The delegation of the Republic of Equatorial Guinea comes to this session of the Assembly in the same spirit as it has always shown to join its efforts with those being devoted here to the service of the ideals of our Organization, ready to reaffirm and support all initiatives that can benefit the peoples. I wish to express ray delegation's satisfaction at the well-deserved election of Mr. Garba of Nigeria to direct the work of this session of the General Assembly. We are convinced that his outstanding talents and diplomatic skills, as well as the positive contribution of his country, Nigeria, to the task of consolidating international peace and stability, will help the Assembly to deal positively with the important and complex items on its agenda.
Our congratulations are also directed to the other members of the Bureau. We our confident that their skill, experience, and unselfish efforts will enable them to contribute substantially to ensuring that the decisions and resolutions adopted will not only be in keeping with the principles and provisions of the Charter, but also make it possible again to enhance the Organization's authority in the solution of current international problems.
In this connection, I can assure members of my delegation's total readiness to do its best to ensure that our work is to the point and achieves results satisfactory to all. The outstanding President of the forty-third session* Mr. Dante Caputo, and the members of his Bureau deserve our praise for the seriousness and competence they demonstrated and the substantial work accomplished during that session.
A well-deserved tribute must be paid to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, and his staff for their determined, positive efforts in the last ten years to solve the problems that are disrupting peace in various parts of our planet. The report of the Secretary-General reflects the delicate problems that will be under the scrutiny of States and their representatives at this session. The fact that there is a stalemate on many items as compared with obvious progress in the search foe suitable solutions to other problems shows that only readiness on the part of States or - which is one and the same thing - the practical application of the spirit and content of the principles of the Charter in solving problems that affect the international community can guarantee the peace, harmony, and well-being that all desire.
Another obstacle on the road to more just treatment of States, and hence to relations that would give equal weight to everybody's needs, is the conduct of some countries, peoples and leaders who put their own interest before the general interest.
That is why there is still inequality in international economic relations. There is a covert denial of the principles concerning recognition of the sovereign equality of States, the freedom of each State or people to choose the economic or political system that best meets its national interests, tine peaceful coexistence of States, and the imposition of pre-conditions on some countries with regard to their co-operation arrangements, thus restricting their right to freedom and sovereignty simply because they are receiving such co-operation.
Equatorial Guinea's conviction that it is possible and indeed necessary to reinforce our organization's authority compels us to appeal to the Assembly for a wide-ranging dialogue which, through the use of the best ways and means available to us, would lead to an impartial guarantee of universal peace, security, and well-being, which in turn would involve stepping up the present negotiations on disarmament and socio-economic development.
Political action in Equatorial Guinea has focused at all times on the attainment of the paramount goals of a modern State: unity, peace, justice and social well-being for the people. This action was embodied in the programme of democratisation contained in the historic Act of 31 August 1979. In carrying out that programme we have organized the society of Equatorial Guinea from its foundations and drafted laws governing that organization.
The preparation of the law on political parties in Equatorial Guinea concluded this programme of democratisation. That law defines and recognizes the democratic principles of the State of Equatorial Guinea, on the basis of which we established the Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea. Today we view the future with optimism and feel proud to have regained our political freedoms, which are indispensable for our progress and the achievement of our goal of national development.
During these years of arduous work, the Government, worthily headed by His Excellency Mr. Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, has enjoyed the full and unconditional support of the people of Equatorial Guinea, in a deep spirit of fraternal coexistence, peace and unity, guaranteeing the consolidation of the process of democratisation. The first Congress of the Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea, convened in the city of Bata exactly one year ago, named His Excellency Mr. Obiang Nguema Mbasogo the President. A few months later he was proposed as the candidate in the presidential elections on 25 June last.
The people of Equatorial Guinea, in a democratic spirit, went in large numbers to the voting booths to exercise their right to vote in these first presidential elections since the country achieved independence 21 years ago. By an overwhelming result of 99.96 per cent in favour, the people of Equatorial Guinea demonstrated the political maturity they had acquired from the country's recent experience and from the dynamic action encouraged by the Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea.
Accordingly, I can state to the Assembly that the process of democratisation in my country has achieved a very positive level, enabling all the citizens to become aware of their responsibility to participate actively in political, economic and social affairs, not merely as spectators but as direct actors on the stage of our history.
Today, 12 October 1989 - the exact date on which I spoke before the General Assembly last year - my country is commemorating 20 years of existence as a sovereign and independent State. It is also the anniversary of our joining) the Hispanic world. In this regard, we congratulate all the countries of the world, and particularly those of the Hispanic world. The distance between States and continents has yielded to technological progress. That is why my country, of the Hispanic persuasion although on the African continent, feels close to the Hispanic peoples and shares the concerns of the Hispanic community.
As a result, I take this opportunity to appeal to the Hispanic States and peoples, echoing the desire and mission of the people of Equatorial Guinea, for an increase in our co-operation in all sectors of: development. One cannot want what one does not knew about. As a result, a physical presence in Malabo, Equatorial Guinea;, is necessary if a contribution is to be made to the best possible development of our co-operation. Prom this rostrum, we extend our warmest welcome to all those who will come.
This session has been convened at a time when all the countries and peoples of the world expect our Organization thoroughly to study the various international questions on its agenda. We believe that the course of our history will change qualitatively and quantitatively if greater understanding among States is achieved, thereby consolidating what has already been done to lessen existing tensions in various areas of the world. The participation of the Secretary-General in this work has contributed to enhancing the authority of our organization. That shows the need to pursue this work in order to ensure peace and harmony between peoples.
We believe that the time has come for intransigence to yield to understanding on the long road towards decolonisation. He know that there can be no reason for excessive optimism so long as the important Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, contained ?n General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) is not implemented.
The situation in Namibia remains a matter of concern because of South Africa's failure to comply with the letter and spirit of Security Council resolution 435 (1978), which was confirmed in the debate that took place from
6 to 29 August last and in the report of the Committee of 18 on its mission to Namibia from 7 to 16 August.
My Government reaffirms in this forum its view that Security Council resolution 435 (1978) must be implemented in its final and definitive form, as that constitutes the only acceptable way for the people of Namibia to participate in free and just elections, under the supervision of the United Nations.
My Government continues to be concerned about the tense and dangerous situation in southern Africa. The destabilizing conduct of the racist Pretoria regime has turned the insecurity of living conditions and the systematic violation of the sovereignty of the front-line States into law and custom. There is no justification for the insolent conduct towards the peoples of southern Africa. The tragic situation inflicted on thousands of refugees and repatriated and displaced persons by a regime that behaves in a manner contrary to the principles and decisions of the United Nations requires Member States to work together to put an end to the excesses perpetrated by that regime and to bring its behaviour into line with that of the rest of the world.
The reasonable thing for the racist leaders to do would be to face historical facts and to take action to enable all South Africans, without any distinctions whatsoever, to become actively involved in the solution of the country's problems. In this connection, my Government rejects and strongly condemn the racist elections held in South Africa on 6 September last, from which, contrary to the well-known demands of the South African people, the broad majority of the population was excluded. Apartheid must absolutely be eradicated by strict adherence to the principles of the Charter and by unequivocal support for the just solution that is clear to the entire international community.
My Government is pleased to note the political will and constructive spirit evinced by the People's Republic of Angola in the search foe a peaceful and negotiated solution to the national and regional problems of that fraternal country. In this connection, we support the Gbadolite agreements of 22 June, which were ratified at the summit meeting of the eight African Heads of State on 22 August in Harare. given their importance, recent events call for further thought. I refer to the proclamation of the Palestinian State. The people of Palestine should find solution if the relevant United Nations resolutions, with which we are all familiar, are respected. We believe that the will of Palestine as expressed in the declaration of its national council in Algeria in November 1988, in the peace initiative announced by President Arafat at the plenary meeting of the General Assembly in Geneva on 13 December 1988, and in the support expressed by Arab State , in the course of the special summit conference in Casablanca in May this year .or that peace initiative represents a positive contribution to a solution of the problem that pits the PLO against the State of Israel. Such initiatives should be sorted in this forum, and we should make a start on the path towards dialogue that is lead to a peaceful solution acceptable to both parties to the dispute. It is a matter of ongoing concern to my Government that Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) have not yet bean implemented. To date, these resolutions remain the only valid, positive means of guaranteeing peace in the Middle East.
However, we welcome the progress made at the first and second informal meetings held in Jakarta in July 1988 and February 1989, as well as the international conference on Kampuchea held in Paris from 30 July to 30 August this year. They made a meaningful contribution to a global solution that would satisfy all parties.
Similarly, we welcome the recent meetings between the Government of Cyprus and the Turkish Cypriot community. We believe that continuing substantive dialogue between the two communities may constitute the only way to achieve a just, and lasts. solution to that problem. The uncertain situation on the Korean peninsula is no less alarming so long as the division of the peninsula continues. We hope that at this politically important time an increasingly open positive and constructive dialogue will be begun with a view to achieving a balance of peace and meeting hopes of national reunification.
In this connection* we hope feat a more wide-ranging and responsible dialogue will contribute to putting an end to Argentina's dispute with the United Kingdom with regard to free Malvinas Islands.
My country welcomes wife great satisfaction, and is very interested in, all negotiations leading towards peaceful solutions to all domestic and international problems and conflicts. In this spirit, we should like to express our thanks and acknowledgment to fee Secretary-General for his efforts to put and end to fee dispute between Iran and Iraq. We congratulate those two countries on their decision to observe fee cease-fire feat began on 20 August this year, which has contributed greatly to the alleviation of tension in that area. We believe that speedy and full implementation of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) might lead to a general and just solution to the problem.
Similarly, we congratulate fee fraternal peoples of Chad and Libya for fee will that both have expressed, and we hope that implementation of resolution 184 (XXV) of fee Organisation of African Unity (OAU) will contribute to fee achievement of a peaceful settlement of their border disputes.
The negotiations feat were conducted between fee parties involved as a result of OAU recommendations give us to understand that the problem of Western Sahara will see a positive solution that satisfies all concerned.
However, we remain concerned about the situation prevailing in Afghanistan. We believe feat implementation of fee Geneva Agreements and of General Assembly resolution 43/20, leading to a political solution to the problem that afflicts the Afghan people, would indeed constitute an important contribution.
The hotbeds of tension in Latin America and the Caribbean resulting from the deliberate manipulation of imported ideologies cause us growing concern. My Government hopes - indeed, it is entirely convinced - that the peace accords signed recently at Tela, Honduras, and the very positive role played by the Contadora Group and the Support Group will be fundamental in finding a political solution to the Central American crisis.
Important steps have recently been taken to reduce the threat of destruction hanging over mankind. We applaud the decision by the two super-Powers to reduce their war—waging arsenals, which have imperilled international peace and security. What we want, however, is not a mere reduction but total elimination of nuclear weapons from our planet. We urge the other nuclear Powers to show the same desire as the United States and the Soviet Union to negotiate a global agreement to dismantle all weapons of all types. That might constitute the best contribution they could make to the cause of peace and security throughout the world, as they are protagonists of our time.
Despite the increasing degree of interdependence, there has been an increase in the inequalities and in the socio-economic imbalances between the developed countries and the underdeveloped countries. These trends are bound to constitute a threat to peace and stability throughout the world. We express our deep and abiding concern about the drastic deterioration in the economic situation in the great majority of developing countries. These countries, which are trying to develop despite their unfavourable situation, stubbornly continue to work hard to adjust their economies. However, in current conditions, which are so adverse, and in the  absence of simultaneous adjustment by developed countries, such efforts increasingly raise the social and political price.

The international political panorama facing the developing countries is sensitive and unfavourable; the prices of commodities decline constantly and systematically; the terns of trade deteriorate daily; all kinds of protectionism are becoming more acute; the flew of capital investment is declining, and interest rates are still high in real terms; monetary and financial instability and inequality in the terms of trade persist, and it remains impossible to achieve the desired goals; external debt has become an irreversible burden that gets less bearable daily, and a problem the developing countries find increasingly difficult to solve.
None the less, we highly appreciate and praise the position taken by some developed countries in totally or partially forgiving the external debt contracted by developing countries. That helps developing countries carry out more appropriate and reasonable structural adjustments and improve their economic and social situation.
The Government, the Democratic Party and the people of Equatorial Guinea consider that current economic trends and the grave economic situation of developing countries require the urgent adoption of measures and action to foster substantive structural reforms in the context of international economic relations with a view to establishing a system that will contribute to constant equitable growth in the world economy. That is why we favour the establishment of a new international economic order as a broad, workable and valid framework for the world-wide effort to achieve social and economic development.
The Republic of Equatorial Guinea is convinced that the convening in April 1990 of a special session of the General Assembly devoted to international economic co-operation and, in particular, to reactivating economic growth and development in developing countries will provide an opportunity to achieve a new consensus on action based on that growth and development. We believe that the international development strategy for the fourth United
Nations development decade will provide a cohesive framework for international co-operation for the coming decade and will spell out the commitments that will contribute, in the common interest, to hastening and consolidating economic and social progress in developing countries. That strategy should include among its major goals special international support for the least developed countries, which include my country.
External debt is the greatest handicap to the economic and social development of developing countries. High real interest rates currently consume a disproportionate part of the export income, the gross domestic product and the savings of underdeveloped countries. The sacrifices made by the peoples of those countries have caused serious social disruption, threatening their economic and social stability. It is difficult for those countries to pay their external debt in view of the current economic situation.

We believe that solving the problem of external debt depends principally on the creation of conditions more favourable to more rapid economic development in debtor countries, on the basis of joint responsibility, through co-operation between all the parties concerned, including the Governments of debtor countries, the Governments of creditor countries and the World Bank and other international financial institutions.
Like so many other peoples, the people of Equatorial Guinea is deeply concerned about the drug trafficking and illegal drug use which in recent years have reached alarming proportions in many countries. The growing magnitude of this problem amounts to a social calamity for mankind and must be fought courageously and decisively on all fronts and with all available national and international weapons. drug trafficking destabilizes the very structure of States, using corruption and the most varied criminal resources in an intricate network of operations, conspiracies and schemes involving ail social strata and the most powerful economic sectors, including the fundamental structures of public power. In some States, this poses a threat to national security and sovereignty. It is time, therefore, to view this as a universal problem, because of the social, economic and political factors at stake.
I wish also to address the role of the international community in the world of science and technology. Today more than ever before it is necessary to support the creation in third-world countries of a network of world-scope institutions and research centres devoted to implementing, developing and promoting the most advanced technology. It is necessary to encourage and organize broader and more coherent international co-operation in that sphere. To achieve this, we must adopt without delay an international code of conduct on the genuine transfer and exchange of technology. In the context of those convictions and criteria, we in Equatorial Guinea have established a council for scientific research, which has already taken the first steps in its research. From this rostrum we appeal to the international community to work together to accelerate and support efforts in that sector.
I cannot conclude without saying that Equatorial Guinea appreciates and values the efforts made since 1982, the year of the first donors' conference for the economic revitalization of our country, held in Geneva under United Nations auspices. Those efforts have made possible a new plan of structural adjustment and tangible economic improvements in our society, in keeping with the recommendations of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
We are certain that the programme for sectoral meetings adopted during the most recent follow-up round-table of the donors' conference, held in November 1988 in Geneva, will be effectively and punctually implemented with a view to achieving its aims, thanks to the ongoing support of the United Nations Development programme and the three major donors: the World Bank, Spain and France.
I wish in conclusion to reaffirm my conviction that, under the excellent guidance of Major-General Garba, the Assembly will achieve the desired success.


I should like first to extend my congratulations to you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the current session of the General Assembly. I wish you every success in your endeavours. I also wish to thank the United Nations, through the Secretary-General, for the extraordinary role which it is playing in the international system and for the extraordinary role that the Secretary-General is playing personally.
I have given a great deal of thought to the way in which I might begin this dialogue with the international community and to the concerns that I should communicate to the representatives present here. I have decided that the most appropriate course would be to share with you a profound concern which I, as a political leader and as a citizen, have felt. It is a concern which I believe is not mine alone, rather one which is universal and of interest to the world as a whole, I am referring to that complex problem of alienation between society and the State, which is producing among the people almost everywhere in the world, a constant feeling of mistrust and lack of belief which, in my opinion, is eroding the very bases of any proper political system, in particular a democratic one.
In the few days that I have been in New York, when I have been travelling around in the official car of the Bolivian Mission, I have noticed that few people on the streets seem to be paying any attention to the cars. Most people seem to see them as an expression of some kind of power. The United Nations itself may be seen to be expressing a power that is concentrated every year during the General Assembly. But after all it is a power which, in one way or another, is suffering from this problem of the distancing of the people and this generates a feeling of despair or mistrust or disbelief. There seems to be a world citizenry who do not feel that the authorities are part of their daily lives.
That is my first concern, but there is another thought, which 1 consider necessary. I believe that the citizens of our world want to be able to believe in something important transcending boundaries. For this reason they are asking us to be truthful - truthful at all times with respect to any problem. That truth may be the antidote to distrust. It may give our citizens faith and hope in their own societies, Governments and States. That is why I believe, today, that the words of the Gospel are of greater importance than ever before - the words that tell us that the truth - and only the truth - will make us free. There can be no freedom without truth. It is impossible to imagine truth that does not express itself within a free system. That is why I should like, openly and frankly, to tell you our truth - the truth of the President of the Republic of Bolivia, the truth of all Bolivians. But first of all, a profound truth that involves the very roots of our nationality.
I come from a country which is embedded in the heart of the South American continent, where all the geographical features of South America converge. It is difficult for us as Bolivians to know whether South America begins in Bolivia or whether South America ends in that geographical knot which is called Bolivia, whether our country marks the starting-point or the limit of the continent. I wonder how many people died in that act of violence. I wonder whether in the civil war which is afflicting a number of Latin American countries more children are dying than died in the violence entailed in the process of economic and financial stabilization, such as the one in my country.
There is another problem facing contemporary democracy, especially in the poorest countries: is economic and financial stability compatible with democracy? That is a challenge to the entire United Nations, because our democracies, given hyper-inflation, the economic crisis and instability, are becoming defenceless - economically and financially defenceless. This is another issue in which the international community must shoulder responsibility.
But, in addition to engaging in the process of bringing about economic and financial stability, our country - in that Latin America which is in such a state of upheaval and which is attempting to work towards democracy through transition - has strengthened its democracy. I can say with pride before all the peoples of the world: Bolivia today has a strong democracy. We have carried out this process in our own way, with our own laws. We have succeeded because of a meeting of minds of Bolivians, the patriotic agreement of the overwhelming majority of Bolivians, which led to a Government of national unity in which political organizations and individuals that had fought each other for almost 20 years managed to come together.
That can be understood only in light of the fact that one stage of Bolivian national political life was superseded - that is, the situation following the 1930s, the world crisis the Chaco war. And today there has been a change in Bolivian national policy: a new cycle, an attempt to make consensus, agreement and harmony, rather than conflict and confrontation, the foundations of Bolivia's democratic policy. That is what we are starting to call the revolution of democracy - a revolution occurring all over the world, now that it is no longer possible to have single parties or hegemonic parties or elements in national political life, and everyone is obliged to share and work together.
While we arrived at this solution in Bolivia, our Polish brothers and sisters were finding a different solution. And earlier we had had the French model of ideologically and historically opposing forces managing to share power within a democratic system.
But, together with this economic and financial stabilization, achieved with so many sacrifices, in a continent - and I emphasize this - where in recent decades democracy has been an exception, today in Bolivia political stability has been strengthened. I must recognize that this has been the result of the efforts of the entire national community and its institutions? and that the Bolivian armed forces - which the international community had regarded as a source of constant instability in our country - have today, like all other elements in Bolivia, become an institution which is a real, solid basis for contemporary Bolivian democracy. In addition, our humble country has succeeded, with a special effort, in solving a problem that has been discussed here on many occasions and is being discussed at this very session - the problem of foreign debt. In the past two years our country, in the midst of an economic crisis and the process of democratic transition, has managed to honour and pay almost 30 per cent of its foreign debt - money owed to the international banking system - $300 million - and bilateral indebtedness. That was possible because of the will of Bolivians and their Government, but also because of international co-operation, which enabled us to renegotiate with the international banks on terms advantageous to the country. It was also possible because of the coincidence that in recent weeks there came to power two Governments, in Bolivia and in Argentina, with faith in Latin America, Governments that believe in Latin Americanism and that with respect to their bilateral debts apply the principle whose application they had been demanding for many years of the rich industrialized countries - the basic principle that there are certain debts that it is technically impossible to pay, and that to find a solution what is needed is the political will and political decisions.
President Menem of Argentina and the President of Bolivia took the decision mutually to write off the debts that had accumulated over past years between the two countries. I believe that that precedent set by contemporary Bolivia and contemporary Argentina can be linked positively with other efforts being made in the same direction to resolve the problem, which is of such magnitude.
That is why I stand before the Assembly, proud of my people and of my country, Whose age-old culture and contemporary achievements from an unbroken line guaranteed by the people themselves, who are determined to realize their own destiny in their own sovereign way. Therefore, I should like to paraphrase, humbly, but also proudly, words 1 used in my election campaign, saying to the international community: "Here we are before you with what we have done". What more can you ask of us? What more can you say? We also stand here with our will to work with the international community to resolve the basic problems of our world of today.
At the same time I want to tell the Assembly that we represent the voice of a whole new generation that has emerged in our country. This is not only a Bolivian phenomenon; it is a Latin American, continental phenomenon. In the past two decades of Latin American life a new political generation has been formed, a generation trained in the school of the struggle for democracy. We are the generation that brought about the clash against the dictatorships to create the democracies on our continent. Although it may seem a young generation, it is an experienced generation, bearing the scars of the struggle against the dictatorships. It remembers the lives of the martyrs who paid the price to bring democracy to Latin America. It is a generation that knows that the struggle was for the Latin American people, the Bolivian people, and that therefore understands that we cannot accept any democracy that is not at the unconditional service of all the inhabitants of Latin America, including the neediest.
None the less, I want to tell representatives that this Bolivia, which has made those achievements in recent years, is a country which, like all other third world countries, like all the other developing countries, has not resolved basic structural problems. My country continues to have a problem of chronic unemployment, even more chronic because of the financial and economic adjustments we have had to make. My country still has a small market and a small productive sector, and it remains a country on the sidelines of the global economy. Indeed, I would say that it is at the margin of the sidelines. It remains a country of critical poverty, perhaps among the most acute on our continent.
Together with those continuing structural problems, which are challenges to be met by Bolivians, with international co-operation, we still have, in spite of our current achievements, the grave structural problem of lack o£ access to the sea. We continue to be a mountainous enclave in the heart of South America. I do not want to dwell on a problem that has existed for more than a hundred years, but I do want to point out here, to the international community, that our demand for a sovereign outlet to the sea is a Bolivian demand that cannot be renounced.
Over Bolivia's long history we have lost territory in the Amazon region, but that does not mean that we ceased to be a country of the Amazon. We have lost territory in the Rio de la Plata area, but that does not mean that we ceased to be a Rio de la Plata country. But in losing territory giving access to the Pacific we ceased to be a maritime country. In other words, we lost not only territory, but the benefit of being a country with access to the sea, which we had when we began our independent existence. That is the basis in justice of our claim for access to the sea.
While members of a past generation led us into an unjust war that resulted in the problem, we of the new generation stress that at the end of the twentieth century we cannot continue to deal with Bolivia's maritime problem and Bolivia's claim with the tired and limited mentality of the nineteenth century. We must begin to approach it with the new outlook that must be adopted as we enter the twenty-first century. In that context, we must find a solution in the new spirit, full of hope, of the coming century.
1 make this claim here at the United Nations because it is precisely in this international forum that it has been recognized that for the underdeveloped countries lade of access to the sea is one of the causes of underdevelopment and poverty. That has been recognized in the world Organization.
But above and beyond all of this, I wish to turn to my compatriots from Bolivia, my Latin American compatriots from Chile and from Peru, and tell them that we should take up this challenge on behalf of our peoples and our Governments and find a solution which will open new prospects for all of us, new possibilities and a new prosperity to construct together.
I wish to speak about some other problems facing my country - and not just my country, for we share them with the entire international community. These are problems such as illicit drug trafficking, the systematic erosion and impoverishment of the global environment, and acute poverty.
Concerning the drug traffic, we are all aware that this is an old problem, but we should welcome the fact that recently the international community has gained a new awareness of the importance of the problem, and that as a fundamental part of that new awareness it has been fully understood that this not a problem of one country alone or of a handful of countries but, rather, an international problem, a problem for the international community as a whole. We should also welcome the fact that, having understood this, the international community has now incorporated the concept of co-responsibility in its approach to the drug traffic. This in itself is a great achievement: it is a great achievement that the average American citizen, who may indeed be suffering the consequences of drug addiction in his own family, understands that somewhere else in the world, in Bolivia, there are peasants facing an equally acute problem from a humanitarian aid moral standpoint, from the standpoint of their lives and the quality of their lives. It is important also that that Bolivian citizen in the countryside should understand that, just as he has existential problems in connection with the drug traffic, in the United States and in other parts of the world there are people for whom it is also a problem, a problem of life and death. I believe that this is an international achievement we should all welcome. The Vienna Convention is a reflection of this' progress, and recently in the United States, through President Bush's plan, we have seen another reflection of concern over this problem and a new approach commensurate with the international community's rising awareness of the problem. Of course, we welcome this plan, although we share the view here that the resources allocated to implementing the plan ace perhaps not commensurate with the new awareness the plan reflects.
But I know that the international community wants to know Bolivia's opinion on this - and I said at the beginning of my statement that Bolivians would tell the truth, would tell our truth in this forum. So it is important to state that, so far as this problem is concerned, we are convinced that we must tell each other the truth, frankly and once and for all. It would be very bad for us to deal in empty phrases. But it would be still worse if each of our countries were tempted to handle the problem on the basis of politics, of domestic political needs or other types of interests.
We must be sincere, we must tell each other the truth - and the first truth I wish to tell the international community is this; I wonder whether we are really waging a head-on war against drug trafficking. I wonder whether we are actually in a state of war, because sometimes that does not seem to be the case. The worst thing I could do would be to involve my country in a war that is not the war we should be waging, or that we are waging as a formality or because of some other need. So let us be honest with each other in the international community about this problem; let us try to tackle the problem properly, for if we really are waging a war it is because we want to win that war - indeed, that is the objective of going to war.
Having examined President Bush's plan, I think we must base our analysis on differences between, on the one hand, consumer countries, areas and sectors and, on the other, countries, areas or sectors which sell their services or act as intermediaries or channels for drugs, and we have to draw a distinction between both of these and the countries that produce the raw materials: if we do not draw that clear distinction, we shall not be seeing the war in its true and proper dimensions and will run the risk of making things even more complicated than they are today.
The thinking of the Bolivian people is that the problem of drug trafficking is similar to the foreign-debt problem in many aspects. It is a scourge, just as the foreign debt is a scourge. However, in drug trafficking, as in the matter of the foreign debt, there are common issues which are of interest to the whole international community and are part of a common strategy that we need to carry out together. But to use the analogy of the foreign debt again, each country has its own specific problems and drug trafficking takes specific forms in different countries. That is why we say that we need to consider the general case, but at the same time we need to look at particular cases, at what is specific about the way the problem presents itself in each country. Hence we must say that for the consumer countries the basic requirement is a policy of prevention. It is not the only step that needs to be taken, but prevention is fundamental. However, for the countries that act as middlemen and as marketing countries, and countries through which drugs are channelled, then the basic requirement is prohibition and suppression. But in the poor, underdeveloped countries, where the raw material is produced - such as the coca leaf in Bolivia - the basic requirement has to be development alternatives to the coca crop.
Consequently, with respect to consumer countries, it is preventions for intermediary countries, it is prohibition* and in underdeveloped countries the production of the raw material needs to be eradicated through development alternatives, such as other products. But markets for such products must be found. What kind of President would I be if I were to tell Bolivian farmers that they needed to change their crops, which provide them with specific benefits, for other crops that would provide them fewer benefits and leave them uncertain of finding new international markets, for there would be unwillingness to open up international markets to those alternative products?
I believe that we must be perfectly clear on this point if we are seriously to tackle the problem - and that is what I would call a real war, one which we must all fight together.
I have spoken with a number of Heads of State and other leaders here - including President Bush, with whom I had a very pleasant talk which generated a great deal of mutual esteem. In those talks I indicated that, in so far as my country is concerned, the best way to fight against drug trafficking was to invest in Bolivia, because drug trafficking cannot be separated from unemployment and from the economic crisis. Drug trafficking is also linked to the critical moment in my country. Therefore, we would be mistaken to believe that all we needed to do in Bolivia was to curtail production, just as we would be mistaken to believe that the drug problem in the United States could be solved through the substitution of crops or the starting of alternative development. We need to place things in the right context. In my talks with the President of the United States and others in this country, as well as representatives of other countries, I was fortunate to encounter a clear understanding that we must tackle the problem together and in this context.
I also wish to state here before the international community that Bolivia is ready to mobilize all its national will and commit itself to a frontal attack against drug trafficking. We are prepared to do so on the basis of our own national reality; we are prepared to do so together with the entire international community. We ask that, based on our own concept, every people take its own initiative within its own country, because this is an endeavour that cannot be accomplished on one's own. Every people needs to tackle the problem directly.
Bolivia pledges to do its part on its own territory, to take the lead in the struggle on its own territory. We ask co-operation from the international community so as to press forward with the struggle, and we hope that the international community will assess the endeavours of the Bolivians in the light of the results of our struggle in our own land.
Bolivians are ready to shoulder their own responsibility in the struggle on their own national territory. We seek international co-operation because our country is poor in resources, poor in logistics, poor in infrastructure - co-operation in the struggle against drugs and for development. We accept to be judged by the international community on the results that we shall achieve as a people in this struggle. We also intend to enhance national awareness in respect of this struggle and, as a country, we pledge to work together with the international community to fight against another scourge - the deterioration of the environment.
Fortunately, Bolivia remains one of the few ecological preserves of the planet. When President Menem flew over Bolivia three days ago at one o'clock in the morning and as a Latin American sent me a fraternal message, I answered him by saying that I welcomed him in my country's airspace and that I was very pleased that he was flying through one of America's purest skies. My words were not meant as a metaphor? they reflected an ecological reality, for his plane was flying through one of the least polluted skies of the continent.
We are prepared to enter this struggle as well and to do so as a country of the Amazon region. A great deal is being said these days about the Amazon. There is something that members perhaps do not know - in proportion to its territory, Bolivia is the most Amazon country of South America. Over 70 per cent of Bolivian territory is in the Amazon basin. We have spoken with President Sarney to promote an ecologically sound production policy in the Amazon territory that we share. We would like to work together with the other countries concerned. We should not be prevented from opening up new productive economic frontiers for the peoples of these territories in the name of a false ecological concept. We need to seek balance between the need of our people for development and the need of our people, and of all mankind, not to harm nature. In this regard, we are prepared in our development process not to repeat the actions taken by the developed countries that have harmed the environment in their development process. That is also a challenge for mankind. The problems of drug trafficking and the environment are related to another problem, namely, that of extreme poverty. I call these the three scourges: drug trafficking, extreme poverty, and the economic, financial and external debt crisis - the latter being the overriding scourge of the poor countries, like my own. These are the scourges facing poor countries such as ours.
For our people, they are the three horsemen of the Apocalypse, so in our struggle we cannot separate them. If we are to combat drug trafficking we must combat poverty as well, and we must preserve the environment. The production of cocaine is related to the systematic destruction of the environment in countries where it is produced. In order to combat damage to the environment we need to combat both drug trafficking and extreme poverty. And to fight against extreme poverty we need to fight against drug trafficking and damage to the environment. This is, as I said before, an inseparable trilogy, and anyone who does not understand this is not fighting the right war, and as I am sure the international community will understand, we should not be fighting the wrong war.
We are prepared to run our own risks-, we are prepared to shoulder our responsibilities-, and we are prepared to share all of this with the international community. But, above and beyond everything that I have said, I want to tell this Assembly that Bolivia, with its Government of national unity, with its process of national harmony, has definite goals in mind. We want to maintain the economic and financial stability that we have won at such great cost. By the end of the year Bolivia will have a maximum rate of inflation of 12 per cent. Truly this is a record in Latin America. This economic and financial stability is an achievement for our people, and we certainly cannot throw it out of the window. We want to use it as the basis for development because stability without growth is fragile: it has feet of clay. Stability without movement is the stability of the cemetery. There is stability in cemeteries, but it is the stability of death, what we want is the stability of life, which is the stability of growth. We want stability with a profound policy of social development.
I would like to refer very briefly to certain international problems in respect of which Bolivia's voice must be heard. As Latin Americans, we believe that a Latin American solution must be found to the problems of Central America, and we believe that that solution must be based on a resolution of the problem of democracy. In the last analysis, what is at stake in Central America is the question of democracy. Let us allow each country to be the protagonist of its own democracy, so long as it is a clear democracy that can coexist with others. I believe that the countries of Central America have a special responsibility because they are most familiar with the problems of the sub-region.
As Latin Americans, we Bolivians must reaffirm that the Malvinas Islands are Latin American, that they belong to Argentina, but that Argentina and the United Kingdom should find a solution in the form of an international agreement. He fervently hope that there will be fruitful dialogue between those two countries, both of which have age-old fraternal links with Bolivia.
In the international sphere, there is something else that is very important to Bolivia. We want an appropriate solution to be found to the problem of the Middle East. We want a just solution that respects the rights of all the peoples of the Middle East. There can be no solution that works to the detriment of any party, because such a solution would not respect tine rights of all those who coexist in the region.
That is why I welcome the efforts made by the United Nations in that area. I hope an international conference under United Nations auspices will take place and that none of the parties or their authentic representatives will be excluded from it, lest we approach the problem without any real determination to solve it.
Much has changed in today's world; those changes are but the forerunners of future changes. Our world is moving closer to detente, understanding and co-operation. We hope the next century, which will be upon us in a few years, will find us all sharing a single ideology: the ideology of global civilization, of a universal culture in which we are all linked to one another. It is up to us.
We are already seeing some signs of that world of the future, a future from which we may look back at the twentieth century and its problems in the same way we look today, in history books, at the problems of the eighteenth century, in the same way we look at tine problems discussed by the encyclopaedists of that age.
Technology is becoming the ideology of the modern world, for technology is drawing us all together. It operates above and beyond the ideologies we inherited from past centuries. Technology and culture will be the ideology of the twenty-first century. What is the ideological difference between an American astronaut and a Soviet cosmonaut? They share the same ideology, technology. They are scientists and have few differences between them. That may be a model of the world to come, a model to be shared by all mankind.
I wish in conclusion to reiterate my faith in the United Nations system and in the purposes of the Organization: to combat poverty and backwardness now and in the future. I believe the United Nations can no longer tolerate the violence of oppression, extreme poverty or the presence of violence and death in many parts of tine world. Deep in our hearts, we all feel that those problems must be resolved.
Since 1945 leaders of the entire world have come here to tell the truth: their truth. Some have come with the arrogance of strength) some have come with the anger of powerlessness. But we have all come here to tell our truth.
As the President of a poor and humble country, I would recall the wise message of Ecclesiastes where it is written that
"wisdom is better than strength; nevertheless the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard". (The Holy Bible, Ecclesiastes 9-.16) The United Nations and the international community must hear the words of the poor, because, as the Holy Father has said, the new name of development is peace.


Please accept, Sir, the congratulations of the delectation of the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic on your election as President of the forty-fourth session of the United Nations General Assembly. We are most appreciative of the activities of the Secretary-General and share the view he expressed in the report on the work of the Organization that:
“The United Nations needs to demonstrate its capacity to function as guardian of the world's security., (A/44/1, p. 11).
The United Nations emerged from the Second World War which was unleashed by fascism and militarism, which took advantage of the lack of unity among peace-loving forces and of the negative response of the European nations to the Soviet proposals for collective action against the aggressor. Our people took UP arms to defend the goals and principles of international relations which were later enshrined, with our participation, in the United Nations Charter. The members of the anti-Hitler coalition were fighting not only for their national interests, but also to bring freedom and independence to so many enslaved nations. We welcome the statements made during the general debate about the inviolability of cost-war borders in Europe.
Fundamental changes have taken place in the world represented in the United Nations. These changes are most profound and radical and signify the end of the cold war and the dawning of an era of peace and mutual trust, the renunciation of propagandist, polemics and the initiation of a quest for specific bilateral and multilateral action to resolve existing problems by political means, drawing upon the prestige and potential of the United Nations.
Clearly, the most important feature of these multi faceted features is the fact that they are not confined to narrow national interests of individual States. They are global in scale and thus call for a multilateral approach. Not only are these changes encouraging but they also call for a correct understanding of where they are leading the world. In conditions of freedom of choice and of pluralism of opinions based on the new political thinking, these changes also mean that we must further outline joint measures to achieve demilitarisation, democratization and the humanization of international contacts and to establish the primacy of law in relations among States.
Over the past few years, we have all had a difficult oath to tread. Gone are the days when people saw everything in terms of black and whites when everyone believed that he alone was right; when socialism was made out to be the enemy rather than a partner in world affairs; when suspicion and mistrust repelled mutual tolerance and the natural desire of nations to live in peace and friendship with one another; when some would put forward proposals to strengthen peace and develop co-operation while others would reject them; and without even attempting to understand them; when universal human values were not taken into account. Without wishing to continue this review of an unhappy past, for which there are still those who remain nostalgic even today, I would point out that in our detailed, often heated and at times disrespectful, discussions, we, after all, did succeed in restoring and enriching, in United Nations resolutions and recommendations, the meaning of such key notions as international peace and security, disarmament, economic development, co-operation, decolonization, social justice, human rights and so forth.
But it is too early to rest on our laurels. All this should be embodied in mandatory international legal instruments. In this context the next decade, which  will mark the end of the twentieth century and of the second millennium, will be decisive in terms of whether mankind succeeds in coping with new challenges and whether it will emerge victorious in the struggle for peace and well-being for everyone on this planet.
We are preoccupied with the problems of eliminating the threat of war, bringing about disarmament, resolving regional conflicts, eliminating the vestiges of colonialism, ensuring development, social progress, observance of human rights, and the preservation of an ecological balance. It is being increasingly recognized that these problems have a direct bearing on the level of security and the quality of life of the peoples of the world.
It would appear that today everyone understands that the use of military force, particularly nuclear force, with all its devastating consequences, has run its course. It is also clear that there can be no just settlement of regional conflicts through the use of military force. The new level of this understanding has led to important conceptual breakthroughs that have made it possible to conclude and implement the first ever agreement on the actual elimination of a portion of nuclear arsenals of Soviet and United States medium- and shorter-range missiles. It has also made possible the holding of substantive talks on a 50 per cent reduction in United States and Soviet strategic offensive weapons. The initiation of the Vienna Talks on reductions in armed forces and armaments in Europe is an important milestone in modern history. What is important in this regard is that these endeavours are being conducted in a multilateral regional context.
Today it is important to make the current positive developments irreversible. It is essential, not only strictly to comply with agreements readied or to conduct negotiations in a spirit of good will with regard for each, others interests, but also not to take steps in a spirit and direction contrary to those developments, not to try to circumvent existing agreements on the elimination of weapons on the pretext of ,modernizing, or by building up arms in other categories, and not to erect new, artificial barriers when parties to an agreement have already removed earlier stumbling-blocks.
Steps must be taken to solve fundamental problems, namely, fundamental military concepts. The idea of nuclear deterrence is a blood clot in the artery of nuclear disarmament. Wanting to keep nuclear weapons is like being high on drugs. Like drugs that merely give the illusion of happiness while actually ruining one's health, nuclear weapons offer only the Illusion of security while in actual fact they threaten universal annihilation.
Trust, predictability, multilateral agreement on the part of all nuclear powers on measures to reduce the risk of the outbreak of nuclear war, reduction of stockpiles of nuclear weapons and their verifiable elimination must replace the policy of nuclear intimidation and so-called deterrence. What the world needs is political and legal deterrence rather than nuclear deterrence.
Generally speaking, there are serious signs of mutual accommodation on the part of various groups of States in the field of disarmament. This is in large part a direct result of the new political thinking. We welcome the recent Soviet and United States agreements and the latest initiatives of the Soviet Union as set forth in the statement by Eduard Shevardnadze, member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union. While a number of differences exist, definite progress towards a broad consensus on disarmament issues can be perceived in the United Nations also.
In considering disarmament problems in the United Nations it would clearly be helpful to focus on those areas In which the United Nations, as a unique multilateral forum, possesses appropriate practical capabilities. That could include measures to prevent nuclear war. In particular, it would be advisable to start work on the practical implementation of the proposals, including those of the Secretary-General, to establish a multilateral nuclear and military risk reduction centre and, ultimately, a system of centres that would include regional centres, and the setting up of hot lines between the capitals of all nuclear Powers.
The United Nations has the unique potential in yet another important field, that of the n on-proliferation of dangerous types of weapons, whether nuclear or chemical, or missile technology, as well as in the area of banning the development and production o£ new types and systems of weapons of mass destruction.
Work must soon begin at the multilateral level on defensive doctrines and the corresponding structures of armed forces, as well as on the principle of reasonable sufficiency for defence. This is really the right time for it. The imperative need for such doctrines, structures and principles is recognized today by virtually all, and, indeed, a number of socialist States have already taken major strides in that direction. Now it is important to negotiate uniform understanding of their essence, criteria and parameters. An appropriate means of starting such a discussion could be negotiated at the General Assembly.
Current and forthcoming disarmament processes, including efforts to prevent the extension of the arms race to outer space, as well as harsh economic realities have made a practical issue out of one that until recently might have appeared to be merely theoretical - namely, the issue of the conversion of military industries. In this connection, too, multilateral endeavours would be helpful, such as the preparation and presentation of national conversion plans and other related measures provided for in the Programme of Action of the Conference on Disarmament and Development, with an exchange of experience and theoretical studies designed to maximize the benefits and minimize the costs and inconveniences involved in the transition from an arms economy to a disarmament economy.
The Byelorussian SSR has accumulated certain experience in this area. For a long time new our heavy industries, including our defence industries, have been turning out consumer goods with the idea of generating production equal in value to be paid in salaries and wages. Thus military might is gradually ceasing to be the guarantee of security in our diverse, changing and interdependent world. It is being replaced by the concept of a comprehensive approach to the problems of international peace and security in all areas of relations among States. In this connection, the United Nations should become a centre for a system of universal and equal security for all. To that end new approaches are needed to bring about and maintain peace. Most useful principles in this respect are contained in the Charter. They should be used to the full. To that end what is necessary is both a drastic overhaul and long-term fundamental work on improving certain existing machinery that is either idling or has become rusty from infrequent use.
The role of the United Nations in resolving regional crises is growing. This is a field in which United Nations machinery has recently achieved major success and made significant progress towards creating new confidence between States in the potential of multilateral diplomacy, which in turn has justified talk of a kind of United Nations renaissance. Although the ultimate goals have not yet been achieved, in this context one can cite Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq and Namibia  efforts on the problems of the Middle East, South-East Asia, Central America, Cyprus and Western Sahara; and the beginning of dialogue, initiated by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, on a settlement in the Korean peninsula.
The United Nations peace-making role should be further developed in the years to come. We should move from extinguishing fires to detecting and preventing them. In other words, we must gather and analyse information on regions of conflict, send missions to the field, set up observation posts, prepare recommendations to parties to conflicts, and where necessary conduct operations to prevent military, political, economic, ecological, humanitarian or other conflicts. All this means that we must make the work of the Security Council more productive. There must be meetings at the ministerial level, and the Secretary-General must be more persistent in raising questions. In other words# we are in favour of a transition from crisis diplomacy to preventive diplomacy that will make it clear to everyone that there is no need to jump into the fire to understand that it will be painful.
It is time to establish the true primacy of law in international relations. This means unconditional compliance with the Charter and obligations under other legal instruments. Furthermore, multilateral legal institutions, primarily the International Court of Justice, should start working to full capacity, and to that end all States in turn should assume new obligations vis-à-vis the decisions of such organs. In this connection, I should like to inform the General Assembly that this year the Byelorussian SSR has accepted the compulsory and binding jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice with regard to six human rights conventions and has ratified additional protocols to the Geneva conventions relating to the protection of victims of armed conflicts.
New developments and trends in national and world economies have recently been clearly taking shape. Major structural changes are under way. The unipolar pattern has given way to the multipolar system of economic centres. Greater integration of socialist States into the world economy is also changing the picture. The devastating debt burden of the developing countries, the chronic instability of raw-material prices and the poverty of millions all call for our closest attention. The issues of underdevelopment and migration are also growing from a humanitarian-assistance problem into something entirely different: they are becoming a category of universal security. The problems themselves are not new, but it is their magnitude today that gives them a new dimension, which calls for a fundamentally different response. It would appear that it is no longer acceptable to tolerate a situation where the rich grow richer at the expense of the poor, and where discrimination, or even diktat, continues to hold its position in international economic relations. Such a situation has become a threat to global security.
Finally, the gap between actual developments in the world economy and the legal regulation of that economy is becoming ever more striking. It has even been sand that the economy is not subordinate to international law, and that, regrettably, can become the case if we all fail jointly to alleviate the situation in this field.
The Byelorussian SSR has an interest in this work since, from 1990, we shall be switching over to a new economic environment based on self-management and self-financing, in addition to developing and deepening our trade and economic ties with foreign States and firms. In this connection, I should like to stress that as a result of the years of socialist construction the Byelorussian SSR has become a highly developed and agrarian State that provides its people with modern material and other benefits. That has occurred in spite of the fact that during the Second World War we lost half of our national wealth and a quarter of our population  in spite of the mistakes and aberrations of the past. All this proves the enormous potential inherent in the socialist social system and the fraternal Interaction of the peoples of the USSR.
Perestroika and democratization of all aspects of social life new under way in our country will make possible the actual utilization  for the benefit of peoples and individuals   of the enormous potential inherent in socialist production relations.
The problem of universal security is aggravated by new environmental threats* pollution of the atmosphere and water  the greenhouse effect  depletion of the ozone layer  deforestation and desertification. Today all this calls for an urgent review of many traditional views of the balance between the interests of individual States and those of the community of nations. What we need is international multilateral research into these problems. It would appear that the solution should be sought in the advent of energy-saving and resource-saving  environmentally clean technologies and production which generate no waste  and in switching over to renewable resources. In this connection  the pooling of our multilateral efforts is indispensable. The forthcoming conference on the environment provides us with an appropriate opportunity to do that.
To the Byelorussian SSR, environmental issues have a specific feature of their own because of the need for clean-up operations following the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear-power station. Immediately following the disaster we had to resettle almost 25f000 people from the contaminated area to other parts of the Republic and build for them 10,000 apartments with the necessary infrastructure. Today the territory contaminated at various levels with radio-nucleides exceeds 18 per cent of all arable land. Costs and losses resulting from setting up , no-go, zones and from resettlement have already reached about 2 billion roubles. We are planning for further evacuation of local residents from contaminated areas, h comprehensive 16-biIion-rouble programme is now being developed in our Republic for 1990 to 1995 to alleviate the consequences of the accident and provide foe safe living conditions in the affected areas. Our own efforts to that end are being backed by the substantial assistance we are receiving from other fraternal peoples of the Soviet Union. A number of public organizations in our Republic have appealed for help to our fellow countrymen and all people of good will abroad. A translation of the text of that appeal is annexed to the text of my statement that has been distributed to members.
We support the United Nations efforts to protect the environment, and also the proposal for the establishment of a centre for urgent environmental assistance and the drawing up of a United Nations programme to mitigate natural disasters and prevent industrial accidents - that is to say  international co-operation in that field, making use among other things of environment-monitoring satellites. In overview, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) should be actively involved in this effort.
We must all give the highest priority to the analysis of problems and phenomena that are emerging in the world today - that is, we must recognize the fundamental nature of those changes, identify new global problems, and define new areas for working together and reaching agreement on ways to bring about urgently needed adjustments in out practical actions.
Taking into account existing differences of opinion on some global processes, we believe that it is not at all necessary immediately to adopt a single consensus view of the future in order to realize that ultimately it will be wise to prepare for imminent change well in advance.
Obviously, the United Nations itself must change in resonance to new challenges and difficulties. It cannot serve merely as a repository of unrealised ideas. It should rather become a generator of new ideas and blaze the trail of change. It is particularly important new for organs of the United Nations system to fulfil their function as a genuine collective intellect and a centre for harmonizing the actions of States.
President Gorbachev made a tangible contribution to a better understanding of the new role of the United Nations in his speech to the General Assembly last December, by offering a philosophic rationale for the heightened importance of the internationalisation of efforts by States to ensure their common future in a global home, regardless of their special features, ideologies or socio-political systems.
The United Nations has already proved capable of adapting to new conditions. In the current situation it is important not to fragment United Nations political, intellectual and financial resources, but to concentrate them on main problem areas, particularly those where this universal Organization has a particular vantage point, expertise and the ability to formulate global tasks and build consensus on the basis of a balance of interests and realism, so as to perform those tasks in the interests of universal security and co-operation.
At the same time, we must all embark on a course of scrupulous compliance with the binding decisions of the Security Council and, in our practical policies, take into account consensus recommendations, while constantly seeking to expand their scope. It would seem the time has come also to give thought to resolving a situation where one or two delegations obstruct general agreement. In this context, some important further steps could be taken, such as practical measures to endow the United Nations with a preventive function, establishing a crisis early warning system, conferring upon the Organization powers to verify compliance with  multilateral agreements and enhancing the effectiveness of the United Nations principal organs, including the Secretariat.
The new role of the United Nations would be best served if we eliminated duplication of work and strengthened the co-ordination of activities of United Nations specialised agencies in accomplishing global, economic, scientific-technological and social tasks. It would also be useful to develop machinery for United Nations interaction with regional intergovernmental bodies and international non-governmental organizations that deal with problems of universal concern, and also with national public organizations.
The United Nations Association that has been created in the Byelorussian SSR intends to be actively involved in the efforts of the world community to translate into reality the noble purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter.
Attaching paramount importance to the activities within the United Nations framework and to the further development of the World Campaign for Disarmament, we intend to make a regular voluntary contribution to that Fund.
The general debate now drawing to a close and the documents adapted at the ninth Conference of Heads of State or Government of the non-Aligned countries demonstrate that virtually all United Nations Member States recognize the need for new approaches to the problems of mankind. We are convinced that the United Nations has an important role to play in promoting that vision. The delegation of the Byelorussian SSR is prepared to make its own contribution to the discussion of relevant agenda items so that at this very session we may achieve good results which match the imperatives of our time.


First of all, allow me warmly to congratulate you, Sir, on your election as President of the General Assembly. I am confident that you will carry out the lofty duties of your office with consummate skill and diplomacy, and my delegation will be happy to join in your efforts and co-operate fully with you.
I should also like to pay a tribute to your predecessor, Mr. Dante Caputo. The manner in which he guided our activities during the last session has earned him the unanimous esteem of the Assembly.
Following the remarkable statement delivered by my French colleague, Mr. Roland Dumas, on behalf of the European Community and its member States, there is little need for me to taking up every subject in the wide range of concerns shared by the Twelve in today's world.
Some 40 years ago, Mr. Paul-Henri Spaak, then Foreign Minister of Belgium, addressed the third session of the United Nations General Assembly in a remarkable speech that had a world-wide impact. Mr. Spaak, who was also President of the Assembly's first session just after the Second World War, stated in 1948 that Belgium's foreign policy, as well as the foreign policies of other Western democracies, was governed by fear, fear of the totalitarian way of government, fear in the face of territorial expansionism, fear of an ideology of world domination. His famous exclamation - "We are frightened" - characterized the prevailing international climate at that time, the climate that led to the cold war - a kind of "glasnost" in East-West relations - and, ultimately, to the lowering of an almost hermetically sealed Iron Curtain.
Owing to that fear, the political question of East-West relations was for many years to come to be couched mainly from a military perspective. East-West antagonism exacerbated some third-world conflicts, and an arms race ensued that took on surrealistic dimensions.
It is a fact of history that equilibrium based on mutual deterrence has been the contributing factor in the prevention of a third world war. Today, however, we find that the arms race has put a considerable strain on our economies and has swallowed up tremendous sums that could otherwise have been channelled into social benefits or into development assistance. In addition, new technologies in modern armaments, as well as the proliferation of all kinds of weapons, seem even to have increased the danger of a sudden conflict's escalating beyond control.
It has new become obvious - although the obvious is not always apparent - that peaceful co-operation is an infinitely more secure, more moral and less expensive basis on which to build peace than are relations expressed in terms of pure military strength.
The political and economic reforms now being introduced in various socialist countries fill us with hope - hope for courageous policies of renewal, hope for more democratic and prosperous societies and, in particular, hope that the old feelings of fear and mutual distrust may gradually be transformed into ever-growing mutual trust through enhanced East-West co-operation. Reforms in Eastern-bloc countries have become absolute necessities under the pressure of various factors that have shown themselves more powerful than even the best-equipped ideologies.
The media and other modern means of communication have shrunk our world to village proportions. At the end of the day no State can afford to live in isolation, ignoring the outside world. New technologies, offsprings of creativity, research and the exercise of the critical spirit, meet with difficulties when trying to expand in centrally planned systems. The market economy, however imperfect, appears to be better suited to bringing about the third industrial revolution. As President Mitterrand recently stated, it is no coincidence that the countries with a democratic, pluralistic political system and a market economy based on free competition, subject, of course, to social correction, are also the ones in which the greatest degree of political and economic freedom for the greatest number of citizens goes hand in hand with the highest level of well-being and social justice. More than subtle ideological hair-splitting, hard facts demonstrate that a Western social and economic model of development, linked with the principle of pluralistic democracy, exerts an immense attraction for many countries in the world. That is given further confirmation in Europe by the continuous flow of refugees and immigrants from East to West.
It is clear that efforts made in the field of armaments, which in certain countries has accounted for up to 15 per cent of gross national product in recent years, have completely precluded the pursuit of economic policies that can effectively address the needs of the populations. Consequently, economic and political reform must be accompanied by arms control and arms reduction if political decision-makers want to avoid a number of vicious circles.
We realize how difficult and delicate the implementation of such a process of political reform can be. The complementarity of economic and political liberalization entails striking an extremely fragile balance. As Foreign Minister Roland Dumas stated on behalf of the Twelve, the fact that China has not acknowledged this fact and this parallelism has given rise to a tragic reversal.
We welcome the favourable developments that have emerged from the disarmament negotiations in Vienna and Geneva. The numbers now on the table can be qualified as quite spectacular. The reduction of the level of armaments must be established in a balanced and reciprocal manner, and it must be accompanied by absolutely trustworthy verification mechanisms. Those are the prerequisites for an even more comprehensive disarmament process. We also welcome President Mikhail Gorbachev's reference to the possibility of a "defensive defence", that is, a disarmament process that renders any attack impossible and that, at the same time, continues to guarantee effective defence utilizing the most modern weapons at the lowest possible level of deployment. That is precisely what we have always tried to achieve. Indeed, our primary goal is to arrive at a state of defence that is mutually and sufficiently deterrent with the smallest possible arsenal, thereby creating maximum stability and security.
Belgium hopes that new disarmament agreements between East and West can be very rapidly concluded, and that as a consequence major financial resources can gradually be freed so that we can pay more attention to other priorities. In the Eastern bloc as well as in Western countries, these financial resources could be spent on modernizing economic and industrial structures and on improving social conditions. Also, we must not forget conservation of the environment and the establishment of -a suitable policy on the environment. A major conference on this subject is to be held shortly in Sofia as part of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE). The United Nations also has an important role to play in this field, particularly in respect of preparing universal rules and standards. In this context, the important Conference on Environment and Development, which is to take place in 1992, will be a real challenge, one which we must meet. We did not receive our planet Earth, which is getting smaller every day, as an inheritance from our parents: rather, we have borrowed it from our children. Our responsibility here is enormous, irrespective of what our economic and political systems may be.
Disarmament and better understanding between East and West can also have a decisive influence on the North-South dialogue and can shed a fundamentally different light on what the approach should be to the problems of the third world. If confidence between East and West grows, many regional conflicts, which are in fact tragic side-effects of the tensions between the two great Powers, can probably be ended. We cannot but rejoice at the progress made in this area and at the many efforts made by all sides toward solving, peacefully through talks and negotiations, a whole range of regional conflicts and chronic tensions. It is none the less true that there are situations still persisting which provide heart-rending examples of violence and repression, such as Lebanon – until recently - and the Middle East and various other regions. Belgium pays a tribute to the Arab League and to the three mediators for the positive role they have played in the Lebanese question, and hopes that the peace process in that region will enable us to bring a speedy end to hostage-taking and to the inhuman fate that has befallen five of my compatriots whose names have been added to the long, sad list of hostages from other countries.
Improved East-West relations and better economic conditions in the industrialized countries are vitally important in our relations with the third world countries. At the special session of the General Assembly in 1979 and at the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in Manila, I submitted a proposal, on behalf of Belgium, for the implementation of a pact for growth in solidarity between the industrialized countries and countries in the third world which wished to join. The pact envisaged a substantial increase in development aid in direct proportion to the economic growth in each participating country and was geared to generating growth within the third world itself. Now that the world economy is healthier and East-West relations are developing in a positive direction, I think that this Belgian proposal could be brought up to date and submitted to the appropriate United Nations organs for thorough examination.
If we could unite our forces to usher in a post-cold-war era, other proposals and ideas could be envisaged. Why, for example, should it be inconceivable to implement triangular development projects, to be carried out, in a third-world country, by a Western country in association with an Eastern-bloc country? Why, indeed?
Concerning the explosive problem of the indebtedness of the third-world countries - although other countries are also facing the snowballing, devastating effects of debt burdens - Belgium supports the multilateral approach of the
International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Belgium recently decided on cancellation, pure and simple, of the State-to-State loans made to 13 African countries. Moreover, Belgium and Zaire have concluded an agreement for Belgium to waive payment of a third of Zaire's commercial debt to Belgium and to reschedule the outstanding interest payments. The package was coupled with the establishment of a re-utilization fund in Zairian currency for local development projects. We hope that this agreement between Belgium and Zaire will set an example to other creditor and debtor countries. In respect of Africa, and primarily Rwanda and Burundi, Belgium is pursuing a coherent policy towards reaching imaginative solutions to debt problems, with firm emphasis on joint management of the funds allocated to development.
The problems of the third world have been considerably aggravated by the scandalous traffic in arms, itself too often financed by the even greater disgrace of the traffic in drugs. Belgium favours an effective international embargo on all arms exports to belligerents, and we welcome the remarkable and extremely courageous efforts of the President of the United States, Mr. George Bush, and the President of Colombia, Mr. Virgilio Barco Vargas, in combating drug production and trafficking.
The international community will understand that the countries of the European Community attach great importance to respect for human rights and that our aid and co-operation are assessed in terms of the progress made in human rights. Indeed, we believe that all people, as individuals, as human beings, wherever they are in the world, have the right to the full enjoyment of their inalienable rights and the exercise of their fundamental freedoms. In saying this, and in acting as we do, we Europeans cannot but be modest and self-critical. This year, 1989, is the year we are commemorating the fiftieth anniversary of the outbreak of the Second World War on our old continent, which saw the most terrible and complete negation of human rights in the history of mankind. Belgium would like to pay a tribute to the unrelenting efforts of the United Nations and fully associates itself with them. Thus Belgium is participating in the United Nations action in Namibia and has sent people there as part of the peace-keeping operations to assist in monitoring the independence process. I wish to pay a tribute to the tireless efforts and devotion of the Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, and of his staff, which have led to the achievement of solutions to many conflicts through negotiation and conciliation.
We also fully support the efforts that are being made within the framework of the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to reach an agreement on the banning of all chemical weapons. We must all work together to enable the United Nations to work even more effectively. Theoretical and ideological debates are not getting us far enough; only programmes of concrete action are worthwhile.
The European Community - with its common market soon to be achieved, with economic and monetary unity, having in view a political unification, hence a common foreign and security policy - this Community, comprised of 12 member States, hopes to become an increasing factor in stability, peace and co-operation in the world, especially in Europe. I sometimes wonder whether this Europe we are striving for is being perceived correctly abroad. There are those who fear the Community, others who encourage it, and still others who ignore it.
The Europe of today was born of dreams but also of a sense of the realities which, 40 years ago, gave rise to the first attempts at integration. Europe is neither a self-centred fortress nor a mill open to all passing winds. Rather it seeks to be a magnet and a model for progress, generating freedom and happiness for its citizens. This Europe of the Twelve is not a Power, it is a potent force.
This Europe which is ours and which we are continuing to build day by day prefers co-operation to confrontation in all its affairs. We firmly believe that a strengthened European Community can contribute significantly to the establishment of genuine co-operation between East and West, so that the last scars left by the Second World War can finally be healed in our hearts and in reality.
A common European house is conceivable only if it is indeed a truly democratic house, where every citizen will be free to enjoy his fundamental political and economic freedoms as well as adequate social protection - where State authorities serve the individual and not the contrary. "Everybody is somebody" must be the humanist maxim of Government in our modern societies, where the growing complexity tends to overwhelm the individual. We must therefore give priority support to those countries that effectively implement policies of reform based on those values. That is the reason for our present aid to and co-operation with, countries such as Poland and Hungary.
The common European house - that of co-operation between East and West - need not result in a Europe of uniformity. It may have different rooms in which each separate people may organize itself as a State, according to its right to self-determination. But it is obvious that such a European house is unthinkable as long as a Berlin Wall continues to divide Europeans.
There are many signs of hope appearing on the horizon. Let that hope not be deceived. After decades of fear and mutual terror, reciprocal confidence must increase. It is not too early; indeed it is high time.