the fuel for the global economic

engine. That is why the United States wants to complete the Uruguay Round of
the negotiations within the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) as
soon as possible, and to create a network of free-trade agreements, beginning
with the North American Free Trade Agreement.
At the same time, we need to recognize that we have a shared
responsibility to foster and support the free-market reforms necessary to
build growing economies and vibrant democracies in the developing world and in
the new democratic States. This should be done by promoting the private
sector to build these new economies, not by fostering dependency with
traditional Government-to-Government foreign aid.
After the Second World War, foreign assistance often served as a weapon
in the cold war. Obviously, we will still use critical foreign-assistance
funds to meet legitimate security needs. And, as our humanitarian operations
in Somalia and northern Iraq, Bosnia and the former Soviet Union will testify,
we will continue our robust humanitarian assistance efforts to help those
suffering from man-made and natural disasters.
But foreign aid as we have known it needs to be transformed. The notion
of the handout to less developed countries needs to give way to cooperation
and mutually productive economic relationships. We know this: the more a
nation relies on the private sector and free markets, the higher its rate of
growth; the more open to trade it is, the higher its rate of growth; and the
better a country's investment climate, the higher its rate of growth.
To move from what I would call aid-dependency to economic partnership, we
propose to alter fundamentally the focus of United States assistance
programmes to building strong, independent economies that can become

contributors to a healthy, growing global economy. That means that our new
emphasis should be on building economic partnerships among our private sectors
that will promote prosperity at home, and abroad also. Working with our
Congress I will propose a top-to-bottom overhaul of our institutions that plan
and administer foreign assistance, drastically reducing the bureaucracy that
has built up around Government-based programmes, streamlining our delivery
systems and strengthening support for private-sector development and economic
reform.
The Agency for International Development (AID), another institution born
during the cold war, needs to be fundamentally and radically overhauled.
Promoting economic security, opportunity and competitiveness will become a
primary mission of the State Department. Our assistance efforts should not be
charity. On the contrary, they should promote mutual prosperity. Therefore,
using existing foreign-affairs resources, I will propose creating a $1 billion
growth fund. The fund will provide grants and credits to support United
States businesses in providing expertise, goods and services desperately
needed in countries undertaking economic restructuring.
I will also support significantly increasing the programmes of the
Export-Import Bank to ensure that United States products and technology
promote investment in world-wide economic growth.
The United States will work with its global partners, especially the G-7
nations, to enhance global growth at this key point in world history, as we
end one era and begin another.
None of us can afford insular policies. Each of us must contribute,
through greater coordinated action, to building ¬£ stronger world economy.

I realize that what I have outlined today is an ambitious agenda. But we
live in remarkable times: times when empires collapse, ideologies dissolve
and walls crumble; times when change can come so fast that we sometimes forget
how far and how fast we have progressed in achieving our hopes for a global
community of democratic nations.

And in the face of today's changes, with the loss of so much that was
familiar and predictable, there is now a great temptation for people
everywhere to turn inward and to build walls around themselves walls against
trade, walls against people, walls against ideas and investment, walls against
anything at all that appears new and different.
As the Berlin Wall fell, these walls too must fall. They must fall
because we cannot separate our fate from that of others. Our peace is so
interconnected, our security so intertwined, our prosperity so interdependent,
that to turn inward and retreat from the world is to invite disaster and
defeat.
At the threshold of a new century we can truly say a more peaceful, more
secure, more prosperous future beckons to us. For the sake of our children
and our grandchildren, for the sake of those who perished during the cold war
and for the sake of every man, woman and child who kept freedom's flame alive
even during the darkest noon, let us pledge ourselves to make that future
real, and let us pledge ourselves to fulfil the promise of a truly United
Nations.
Thank you and may God bless you all.


 Once again the nations of the world meet
in full assembly in this Hall to discuss the state of our world, to report on
our actions of the past year, and to express the focus of our intentions in
the coming years. Many of us had hoped that this might be a time for
celebration, a time for rejoicing, as the deep freeze of a lengthy cold war
gave way to the soothing warmth of a new era of enlightenment, understanding,
caring and purpose.
But we have little joy, and our celebration was certainly short-lived.
Whatever insights we may have gained from the cruel and terrible events of the
past half century are sorely needed now, in a world that breeds new forms of
tyranny, hatred and brutality almost on a daily basis. Many people in this
Hall have seen the evidence up close: the bullets, the bodies, and the fear
in ordinary men and women, frequently in their own countries.
There is, however, no need to lose hope: we have the capacity, and we
must continue to build for the future. What we need is the collective will,
and I believe that it is in this United Nations, this global forum, that we
must dedicate ourselves to securing the peace and stability which have evaded
many generations before us, and must build a new world, individual by
individual, nation by nation.
But, we must remove the double standards that are everywhere. What good
are words spoken in this Hall if people at home are unable to speak freely?
Why exercise the art of diplomacy here, if it is not supported at home by the
science of justice and the skilful application of the rule of law? Can we
hope to manage, together, an ever more challenging world when many of our own
houses are in disorder?
We in Canada, at this very moment, are engaged in our own process of
rebuilding, rededication and renewal, a continuing process in real
democracies. In four weeks, millions of Canadians will exercise the ultimate
democratic right by deciding, through their votes, whether to accept or reject
a proposal for fundamental reform of our Canadian Constitution. If accepted,
and I have no doubt that it will be, this reform will build on the values and
rights which are already a proud part of the Canadian reality. It will
strengthen existing guarantees and protection for the rights of minorities,
improve the functioning of our already highly regarded democratic
institutions, bring greater social and economic justice to our native peoples,
and reallocate fundamental roles and responsibilities between levels of
government,
I am confident that the vast majority of Canadians will support this
reform because it is based on fundamental values to which every Canadian
subscribes: unswerving respect for the rights of the individual, supported by
the rule of law; a strong and deep attachment to democracy, its values and its
institutions; a passionate commitment to social justice and economic progress
for all; respect for national and international obligations; and a will to
resolve differences peacefully through conciliation, compromise and consensus.*
As Canadians, we have learned that democracy and freedom can be
maintained only by vision and constant vigilance. New ideas for the future
must be grounded in the fundamentals that were the original basis for our
unity. As Prime Minister Brian Mulroney told Canadians in introducing our
Constitution:
"What Canada's leaders have produced is a series of constitutional
reforms that strengthen the bonds that brought us together in 1867.
These reforms renew the concepts that are at the core of Confederation.
They provide a strong framework, a solid foundation, to let us move
confidently into the future together."
Obviously, a strong and united Canada is important for Canadians, but it is
also of fundamental importance to the nations of the world.
The values which Canadians hold, and which we have brought to the world
throughout our first 125 years as a nation, are also the values which are
fundamental to the Charter of this Organization.
It is our belief that here at the United Nations we are not in need of
better principles; the drafters of the original Charter have served us well.
What we need from this Organization and its Members is the will to act. And
we need deeper understanding of the root causes of conflict between nations,
so that together we can
"break the chain of violence,... defuse the lust for revenge,... voice
[the peoples"] needs,... affirm their dignity" (A/40/PV.47. p. 23)
as our Prime Minister said in this Assembly on the fortieth anniversary of the
United Nations seven years ago.
I believe that the United Nations has taken up that challenge, and I
salute the Secretary-General for his vision and leadership and for his courage
in making the Organization more relevant in and to our time. His report, "An
Agenda for Peace" (A/47/277), lights our path to the future.
The Secretary-General also made the important link between peace nations
and peace within nations when he pointed out:
"There is an obvious connection between democratic practices such as
the rule of law and transparency in decision-making and the
achievement of true peace and security in any new and stable political
order."(A/47/277, para. 59)
There are within nation-States three fundamental weaknesses which can
cause disputes that go beyond their borders. Primary among these is the
absence or abuse of fundamental human rights. If people have no rights, they
have no hope; if they have no hope, eventually they will have no fear; and if
they have no fear, they will seek any possible means to restore their rights,
even killing and dying in the trying. It is a pattern for instability, a
pattern for failure, one that has been repeated all too often in the past.
The United Nations must lead in the field of human rights. In El
Salvador, Cambodia, Croatia, Bosnia, and Somalia efforts to protect human
rights are of fundamental importance in attempts to bring peace to these
troubled lands. Canada, by the way, is currently serving in all of those
places.
The 1993 World Conference on Human Rights offers a unique opportunity
for all Members of the United Nations to work in a constructive and
cooperative spirit to strengthen the foundation of universal respect for human
rights.
Particularly insidious among the forms of human-rights abuse is
systematic discrimination, whether based on gender, race, or ethnic origin.
Violence against women remains one of the most serious forms of
human-rights abuse. Canada initiated and strongly supports the current work
in the United Nations for the adoption of a universal declaration on violence
against women,
In another context, to eliminate employment discrimination we must also
ensure the election and appointment of more women to senior positions in
national and international decision-making bodies, including the United
Nations. This has been a cornerstone of my Prime Minister's domestic and
international appointments policy.
But no group should be marginalized; all views, all experiences are
important. To this end, Canada is proud to be at the forefront of efforts to
prepare for the International Year for the World's Indigenous People, 1993,
when the international community will turn its attention as never before to
the rights of the world's indigenous peoples. Our recently concluded
constitutional negotiations in Canada include major advances for indigenous
peoples in our own country, which will end years of injustice and inequality
in some aspects.
As this special Year begins, we also mark the end of the Decade of
Disabled Persons. We must continue to remove barriers to the full
participation and integration of persons with disabilities. It is our
hope that a consensus for ongoing collaboration can be reached in Montreal,
where on 8 and 9 October my colleague, the Honourable Robert de Cotret,
Canada's Secretary of State, will host an international meeting of Ministers
responsible for persons with disabilities.
This past year has seen the resurgence of a particularly vile form of
abuse of human rights. Canada protests in the strongest possible terms the
abhorrent practice of "ethnic cleansing". Whatever reason for it, wherever it
exists, it represents the basest form of inhumanity and abuse of the
individual, and cannot be tolerated by the world community and this
Organization.
In this connection, Canada calls for the drafting of a statute by the
International Law Commission to establish an international criminal court.
For this purpose, Canada will shortly convene an international meeting of
experts to mobilize legal expertise on this important matter.
A second major weakness within many nation-States is the absence of a
developed system of democratic values and institutions, and this, too, may
ultimately lead to conflict,
One should not be fooled by the outward trappings of democracy. How can
peace flourish when a democratically elected leader is placed under house
arrest, as in Myanmar, or a democratically elected Government is violently
overthrown, as in Haiti?
A true and lasting democracy requires time and understanding, like a
true and lasting friendship. And it requires two-way trust between a nation's
peoples and its leaders.
We recognize the enormous challenges facing countries where democracy is
in its early stages. We must all promote a climate of trust within these
emerging democracies, so that new ideas have time to flourish and take root.
Canada is doing this through its aid programmes and by its participation in
the social and economic agencies of the Organization.
A third major weakness within nation-States is the inability to make
responsible choices in the management of public policy. Good governance is
important, because it ensures that in the provision of government programmes
and the distribution of government resources adequate attention is paid to
social justice, health and education. It also promotes equitable economic
opportunity through the development of a free market system. Ultimately,
these are the means to defeat poverty and to ensure that arms purchases and
spending on the military are not excessive.
Canada's own assistance to developing countries is increasingly focused
on and tied to their efforts to protect basic human rights, to develop
democratic values and institutions, and to undertake good governance in their
policies and programmes.
We urge other Member States and the General Assembly to adopt a similar
philosophy and similar practices if we are to eradicate the seeds of conflict
from within nation-States.
These are, of course, resolutions for long-term prevention of conflict.
In the meantime, however, we cannot ignore the current state of the world, and
that is why the Secretary-General's report, "An Agenda for Peace", is such an
important and pivotal document for this General Assembly.
Canada is no stranger to the process of bringing peace to, and keeping
peace, in all the regions of the world.
Of the 45,000 peace-keeping forces currently serving under the United
Nations flag, close to 4,300, or almost 10 per cent, are Canadian. No other
nation has made a greater commitment to United Nations peace-keeping than
Canada. Canada has served in virtually every United Nations peace-keeping
mission, and Canadians currently serve in such varied missions as those in
El Salvador, Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia, Somalia and the Middle East.
Our experience in these and other missions has taught us that no two
missions are the same, and our experience has also taught us that
peace-keeping, which is not even mentioned in the United Nations Charter, is a
dynamic concept that must be further refined to meet the challenges of the
1990s and beyond. Consequently, we are very pleased that the
Secretary-General consulted so broadly on this matter, and we are also pleased
that much of our own experience and many of our suggestions are reflected in
his final report.
We commend the Secretary-General's emphasis on preventive diplomacy and
peace-making as the preferred options. We encourage him to continue to use
all of the means at his disposal to defuse crises, from fact-finding missions
to mediation. We consider it the duty of all Member States to share with the
Secretary-General all information that can help him to fulfil his role.
We strongly support the concept of preventive peace-keeping, and we urge
the Security Council to adopt this option when lives can be saved,
confrontation averted or democracy stabilized. In Kosovo, for example,
preventive diplomacy by the Security Council and the Secretary-General may
well prevent bloodshed and anarchy such as is seen in much of the rest of the
region.
In the area of peace-making, we agree that the Secretary-General should
continue to use mediation and negotiation to facilitate the process of peace,
and that the Security Council should avail itself of the provisions of the
Charter that permit it to recommend appropriate measures for dispute
settlement.
We also agree that there is a broader role for the International Court of
Justice and that pursuant to Article 96 of the Charter, the Secretary-General
be authorized to take advantage of the advisory competence of the Court.
I have already alluded to the 4,300 Canadian men and women, 20 per cent
of our military forces, who are currently committed to United Nations
peace-keeping operations. Canada has for many years maintained a battalion on
stand-by for United Nations peace-keeping operations. We also have a
longstanding policy whereby members of other Canadian forces can be and have
been called upon for peace-keeping duties. We are prepared to confirm
Canadian arrangements through an exchange of letters with the Secretariat, as
suggested in the Secretary-General's report. We urge other countries to do
the same.
We agree with the need to make available human-rights monitors, electoral
officials, refugee and humanitarian specialists and police whatever the
situation calls for. We have committed, for example, 45 members of the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police to serve with United Nations civilian forces in the
former Yugoslavia. And let me add, we believe that countries that make
available such civilian experts to the United Nations should have their
supplemental costs reimbursed.
Whereas "peace-keeping" has become very much central to United Nations
action and philosophy, the concepts of "peace enforcement" and
"peace-building" are less familiar. We in Canada believe, however, that both
will have an increasing role in the future, if the international community is
truly dedicated to ending conflict and to enhancing democracy.
Of the two, the use of "enforcement" is the more controversial. Recent
events demonstrate that the use of force may be a necessary option, and we
urge full consideration of the Secretary-General's views in this regard. For
our part, we insist on the right of Member States to take part in any decision
involving their nationals. We also believe that further work is required on
an urgent basis to determine the circumstances under which enforcement
activities should be undertaken and the limits of potential enforcement action.
"Peace-building", on the other hand, has been undertaken, most notably in
the multidimensional United Nations activities in Cambodia and El Salvador.
These operations are long, difficult and costly.
Building lasting peace is critical despite those obstacles, not only
because of the stability, opportunity and safety it brings to the people most
directly affected, but because in the long run it is less difficult, less
disruptive, and probably less costly than continued hostilities.
Canada, while active in both El Salvador and Cambodia, is fully prepared
as well to assist the United Nations in expanding and shaping its approach to
peace-building in the future.
We support the Secretary-General's proposals for improving the
effectiveness and timeliness of peace-keeping operations, and, most notably,
for the establishment of a peace-keeping start-up fund of $50 million, and the
other proposals in his report.
All Member States must pay their dues fully and on time. In May of this
year, in the presence of the Secretary-General, Prime Minister Mulroney noted
publicly that money is the clearest measure of political will. He went on to
say:
"The Secretary-General of the United Nations, the holder of one of
the most important offices in the world, should not be treated as a
modern-day mendicant, forced to wander around wealthy capitals imploring
the decision-makers to pay their bills so that the United Nations can do
its job the next day. He must be free to devote his entire time and
energy to running the United Nations and solving global problems, rather
than passing the hat for peace and security."
Financing a la carte will, over time, erode the United Nations financial
base and also weaken the commitment of Member States to the broad range of its
activities.
Canada is opposed to the recent decision of the Security Council to
enlarge the mandate of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) at no
cost to the United Nations, with the cost to be borne by the participating
countries. This sets an unfortunate precedent, and it goes against the United
Nations principle of collective responsibility.
We also have serious concerns about certain long-standing missions, such
as the one in Cyprus, where Canadians and others have served for 28 years. In
Cyprus an entire generation has grown up regarding the presence of
peace-keepers as part of their everyday norm.
We cannot allow the parties in any dispute to institutionalize permanent
peace-keepers so that they are just another aspect of the status quo. This is
simply unacceptable. The parties involved must accept their responsibility
directly and work with the Secretary-General to find a resolution without
further delay.
We are interested in the Secretary-General's suggestion for increasing
cooperation with regional arrangements and organizations in functions such as
preventive diplomacy, peace-keeping, peace-making and peace-building. I
myself have encouraged the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe to
develop some of these mechanisms, and Canada, working within the Organization
of American States, remains dedicated to a return to democracy in Haiti.
There is no doubt in my mind that regional efforts in preventive
diplomacy and peace-making should be encouraged. I hope that future
developments in those institutions will enable them to carry out peace-keeping
operations under certain circumstances. But it is the United Nations which
will continue to have the ultimate authority.
Expanding the circle of peace-keeping and peace-making organizations may
serve to reduce some of the disproportionate burden that in the past certain
countries, such as Canada, have willingly assumed. Future needs, however,
will require a broadening of participation by Member States.
Member States also have a direct responsibility to reduce the numbers and
kinds of weapons that are available for conflict. Last year we in this
Assembly took a major step to increase transparency in arms sales and to
inhibit excessive build-ups of conventional weaponry, with the establishment
of the United Nations arms register. This year we can take two even more
important steps. The General Assembly, at this session, will launch the
preparations for the extension of the nuclear non-proliferation Treaty in
1995. An indefinite extension is the only option.
France and Russia have declared nuclear-testing moratoriums. Other
nuclear Powers the United States, the United Kingdom and China have no
reason not to join them. All nuclear-weapon States should observe an
immediate moratorium on nuclear testing and should summon up the political
will and energy to negotiate a comprehensive test-ban treaty.
We are seeing some progress. After many years of difficult negotiations,
our negotiators at the Conference on Disarmament have succeeded in producing
a chemical-weapons Convention that, when implemented, will ban all chemical
weapons for ever. I urge all Member States to join Canada as original
signatories when that Convention is opened for signature in Paris next year.
There are other substantive issues that I should have liked to discuss in
greater detail before the General Assembly today - notably, the follow-up to
the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in
Rio de Janeiro, where Canada's Prime Minister expressed his strong support for
conventions on climate change and on biological diversity, in a ringing call
to action:
"As political leaders",
he told his fellow nation-builders,
"our job is to force the pace and stretch out the limits of international
cooperation. Nations ... have the human genius to create a world free
from deprivation and secure from degradation. What remains is for
Governments to provide the leadership the world so desperately needs."
The job of the General Assembly is to continue to stretch those limits and to
demonstrate that leadership through the establishment of a commission on
sustainable development and a conference on the high seas.
There are as well, of course, many issues of process, such as reform of
the United Nations development system, that require our immediate time and
attention. Canada put forward detailed proposals in this regard in July in
the Economic and Social Council, and will continue to take an active role and
interest in this matter.
What a large task we have set for ourselves. But one of the lessons that
we have learned in the post-cold-war era is that there is no breathing space,
there is no long pause for contemplation and reflection. Decisions must be
made on a timely basis, and when those decisions are made, all Member States
must vigorously support and abide by them.
Last month, at the London Conference on the former Yugoslavia, I made it
clear that Canada is losing patience with much of the posturing that,
historically, has masqueraded as international diplomacy. I know that others
in the Assembly share this frustration. But, as we speak, the body count
rises in what is left of Bosnia and Herzegovina not to mention the thousands
of men, women and children who are facing starvation in Somalia. The United
Nations needs the commitment of its Member States, it needs well-thought-out
and timely decisions, and it needs follow-up action. Anything less is failure.
Let us not spend the next four or five years debating the niceties of
this principle or that concept; let us all get on with the everyday job of
building peace and security. No one should be here who is not prepared to
work towards those noble objectives, and no one should leave here without
confirming his or her commitment to working together for the benefit of all
the peoples of the world.


Allow
me first of all to convey to you. Sir, my most sincere congratulations, on my
own behalf and that of my delegation, on your election to the presidency of
the General Assembly at its forty-seventh session. I wish you every success
in the execution of your tasks during the coming months. I also wish to pay a
tribute to your predecessor. Ambassador Samir Shihabi of Saudi Arabia.
I should like to give a warm welcome to all those countries that have
joined the Organization this year, and I hope that their active participation
in this forum will contribute to the efforts of the international community to
preserve peace and promote justice and progress among nations. With the
admissions of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of Moldova, San Marino, Slovenia,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, the Organization's goal of
universality has been promoted.
I should also like to convey to Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali
the respect of the Spanish Government for his efforts and dedication in
carrying out the important responsibilities with which he is entrusted. You
may rest assured, Mr. Secretary-General, that you can count on the full
collaboration of the Spanish authorities.
During the general debate at the forty-sixth session, the common
denominator of many statements heard in the General Assembly was the
tremendous changes that had taken place in the world since the middle of the
previous decade. Far from abating, the pace of that trend to transformation
has significantly accelerate over the last 12 months.
At this stage of the process, it would be no exaggeration to say that we
have before us a new pattern of international relations. After the
disappearance of the East-West confrontation and its replacement by dialogue
and cooperation, decisive progress has been made in disarmament agreements and
arms control, at both world-wide and regional levels. Long-festering regional
conflicts have been settled or may well be on their way towards settlement.
To the progress made along the road to peace in Angola and Cambodia we must
add the process begun last year in Madrid with the opening of the Middle East
peace conference, which constituted an invaluable point of departure for the
solution of the Palestinian problem and for achieving the necessary and
definitive harmonious relations between Arabs and Israelis.
Likewise, the current peace plan for Western Sahara should culminate soon
in the holding of a referendum on self-determination under the auspices of the
United Nations.

I also wish to stress the progress made in the eradication of the policy
of apartheid in South Africa. We fully support the efforts of the
Secretary-General to put an end to violence and to encourage the resumption of
the internal negotiations that must lead to the total eradication of apartheid
and to the establishment of a truly democratic regime in South Africa.
Similarly, the Peace Agreement signed in Chapultepec, on 16 January of
this year, between the Government of El Salvador and the Farabundo Marti
National Liberation Front constitutes a milestone of paramount importance for
the peace process in Central America, a region that has been in a constant
state of conflict for the past decade. Spain, which has so many links to that
region, has been and is still actively collaborating in that process through
its participation in the Group of Friends of the Secretary-General for peace
in El Salvador..
In that connection, Spain welcomes the exemplary manner in which the
Governments of El Salvador and Honduras have settled their territorial,
insular and maritime disputes.
The map of Europe has undergone a profound transformation over the past
year. The unification of Germany now appears fully consolidated. Russia and
the formerly subjugated countries that recovered their independence and
freedom are struggling to consolidate their democracies and to overcome the
serious economic difficulties brought on by their transition to a market
economy. The European Community, on its way towards union, is acquiring a
greater political role, in accordance with its undoubted economic strength.
Democratic ideals and practices and the recognition of human rights have
reappeared vigorously not only in Eastern Europe but also in Latin America and

many African countries, despite the grave economic situation now prevailing on
that continent.
Those auspicious events should not lead us to forget that the collapse of
the former system has opened up a great void fraught with risks in which
disorder may find a natural home. In some extreme cases, we are witnessing
the exacerbation of previously repressed or latent nationalist forces which
are giving rise to such bloody conflicts as those at present dividing the new
Caucasian Republics and the new States that emerged after the dissolution of
the former Yugoslavia. Such situations reveal that the horrors of the past
can always be repeated if we do not keep looking to the future. This is
something that neither Europe nor the rest of the international community can
or should allow.
The seriousness of the conflict now taking place in the territory of the
former Yugoslavia is a good example of what I have just said. In the
Conference that started in London, the many efforts of the international
community converged in an attempt to put an end to that complex conflict by
helping the parties to resolve their differences through the negotiations
currently taking place in Geneva. Aggression, the use of force, and the
violation of human rights will only generate destruction and hatred and will
meet with the continued condemnation and determined action of the
international community to put an end to them.

Meanwhile, the gap between the developed and the developing countries
persists and, in many cases, has even widened. Old conflicts have intensified
and new ones have appeared. The tragedy presently afflicting Somalia is
palpable proof of the terrible effects that underdevelopment, poverty, natural
disasters and violence can have when they coincide in time and place. This
situation demands greater solidarity and a swift collective response such as
the one decided in the framework of the United Nations, which was aimed at
putting an end to such terrible suffering and making possible a peace process
that will lead to national reconciliation in that country.
For all these reasons, after the initial moments of surprise and
euphoria, of perplexity and optimism in the face of what seemed to be the
emergence of a new world order, we are now coping with the need to incorporate
these new changes, so as jointly to build a more just and secure international
society.
This is the great task confronting the United Nations today. The choice
is very clear: we cannot allow the Organization to trail behind events,
letting itself be moulded by them. On the other hand, we can make the United
Nations an active forum and the foremost centre in the transformations
affecting us all, capable of influencing and shaping these transformations.
This alternative, this leading role, which is the one desired by Spain for the
United Nations, is the choice that seems to have been made by the
Secretary-General when he drew up his excellent report entitled "An Agenda for
Peace" (A/47/277),' and when he reported to the General Assembly on the work of
the Organization.
I referred earlier to changes in the international climate that have made
it possible to defuse various deeply-rooted regional conflicts. The United

Nations has contributed to this objective to a large extent through the
peacemaking activities of the Secretary-General carried out in the framework
of the peace-keeping operations. The results obtained over recent years have
made it possible to speak, truly, of a process of revitalization of the
Organization.
However, the present momentum behind this process has proven
insufficient, as demonstrated by the persistence of some old conflicts and the
outburst of new forms of violence. From this perspective, the Spanish
Government believes that the set of suggestions put forward by Mr.
Boutros-Ghali represents a very useful basis for a systematic and effective
response by the Organization and the international community to any kind of
conflict, whatever the causes and outcome. It is essential, to this end, to
secure the cooperation of all Member States in the complex tasks ranging from
conflict-prevention to the consolidation of peace.
The increase and enhancement of peace-keeping operations requires a
growing effort on the part of us all. Spain is aware of this and, after
participating in a noteworthy manner in the United Nations Transition
Assistance Group (UNTAG) in Namibia and in the United Nations Observer Group
in Central America (ONUCA), is contributing with a large number of army and
police officers to the work of the United Nations Operation in El Salvador
(ONUSAL). Moreover, Spain is participating actively in the United Nations
Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM II) and is collaborating with the United
Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO). Spain is also
prepared to participate with a military contingent in the task of the United
Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Finally, Spain
provides aid - mainly humanitarian within the framework of other operations
established by the Security Council.

The peace-keeping operations have also undergone a qualitative change, as
new and different activities have been undertaken that go beyond their
traditional limits. These new dimensions require special training and a rapid
response that can hardly be obtained if we do not follow the
Secretary-General's suggestion of establishing special national units ready to
be rapidly deployed at the service of the Organization. Spain is prepared to
consider this proposal seriously after appropriate consultations with the
other Member States and with the Secretary-General.
Nevertheless, we must bear in mind that peace cannot be made and cannot
be consolidated with the use of military means alone. It is necessary,
whenever possible, to resolve conflicts before they degenerate into armed
hostilities, using all the means for peaceful settlement of disputes provided
for in the Charter. In this context, I would like to underline the
Secretary-General's statement that greater confidence on the part of States in
the International Court of Justice would contribute significantly to the
Organization's task of peace-seeking. Spain has already given proof of this
confidence by recently accepting the Court's compulsory jurisdiction and by
supporting the possibility of authorizing the Secretary-General to request
advisory opinions of the Court on legal questions arising within the scope of
his activities.
Spain has firmly supported the strengthening of the United Nations role
in the field of preventive diplomacy. That is why we decided to co-sponsor
the initiatives leading to the approval, in 1988, of the Declaration on
conflict-prevention and, in 1991, of the Declaration on Fact-finding by the
United Nations in the Field of the Maintenance of International Peace and
Security. These efforts should be enhanced, and in this connection, such
measures as fact-finding missions, an early-warning system and the

reinforcement of the role of regional organizations can be very useful in
preventing conflicts which, if allowed to start, might later require the
launching of a much more costly exercise for the reestablishment of peace.
In this sense, we also believe that all efforts that could contribute to
the consolidation of peace once it has been reached, should be promoted in
order to avoid the resurgence of new conflicts over the not yet extinguished
flames of a pre-existent conflict. In this regard, I would like to underline
here the considerable increase in the Organization's efforts in the field of
humanitarian assistance, as well as the tasks recently carried out in the
field of electoral assistance in countries where democracy and peaceful
cohabitation are threatened or insufficiently established. The role of the
Organization on behalf of refugees has also been of great importance for the
consolidation of peace, as has its work in the field of disarmament and the
promotion and defence of human rights.
The Member States of the Organization must be aware that the new tasks
that we are entrusting to the United Nations are increasing in number and
complexity day by day, and are without precedent in its history. In order for
the Organization to be prepared to meet these new demands for international
action, the unconditional financial backing of each of its Members is required.
This year, we have completed the drafting of the text of the Convention
on chemical weapons, which envisages the prohibition of the development,
stockpiling and use of these weapons, as well as their destruction. The
elimination of this type of weapon is a long-sought objective that should now
be attained. Spain decidedly supports the adoption of this Convention at this
session of the General Assembly, and hopes that it will soon enter into force.

We welcome the proposal of the Twelve, adopted by the General Assembly
last year, to create in the Secretariat a Register of Conventional Arms with
regard to the international transfer of such arms, which envisages the
transmission of information by all Member States. It is necessary for all of
us to cooperate, so that this Register may be established as the
clearing-house for the exchange of information on all flows of conventional
arms, and in the near future to include information on other types of weapons
and other data concerning the military capacity of States.
To the achievements of the Organization in the field of disarmament and
arms control must be added this year other important progress made at regional
and world-wide levels aimed at reinforcing the stability and security of our
planet and thus the purposes of the United Nations.
I am referring to the withdrawal of all tactical nuclear weapons, from
areas where they were deployed until very recently, to the territories of the
United States and the Russian Federation. We must underscore as well the
agreements reached recently by President Bush and President Yeltsin on a
drastic reduction of the nuclear arsenals in their respective countries. We
also welcome the initiatives taken by several nuclear Powers to declare
moratoriums on their nuclear tests, or to reduce them to a bare minimum.
In the European region, one must underscore the significance of the
Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe and its complementary Act on
personnel strength, both already in force, as well as the conclusion of the
Open Skies Treaty and the adoption of a new series of confidence-building
measures.

Spain welcomes all these achievements and hopes that they will lead to
further progress in this field.
The ultimate beneficiary of the United Nations efforts to achieve a more
peaceful, just and secure world is undoubtedly mankind as a whole.
Thanks to a large extent to United Nations action we have made
significant advances in the defence and protection of human rights and
fundamental freedoms internationally. However, we are living in a period of
instability and uncertainty, in which not only economic inequalities but also
the resurgence of intolerance, xenophobia and exacerbated nationalism, among
other factors, are endangering personal freedom and security. That is why it
is necessary to intensify our efforts in this area, so as to encourage
understanding and respect for the rights of individual members of minorities
and for the needs of the most vulnerable groups of society. In this respect,
we consider particularly important that this Assembly approve by consensus, as
the Commission on Human Rights and the Economic and Social Council have
recently done, the draft declaration on the rights of persons belonging to
national, ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities.
My country places great hopes on the World Conference on Human Rights
scheduled for next year in Vienna. This Conference should, on the basis of
existing universally accepted standards, draw the basic guidelines for our
future activity in this field, so that individuals and peoples may, through
democracy and development, fully enjoy the benefits of human rights and
fundamental freedoms.
The achievements of the United Nations in the field of international
peace and security contrast with the limited progress in the sphere of
economic and social development. The world gap between rich and poor has been
widening in an alarming way. The United Nations Development Programme's Human

Development Report for 1992 shows that the richest 20 per cent of the world
population receive 82.7 per cent of total world income, whereas the poorest
20 per cent receive only 1.4 per cent.
The international community cannot remain passive in the face of these
grave and growing disparities. The Organization, owing to its universal
membership and the breadth of its purposes and principles, must play a leading
role to guide and stimulate the establishment of guidelines for the United
Nations system as a whole, in order to find solutions to the important issues
related to the development and well-being of all peoples.
It is necessary in this respect to strengthen the Economic and Social
Council. Some progress has already been made in its restructuring, but it is
necessary that such restructuring be continued and deepened in order to
revitalize this principal organ of our Organization. It also seems necessary
to envisage the reform of the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD) in order to adapt it to the new realities, as was
underscored at its eighth session, held in Cartagena de Indias last February.
We support the establishment by the Assembly during its current session
of a high-level Commission on Sustainable Development that was agreed to at
the Conference on Environment and Development, held in Rio de Janeiro last
June, where the concept of sustainable development was identified as a central
element that should inspire the theory and practice of development policies in
the coming years.
We should look for new ways of dealing with the main task of attaining
sustainable development and assign greater financial resources to this task,
in particular by those countries that are in a position to do so. My country
is aware of the fact that it must make an effort in proportion to its economic
capacity. For this reason, the President of the Spanish Government at the

summit meeting at Rio de Janeiro, after recalling that Spain had tripled its
official aid over the past 10 years, made a commitment to triple its aid again
in the course of the coming decade. This is a difficult challenge that we
have taken upon ourselves but one that we are ready to fulfil.
The world population has more than doubled over the past 40 years, and
according to recent estimates it will double again in the next 30 years. This
astounding growth demands a serious analysis on the part of the international
community as well as a careful study of the consequences that it generates,
such as migratory flows, the problems of large urban concentrations and the
enormous demands it creates in the areas of food, housing, health care and
education. These are all issues that should be studied in depth at the
Conference on Population and Development, to be held in Cairo in 1994.
It is not surprising that social problems are gaining importance at the
present time, when many economies are undergoing tough processes of adjustment
and others are going through difficult transitions from a central planning
system to one of market economy. The summit conference on social development
to be held in 1995 is therefore a timely initiative. Proper preparation is
the best guarantee for its success. The basic guiding principle for its work
should be the concept of human development; it should examine the necessary
measures to provide greater opportunities for education, medical care and
employment to the world's inhabitants. It is becoming daily more obvious that
economic growth in itself does not automatically improve people's living
conditions, neither within nations nor internationally. Therefore, it is
essential to give a social dimension to the concept of economic development.
Allow me to refer now to two great threats to society today: drug
trafficking and terrorism.

The drug-trafficking business is so grim and complex and has so many
ramifications that efforts to combat it must be based on the strengthening of
national measures and on effective international coordination and cooperation.
The producer countries must receive the assistance needed to grow
alternative crops and to enable them to confront the powerful and well-armed
drug-trafficking organizations. Those countries producing substances likely
to be used in the manufacture of drugs should inspect and control the exports
of those substances. Consuming countries also responsible for the
drug-trafficking must strengthen programmes and measures aimed at decreasing
domestic demand. Moreover, perseverance is necessary in inspecting bank
accounts used by drug traffickers and in reporting money-laundering when
suspicions of its connection with this illegal activity exist. Concealing
information on the drug-trafficking business amounts to complicity in criminal
activity.
Terrorism, for its part, continues to pose a threat to human life and to
coexistence between nations. It is a threat of an international character and
as such requires international efforts for its eradication. General Assembly
resolution 46/51, adopted by consensus last year, was a further step in United
Nations work aimed at developing greater international cooperation for this
purpose.
Those two threats, especially that of terrorism, are interrelated with
illegal arms dealing, which must be combated just as firmly by the
international community.
There is one issue whose importance for Spain is well known: the
decolonization of Gibraltar. I wish to restate my Government's determination

to continue, with dedication and in a constructive spirit, the negotiating
process with the United Kingdom established by the Brussels Declaration of
27 November 1984, bearing in mind the doctrine of the General Assembly that
this is not a case of self-determination but a situation that affects the
territorial integrity of Spain. I trust that the negotiating efforts of both
Governments will soon lead to a definitive solution that, while taking into
account the legitimate interests of the people, will put an end to the
colonial status of Gibraltar a status that is clearly anachronistic and
inappropriate to the times in which we live, especially since the General
Assembly's proclamation of the International Decade for the Eradication of
Colonialism until the year 2000.
Last July, in Madrid, the Heads of State and Government participating in
the Second Ibero-American Summit adopted a document of conclusions reaffirming
their aspirations to a free, open and pluralistic society directed towards
progress and social justice, a society in which free rein is given to the full
exercise of individual freedoms and in which no one is excluded or
persecuted. I am certain that this is an ideal we all share.
The Ibero-American Summit declared itself in favour of reforming the
United Nations system and stressed the need to give it momentum so that it
could respond more efficiently to the will of all its Member States. The
celebration, in 1995, of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations will
be a good occasion for the attainment of this objective, which will enable the
General Assembly to undergo renewal and revitalization, following on that
already experienced by the Security Council. The Organization would then more
faithfully reflect the important changes that have taken place in
international society during the last 50 years.

We are all well aware that in today's world no nation can stand on its
own. The fate of each and every one of our countries is linked to the fate of
the others. I wish therefore to conclude my statement by expressing the firm
conviction that in the new global and integrated society that is emerging at
the end of this century no intelligent action can be taken that is not based
on the exercise of the most resolute solidarity.


It gives
me pleasure, at the outset of my statement, to congratulate you warmly on
behalf of the Mauritanian delegation on your unanimous election to the
presidency of our Assembly. We are confident that your ability, political
experience and diplomatic skills will enable you to guide this session to its
desired goals.
We should like to extend our thanks also to your predecessor.
Ambassador Samir Shihabi, the Ambassador of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, for
the judicious manner in which he conducted the work of the past session.
I should also like to take this opportunity to extend to
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali our warmest congratulations on the occasion of his
election to the post of Secretary-General of our Organization. We should like
to pay tribute to his efficiency and the positive results he has been able to
achieve in the short period he has spent in office. I should like to reaffirm
to him our full readiness to work with him in any way that would contribute to
the performance of his tasks.

At a time when the universal character of our Organization becomes more
and more pronounced through the accession of new States to its membership, I
cannot but seize this opportunity to extend to those new Members our
congratulations on their accession and, in welcoming them, express our
confidence that they will be a new tributary of strength to this Organization.
The year 1992 will always be a landmark on the road to a new type of
dialogue-and-cooperation-oriented international relations. This is attested
to by the high-level international meetings that have been held, and which
have contributed to the emergence of new patterns of international relations.
Examples of such meetings were the first summit of the members of the Security
Council, the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the Summit of the Organization of
African Unity (OAU) in Dakar, and the tenth summit of the Non-Aligned Movement
in Djakarta.
At the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, it became clear to all that it is
no longer acceptable that islands of wealth should persist in an ocean of
poverty and that international problems cannot be solved in the absence of
sincere and effective cooperation between all peoples.
In these international conditions of rapid change, the causes of
democracy and human rights have undergone a marked development and the idea of
linking social progress to economic development has gained more acceptance.
This proves that no country or group of countries, no matter how powerful, can
face up to the challenges of the age on its own, without extensive cooperation
and consultation.
However, the concept of cooperation and consultation, between countries,
even if it has gained acceptance in theory, has yet to be translated into
actual reality.

In this context, the Rio de Janeiro Conference was a promising start.
The decision of the Earth Summit to hold negotiations with the aim of
developing an international convention on the phenomenon of drought and
desertification is cause for optimism. It is regrettable, however, that this
natural disaster has been allocated the smallest share of the resources
earmarked for the implementation of the environmental programme.
Mauritania, in which the bane of drought and desertification has become a
chronic affliction, has formulated a programme of its own for combating
desertification and correcting the imbalance in its environment.
Proceeding from our experience in this area, we appreciate the
difficulties of the countries which suffer from this phenomenon. I should
like, on this occasion, to declare our solidarity with the peoples of southern
regions of Africa and the Horn of Africa who are now suffering the effects of
drought.
With the ending of the cold war and its ideological conflicts, today's
world faces no greater challenge than that of development. In past decades,
the traditional current pattern of development proved to be deficient and
incapable of achieving its goals. It is generally accepted now that
alleviating poverty and even attaining a measure of economic well-being are no
longer sufficient to satisfy the ambitions of mankind for progress. The
social dimension of the question of development is vital for the happiness of
mankind. This has proved to be true to such an extent that the advocates of
absolute liberalism have come to concede that no economic progress can be
achieved in the absence of a social chapter that would complement it.
Hence the hope we attach to the planned world summit on social
development, as such a meeting would highlight the need to link the economic
and the social in development.

The world economic situation still causes concern. The most telling
proof of this is that the developing countries, particularly in Africa, still
face frustrating international conditions that are downright harmful, such as
protectionism and the burden of foreign debt.
The economies of developing countries are continuously deteriorating and
poverty is increasing and spreading. Unless something is done to combat this
situation, it will become impossible to build a world where stability reigns.
How can we talk about a new world order while nothing concrete is done to
eliminate hunger, disease and ignorance? Was it not declared in the
resolutions of the first summit of the member States of the Security Council
that peace and prosperity are complementary and that no lasting stability can
be achieved without real international cooperation to eliminate poverty and to
achieve a better life for all?
And yet, there is a better chance for international cooperation because
of the increasing practice of democracy in the world and increasing economic
liberalism world wide. In such a context, the United Nations can play a
principal role, as it is the ideal forum wherein international questions can
be addressed, as best exemplified by the special session of the General
Assembly in 1990 and the Rio de Janeiro summit. Those two gatherings have
demonstrated that it is possible for us to conduct a dialogue between North
and South and thereby to create a climate that is conducive to the promotion
of development.
The reorganization of the United Nations Secretariat will be an
opportunity to take into account the interests of the majority of the
inhabitants of the planet who face the challenge of development, and who bear
the burden of its attendant fierce struggle against backwardness, ignorance

and disease. In such a context, special attention should be paid to Africa.
Africa is the continent that exerts strenuous efforts in facing up to the
ravages of natural disasters and, at the same time, in coping with the adverse
and frustrating international conditions that stifle its growth, such as a
foreign debt that now exceeds US$ 225 billion.

It has to cope with all this under the crushing impact of the increasing
depletion of its sources of foreign investment. Therefore, we should provide
effective support to implement the United Nations Convention on the
development of Africa in the 1990s. The political support for the Convention
that was announced by the latest summit in Dakar was a first step in that
direction.
Fortunately, the world now witnesses marked progress in the observance of
human rights. However, and regrettably, there are still dark corners where
the darkness has not been pierced yet by the ray of light of freedom and
tolerance. How else could we explain what is taking place today in Bosnia?
How else could we explain the massacres, the destruction of property, the
humiliation, and the desecration of sacred shrines? Can there be any hope of
putting an end to this tragedy without more pressure on Serbia by every
available legitimate means to force it to comply with the will of the
international community? Is it not high time for the international community
to put an end to the threats to peace and the violations of basic human rights
in all the world's hotbeds of tension?
The World Conference on Human Rights scheduled for next year should
provide convincing answers to such questions. For our part, we shall hold on
to our conviction that the best possible way to ensure respect for human
rights is to consider them as universal standards that must be applied in all
cases, to all, without distinction. In other words, we should not confine
ourselves to condemning repressive practices whenever this serves our
interests and purposes. We sincerely hope that the future Vienna summit will
succeed in affirming the purely humane nature of human rights as far away as
possible from political or ideological considerations.

While we are concerned about the world economic situation and its effects
on international relations at the present time, we are hopeful that the
increasing development of democratic practices will lead to more harmonious
relations between countries. Mauritanians feel proud of their country's
contribution in this respect.
The democratic process which was launched by the Correction Movement on
12 December 1984, has culminated, this year, in the holding of presidential
and legislative assembly elections within a context of political pluralism.
The gradualist approach adopted in achieving this has proved to be the best
way of avoiding the shocks of sudden change. Municipal elections, in various
stages, gave the citizen the necessary lessons and sufficient experience to
acquire a spirit of tolerance, and also tested the electoral machinery.
The Mauritanian people have voted on a constitution embodying a full
multiparty system for the first time in the history of the country. This
constitution, which was voted upon and ratified on 12 July 1991, makes
provision for all the freedoms that are set out in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. Consequently, it provides an effective basis for the rule of
law under which every citizen will enjoy freedom and justice. In support of
this qualitative transition, there has been a general amnesty that covered all
political crimes and misdemeanours committed since the country became
independent. We are therefore very happy to state that in our country today
we do not have a single political prisoner.
We have passed laws on the freedom of the press and freedom of political
parties and political assembly which have led to the publication of
40 independent newspapers and to the establishment of 16 political parties in
addition to various cultural and scientific organizations. This process has

culminated in three major events: the presidential elections of
24 January 1992; the elections to the House of Representatives on 6 and
13 March; and the Senate elections on 3 and 10 April 1992.
All these elections took place in an atmosphere of freedom, tolerance and
transparency which enabled everyone to see everything that was going on and to
monitor it. That this was the case was confirmed by foreign observers who
monitored the election process. Indeed, as one of those observers said, the
real winner of the election race was the Mauritanian people. Mauritanians
have turned their backs on the experience of single-party and non-democratic
systems, and have chosen pluralism and real democracy, and, thus, have become
the source of the authority and legality, as President Mo'awia Ould Sidi Ahmed
al Tayeh remarked in his inaugural address.
Our struggle is not confined to our efforts to develop democracy. We
have simultaneously been waging a battle of economic reform, since 1985, by
means of specific plans and programmes. What is at stake here is raising the
standard of living of every citizen. Included in this campaign are the
efforts to eliminate illiteracy by the year 2000 and to enhance the status and
rights of women. In mentioning these efforts, I should like to extend our
thanks and gratitude to all the countries and international organizations and
agencies that have supported our efforts to achieve a better life for our
citizens.
There are clear causes for concern in the international arena. However,
there are also reasons for hope. As the saying goes, life would be hard
indeed were it not for hope. The Security Council has become more harmonious,
which has enabled it to play a decisive role in solving international
disputes. It is no coincidence that we have seen the United Nations achieving

more in the past two years in terms of the number of peace-keeping operations
than it had been able to achieve over several decades.
Proceeding from this, can we dream that all the peoples of the world will
soon get a taste of peace in view of the steps taken to reverse the arms race
and limit armaments? We now see the parties to conflicts increasingly opting
for dialogue and reconciliation. This should create a favourable atmosphere
to end all conflicts.
Nevertheless, all these shining signs of hope along the path of progress
will not be enough for the realization of peoples' aspirations for more
freedom, independence and prosperity unless they go hand in hand with a
serious commitment to justice.

It would be no exaggeration to cite as an example the case of the
Palestinian people, who continue to be deprived of their right to
self-determination and independence while their sole legitimate
representative, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), continues to be
excluded and its national uprising is still being repressed.
Our welcome for the Madrid Conference and the negotiating process that
emanated from it last autumn stemmed from our hopes for peace in the region.
However, we make no secret of the fact that we are concerned at the course
those negotiations are now taking. While the previous Government of Israel
resorted to stalling and prevarication and had an "anti" position so far as
any land concessions were concerned, Israel now has an administration that
claims willingness for dialogue. Therefore, we hope that cooperation between
this new administration and the peace-loving forces will lead to a
comprehensive and definitive solution to a problem that has been with us for
far too long and which has overtaxed a people which wants nothing but to
achieve its rights to independence and peace. We believe the only solution is
withdrawal by Israel from all the Arab-occupied territories, foremost among
which is the Holy City of Al-Quds, adherence by Israel to the agreed
international obligations and principles and implementation by Israel of the
resolutions of this Organization.
While on the subject of the Middle East and the hope that international
legality may have the upper hand and put an end to the long suffering of the
peoples of that area, we reaffirm our rejection of any attempt that aims at
undermining the territorial integrity of Iraq and its independence as well as
any action that may jeopardize the safety, security or independence of Kuwait.

While we support fully the sisterly country of the United Arab Emirates,
in its demands regarding its legitimate rights over the island of Abu Mousa,
we wish to express surprise at the actions of Iran in this respect and call
upon Iran to deal with this problem in accordance with the agreements between
the two countries within a context of good-neighbourliness, mutual respect and
brotherliness.
The achievement of the unity between the countries of the Arab Maghreb,
which we have the honour of chairing this year, is a hope that all the peoples
of the area look forward to in order for them to achieve their aspirations
after integration, prosperity and development. An important area such as
this, with more than 60 million inhabitants, coasts from the Mediterranean to
the Atlantic, rich economic resources and a position that makes it a
geographic and cultural bridge between Europe and sub-Saharan Africa, should
get enough support from the United Nations to remove all the obstacles that
impede its development and progress.
It is no exaggeration to state that all the Arab Maghreb has been hurt by
the blockage imposed against Libya. In view of the fact that Libya has
declared its full readiness to cooperate with the United Nations and in view
of the constructive proposals contained in the Arab League's decision 5092 of
12 September 1992, we hope the international community will show understanding
for this fair position and reach a solution that will satisfy all and spare
the Maghreb problems it can do without.
In the Western Sahara, the United Nations, in coordination with the
Organization of African Unity, continues to deploy efforts which aim at
overcoming obstacles in the field so that suspicion may not replace the early
optimism that prevailed in the area in the wake of the signing of the
cease-fire agreement on 6 September 1991.

We are determined to continue efforts that would lead our Moroccan and
Sahraoui brethren to a permanent peace that, no doubt, will be a vital factor
in building the Arab Maghreb.
The resumption of diplomatic relations between Mauritania and Senegal
last April, the resumption of daily flights between the two countries and the
opening of borders indicate the turning of a new leaf in the relations of the
two countries. The resumption of cooperation between our two peoples is proof
that the leaders of both countries are determined to put behind them this
painful era in order for the two countries to focus on winning the battle for
development.
The last Nouakchott summit which brought together the leaders of Mali,
Senegal and Mauritania with the aim of achieving the goals of the organization
of the investment of the Senegal river, was a model to be followed in the area
of common African action.
In South Africa, the road to the establishment of a real non-racial
democratic system is still full of obstacles despite the progress achieved
over the past two years. The most dangerous obstacle is the violence that, in
five years, has claimed the lives of thousands of people. Consequently, the
international community should remain vigilant until the objectives of the
United Nations declaration of 14 December 1989 have been achieved in full.
Despite the tragedies and evils and atrocities that sadden the heart in
Somalia, there are still hearts that are full of goodness. In this context,
we must express gratitude to those who have helped Somalia and have made every
effort to ensure arrival of their humanitarian assistance to it in the face of
considerable difficulties. To all those I extend the thanks of my country and
I appeal to our brethren in Somalia to let reason reign, put the national
interest first and try to resolve their problems democratically, by dialogue.

In Latin America, as in Asia, we have seen how democratic development and
dialogue have helped to solve many thorny problems and disputes. Two years
after resolving the question of Nicaragua, peace reigns in El Salvador.
The most important event in Afghanistan was the accession to power by the
Mujahideen after a long devastating war. Our recognition of the new
authorities in Afghanistan was an expression of our satisfaction with this
development. We hope that Afghanistan, after the return of its sons, will be
able to overcome factional strife and, thereby, embark on a much needed
process of national reconstruction.

We reiterate our support for the Paris Agreements on Cambodia, which
commit all political factions to work for peace in that country. We regret
the delay in implementing some of the items of those Agreements, and feel that
a careful study should be made of the reasons behind such delay with a view to
determining the type of measures that would enable the United Nations
Transitional Authority in Cambodia to discharge their task as fully as
possible.
There is no doubt that accession by the two Koreas to the membership of
the United Nations is an event that justifies the hope that Korea will be
unified eventually by peaceful means, through dialogue and consultation.
The United Nations stands today at an important crossroads. The
Organization must regain its prestige in order for it to be able to rise to
the many challenges posed by the international changes on the horizon. In
this context, the reorganization of the Secretariat would enable us to find
the right instrument to face up to those coming challenges in which the
question of development should be paramount. We have great hopes that this
new era will create an appropriate atmosphere for new, more equitable and
democratic international relations. Nothing can help achieve these
aspirations of all peoples and nations more than justice and democracy.