Sir, I take great pleasure in joining those speakers who have already congratulated you upon your election to the high office of President of this venerable world body. I am fully confident that, under your able guidance, our difficult deliberations in the weeks ahead will beat much good fruit. You may rest assured of the full coo-operation of my delegation.
I should also like to thank your predecessor, the Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, for his excellent work in conducting our affairs during the forty-first session of the General Assembly,
Each session of the United Nations General Assembly is convened, as it were, by a summons to all Member nations, exhorting them: "Come, let us reason together," and in this regard, the words of the Saint Lucian Nobel Prize winner. Sir Arthur Lewis, are instructive;
"We must continue to make the problems of each the official concern of all, that they may be resolved by discussion and mutual concession."
In the conduct of our international affairs. Saint Lucia has always been, and will always be, guided by its deep concern for the attainment of universal peace, respect for human rights and economic development and, in reflecting on the four decades that separate us from the end of the Second World War and the creation of the United Nations, we ate saddened by the realization that the insanity of the last world conflict has never really receded from international affairs during these last 42 years.
The world which emerged after the Second World War has been one divided into blocks by two competing super-Powers. Their over-riding objectives of promoting and protecting their competing ideologies have led to global suspicions, tension and hostility, and have dragged nations small, young and tender, like Saint Lucia, into regional conflicts completely detrimental to the interests of these small States. Since 1945, the nations of the world have killed over 40 million of their people in local wars. Today, from Central America to North Africa, from Afghanistan to the Persian Gulf to Kampuchea, local wars are raging with the consequential destruction of human life, prosperity and the environment, and from north—east Asia to Central Europe, brothers find themselves hemmed in by hostile creeds, glaring at each other across ideological frontiers. The horrors of international local wars are made worse as brother battles brother from South America to southern Africa, from East Africa to South Asia.
While we have been able to avoid a Third World War, it is small comfort that a contributory factor has been the spectre of mutually assured destruction from the nuclear weapons stockpiled by the super-Powers. And although there is general agreement that a second Noah' s ark will not emerge from a nuclear deluge, neither will there be a second genesis in another Garden of Eden. The threat of a thermonuclear Armageddon remains an ever constant reality. The arms race is, however, unflagging, and expenditure on arms has continued to soar, diverting into its vortex millions of dollars that could have liberated the world from underdevelopment, hunger and disease.
But in recent times there have been some small signs that a semblance of sanity is creeping back into the judgement of men; some not unpropitious events which give cause for the hope that we may be approaching a new tide in the affairs of men.
The announcement early in the life of this session of the General Assembly that the United States and the Soviet Union have agreed in principle to dismantle an entire class of nuclear weapons - the intermediate-range missiles - is one such welcome sign. It is the earnest hope of Saint Lucia, and I am certain of the international community, that the proposed intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty will be but the first step in a journey which we hope will end, not in the total elimination of mankind, but with the total elimination of nuclear weapons.
As the super-Powers inch towards nuclear agreements, so too are there small signs of hope in those countries that have been the quintessential examples of the East-West ideological divisions that have separated us since the last world war.
The recent high-level contact between the German Democratic Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany was most significant. My delegation hopes that this historic visit is but a foretaste of the quality of co-operation and understanding yet to come.
In the Koreas, we feel that many recent activities augur well for the future. Saint Lucia would welcome the peaceful reunification of the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea on the basis of agreements worked out by the Korean people themselves. We are therefore supportive of all topical proposals aimed at a renewed dialogue between the Korean people on reunification and, in the interim, we believe that full membership of the United Nations for the two Koreas would not hinder the efforts of unity towards this end. We believe that the coming 1988 Olympics presents an opportunity .for dialogue and co-operation that should not be missed.
Our region of the world has not escaped the effects of the ideological wars and rivalry of the super-Powers. Saint Lucia has for some time now been quite concerned with the situation in Central America and its implications for the peace and security of the entire region. We have always held the position that the countries of the region have the right to live in peace and to decide their own future, free from outside interference or intervention. We have also consistently maintained the view that the problems of the region are rooted in deep-seated local social and economic deprivation, and are therefore not amenable to armed or military solutions.
We have therefore always supported the efforts of the Contadora Group and, more recently, the Support Group to end the conflict in Central America. We welcomed the Cancun Declaration on Peace in Central America and the Document of Objectives, which set the foundation for the inauguration of negotiations with a view to ensuring harmonious coexistence in Central America. Saint Lucia expresses its full support for the peace plan signed by the five Central American Presidents and welcomes the creation of a role for both the United Nations and the Organization of American States in the implementation of the plan. We call upon all States to pledge their full co-operation to assist in its realization. Let those who dared to draw their swords, be now courageous enough, not only to sheathe them, but to take a bold leap of faith for peace. Let all men of goodwill remember that what the poor of the region desire is not guns, but simply a better and more fulfilling way of life, and let them lend their support to the cause of peace.
In the Caribbean, the Haitian people have cast off the yoke of oppression and are on the way to establishing a democratic system of government. We therefore look forward, not to the mere holding of elections in November this year, but to elections that will be free and fair and free from fear. We are confident, however, that the people of Haiti, whose forefathers were the first people to establish a free nation in the Caribbean, can and will find the wherewithal to continue on the road to liberation. But we must never forget that democracy is best created and sustained by economic progress. We therefore call upon all those who are in a position to do so to assist the Haitian people in this time of need.
Amidst those signs of hope are areas in dire need of redress. And where peace should have been on the throne, it still remains on the scaffold. In Central America, Guatemala still threatens the independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of our sister Caribbean Community partner, Belize, with its persistent claim to its territory. Guatemala's uncompromising attitude on this matter has been a source of much distress to Saint Lucia. We hope that the Guatemalan President, His Excellency Mr. Vincio Cerezo Arevalo, who has shown such leadership and diplomatic skill in dealing with other Central American problems, will be magnanimous in addressing the matter.
In the South Atlantic, there has been too little movement towards solving the Falkland/Malvinas problem. The restoration of democracy in Argentina has presented an excellent opportunity for renewed dialogue between two countries that, for almost two centuries, have enjoyed a great degree of friendship. We urge both sides, in the spirit of compromise, to seize this opportunity.
The question of Cyprus has been on the agenda of this body for much, much too long. Saint Lucia continues to maintain its full support for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of the Republic of Cyprus. We believe that the relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions and the high-level agreements of 10 February 1977 and 19 May 1979 form the basis for a just and lasting settlement of the question. Accordingly, we welcome the proposal made by the President of Cyprus for the total demilitarisation of the State, and the unconditional withdrawal of all troops and settlers of occupation. We urge the Secretary-General to continue to use his good offices with a view to facilitating a speedy settlement.
In South Africa, the intolerable situation continues to aggravate the international community as the apartheid regime stubbornly maintains its abhorrent system of racial oppression at home and its stranglehold on Namibia in defiance of international law. Has not the dehumanisation and brutalisation of the oppressed peoples of South Africa been affronting the world long enough? Must South Africa continue to flout every attempt by the United Nations and the Commonwealth to end its racial insanity and to restore dignity, peace and freedom to that land?
Have we not realized that until the evil of apartheid is totally eradicated all of us, no matter who we are or where we are, will be accomplices in the vilest system of degradation ever visited upon man by man himself?
Some of the front-line States of southern Africa have known no peace since their independence for having provided support for the just struggles of the oppressed people of South Africa. They, too, require an opportunity for peaceful development. We wish to assure them that, despite our size, they can count on us for whatever assistance we can render in the cause of freedom.
The apartheid regime mocks the world even more by perpetuating its intransigence over Namibia in that it continues to use dilatory tactics to frustrate the legitimate right of the Namibian people to self-determination, Saint Lucia strongly condemns the apartheid regime for the imposition of the so-called interim government in Namibia on 17 June 1985, in defiance of the resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. Saint Lucia reiterates its recognition of the national liberation movement, the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), as the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people, and its support for the inalienable right of the Namibian people to self-determination, freedom and independence, with full territorial integrity.
In northern Africa, the tragedy of famine in the Sahel, aggravated by war, continues to haunt us. In the Persian Gulf the war between Iran and Iraq drags on, destroying more and more lives and threatening to erupt into a wider conflagration as other nations dispatch their armadas into the Gulf. The admirable co-operation of all members of the Security Council in adopting resolution 598 (1987), on 20 July last, is to be applauded, but, in the absence of compliance; we urge the members of the Council to find the necessary political will to bring the full weight of the Charter to bear on the warring parties. If Member States of the United Nations will not respect the decisions of the Security Council, then we are in fact eroding not only the authority of the Council but also the integrity of the Organization itself. This leads us to examine one more cause for concern today: the role of the United Nations itself. Some credit must be given to the United Nations for general world peace over the last 40-odd years; at the very least, the Organization has served as a palliative, bringing the moral authority of the rest of the world to bear on warring parties# and thereby helping to preclude the general widening of bilateral or regional conflicts.
However, we cannot escape the fact that the United Nations has had extremely limited success in preventing, and resolving, local conflicts since the Second World War. We cannot deny that most combatants have circumvented the conflict resolution mechanisms of this Organization before going to war. And, in more recent times, as the super-Powers have jostled for supremacy, as some nations have tried to stamp their point of view on others, there has been a retreat from multilateralism. As a result, the United Nations itself suffers, as nations respond only lethargically to its basic financial needs.
Saint Lucia's aspiration for universal peace is inextricably linked to a vibrant and increasingly strengthened United Nations. We continue to hold the view that the United Nations is the last, best hope for mankind. Its diminution is linked to the failure of nation States to recognize the vital role it has played in maintaining world peace in the past 40 years. It is not coincidental that there has been an almost inverse relationship between military expenditure as a percentage of world gross national product and the influence of the Organization. As that influence reached a nadir about 1980, we saw an acceleration of military expenditure to about 5 per cent per year in real terms. It now nears $1 trillion per year - well above that of the immediate post-war period, when the United Nations was at its most influential.
Saint Lucia believes that without a strong United Nations, we cannot continue to hold the line that prevents local conflicts from becoming global, let alone resolve the local conflicts themselves. We must not therefore, through lack of financial support, hold the Organization to ransom for some narrow national goal with which we perceive it to be out of consonance. If the prospects for universal peace are to improve we must reintroduce the necessary political will into the halls of the Security Council and the General Assembly. We can improve on the United Nations, but we cannot do without it.
Saint Lucia takes its commitment to regional and international organizations very seriously. Over the years, in the Caribbean, we have lent our full support to the process of greater functional co-operation and integration. In the eastern Caribbean in particular, we have helped forge the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), which includes among other things a single central bank for our several countries. As the unswerving dedication of its member States has blossomed into great strength for the Organization in a few short years, we have decided to accept the challenge of the logic of its success and to take the ultimate step into a full political union of all our willing member States. The implications and logistics of this proposed political union are now being studied.
If we can pool our resources - our markets, our capital, our defences, our people - if we can reduce the costs of our administrations, in which we have seven Governors-General, seven Prime Ministers and 60 Ministers, for a total population of about 500,000, we shall be better able to deliver a higher quality of life for our people and play a more effective role in international affairs· We have already received pledges of support from our colleagues in the wider Caribbean community, and we are sure that, as the wisdom of our endeavour unfolds, we shall be able to count on the support of our neighbours in Latin America, and our friends in the rest of the world.
When the Charter of the United Nations was framed, little thought was given to the conception of small States such as Saint Lucia. But countries like ours have special problems which need to be addressed quite seriously by this body. Consequently, the slow progress of initiatives in favour of island developing countries after over a decade of discussions and resolutions in the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the General Assembly and elsewhere, remains a matter of great concern to Saint Lucia. The myriad special problems of those countries, including vulnerability to natural disasters such as that which struck the eastern Caribbean only last month, continue to pose major hindrances to the development process.
We therefore regret that the comprehensive review of the progress made in - assisting those countries, as mandated by General Assembly resolution 39/212 of 18 December 1984, did not take place last year. My delegation is consequently preparing some new initiatives which will facilitate the General Assembly's action on this question next year.
The economic plight of the developing countries continues to be most unsatisfactory, while global output grew by 3 per cent last year, the developing countries lost $94 billion as a result of constantly deteriorating terms of trade, and national income fell by as much as 10 per cent in some developing countries. This rather undesirable state of affairs is further compounded by a seriously diminishing interest in private sector investment in the developing world, and a general weakening of official financial flows. Non-concessional bilateral credits to the developing countries have also decreased, as have credit flows from the International Monetary Fund. In fact, repayments to the Fund from the developing countries last year exceeded new credits by almost $3 billion. All o£ this, added to the burdensome debt of the developing world and the increasing protectionism in the developed market economies, is the right formula for disaster.
The sluggish growth of the global economy already reflects the drag of the developing countries' economies} redressing these imbalances is therefore paramount. Each day the global village grows smaller and smaller, as all of us grow more dependent on each other. Upon being told that man would soon embark on a search for intelligent life in space, an old lady responded that it would be nothing more than a search for new enemies. "After all", she said, "if we cannot get along with the man across the street, how can we expect to get along with the people up there?"
In our intercourse with the various peoples of the world, there is only one conclusion that can be reached. We are all essentially one and indivisible, in reason, in form, in movement, in needs and. in ideals. Every man cherishes his liberty. No man enjoys being dominated by another. Every man wants to live in peace, to enjoy the good things of life and to see the world rid of ignorance, of poverty and of disease.
For our children, and for theirs, we yearn for nothing less, and to these ends, the intellectual treasures of the Earth can and should first be harnessed.
There is yet time to begin. When will we begin?


On behalf of the Malawi delegation I should like to join those who have spoken before me in congratulating you, Sir, on your election to the presidency of the forty-second session of the General Assembly. The wealth of experience and knowledge of international affairs as well as the diplomatic skills and patience which you bring with you to this lofty seat are well known. We are certain, therefore, that under your guidance the General Assembly will achieve positive results. In wishing you success in carrying out your duties and responsibilities, I assure you of my delegation's full co-operation at all times.
My delegation equally wishes to express appreciation to your predecessor, Mr. Choudhury, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, for the remarkable way in which he presided over the forty-first session. Under his stewardship, many important and historic decisions were made by the General Assembly.
We wish also to express our great pleasure at the good work undertaken by the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, during the past 12 months, particularly that of mediation between parties in conflict.
The Malawi delegation wishes to congratulate Mr. Joseph Reed on his appointment to the post of Under-Secretary-General for Political and General Assembly Affairs.
While the situation as regards international peace and security continues to cause much concern, we have been encouraged by some positive developments in the past few months. We welcomed the International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development, which was sponsored by the United Nations and held here in August and September. We welcomed the adoption by consensus of the final document of the Conference. We believe that the document has provided a basis on which to build further towards the achievement of disarmament and therefore the promotion of development around the world. Malawi has also been encouraged by indications of progress at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, particularly with regard to the question of chemical weapons.
My delegation joins others in welcoming the announcement that the two super-Powers, the United States and the Soviet Union, have reached an agreement in principle on an accord on the elimination of intermediate nuclear forces. We note that this will be the first such accord ever and therefore represents a major step forward in the field of nuclear-weapons disarmament.
My delegation wishes to congratulate the two sides on this historic development. In so doing, it is our hope that the accord, which we understand could be signed soon, will give a much needed impetus to efforts also to attain disarmament in conventional weapons. For, in the end, international peace and security will best be assured only by complete and comprehensive disarmament.
The elimination of or reduction in arms production and arms stockpiling cannot by themselves guarantee international security. For international security depends as much on the conscious promotion of peace as it does on the absence of the tools of war. There is, therefore, an equally urgent need to find ways to bring to an end the areas of conflict and tension that exist in the various regions of the world. In all of these we can clearly see that the main causes are either the denial to peoples of their right to self-determination or the deliberate disregard by some States of the sovereignty and integrity of other States.
In the early months of this year, our interest was aroused by sudden developments that seemed to promise positive movement towards breakthroughs on the respective questions of Afghanistan and Kampuchea. Sadly, however, neither the much-heralded reforms and other initiatives announced by the authorities in Kabul in January, nor the flurry of diplomatic activity in Viet Nam a few weeks later would appear to have led to any changes. If anything significant came out of these developments it was perhaps a reaffirmation of what has been repeatedly stated in this Assembly; that only the withdrawal of foreign forces will facilitate a meaningful solution to the two respective questions. The peoples of Afghanistan and Kampuchea must be left to resolve their political differences and determine their political future by themselves.
Another area of concern in the Far East is the Korean peninsula. My Government remains convinced that the political future of that area can best be determined by the Korean people themselves, through genuine dialogue and negotiations between the Governments of North Korea and South Korea. That is why Malawi supports the recent call by South Korea for talks, without pre-condition, at a higher political level than has been the case in the past. It is our hope that all sides will give the call by South Korea serious consideration.
In discussing a region which seems beset by seemingly intractable problems, it is a welcome change to be able to applaud something truly and significantly positive. We refer here to the accord signed in July by the Governments of India and Sri Lanka in order to bring about an end to the conflict in northern Sri Lanka which had threatened permanently to divide the Sri Lankan people while at the same time promoting tension between the neighbouring States of Sri Lanka and India. In this regard, we salute the two leaders. President Jayewardene of Sri Lanka and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi of India, for their singular act of courage and faith. We see the accord as a concrete example of how States can co-operate to promote international peace and security.
As we review the situation in the region of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, we find cause for grave concern in both the apparent widening of the conflict and the threat inherent therein to international peace and security. We have noted with interest the adoption on 20 July 1987 by the Security Council of  resolution 598 (1987), which appears to us to be a reasonable basis for finding a lasting solution to the conflict in the Gulf.
With regard to the Middle East, we in Malawi have been encouraged by the growing support for a proposal which was made to the General Assembly last year for the convening of an international peace conference, sponsored by the United Nations, to be attended by all parties directly concerned in the conflict. War has not been able to end the conflict between the Arab States and Israel, because war cannot address the crucial issue, the right of all the peoples of the region to self-determination within recognized and secure borders. We have stated before that only through dialogue among all parties to the conflict can the framework for a lasting solution that meets the needs and aspirations of all concerned be found. We believe that the time is now right for such dialogue, and we believe it is right and proper that the United Nations should have a central role in facilitating such dialogue. We support the proposal for an international conference on the Middle East,
My delegation notes with encouragement the return to peace in the Mediterranean region following the sudden heightening of tension there in early 1986. However, while we delight in this, we regret that peace and national conciliation in Cyprus continues to elude the people of that island State, We support the efforts of the Secretary-General aimed at keeping open the channels of communication between the leaders of the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities. We regret, however, that those efforts have so far not met with success. We therefore appeal to all those concerned in this matter to co-operate with the Secretary-General and accept the need to resume the intercommunal talks as a way towards finding a formula for the lasting solution the foreign invasion of 1974 was unable to provide.
Malawi welcomes the peace plan recently proposed by the leaders of the Central American region with a view to bringing about an end to the various conflicts and tensions in that region. We should like to register our support for their bold initiatives, and we wish them success in this endeavour.
On our own continent of Africa too, tension and conflict, particularly in the southern African region, continue to pose a threat to international peace and security. There are three main causes of that situation: first, the continued denial to the people of Namibia of their right to independence and self-determination·, secondly, the attempts by some external forces to impose upon certain countries of the region the types of ideology and forms of government preferred by those forces, in complete disregard of the choices of the citizens of those countries; and thirdly, the problem of apartheid, a political system which the African people and the entire world have unequivocally and unanimously condemned and rejected.
With regard to Namibia, we reiterate what we have said before: that the independence of Namibia is long overdue. Security Council resolution 435 (1978) met all the legitimate concerns of all the parties to the political dispute over Namibia, and all the parties accepted, and still accept, that resolution as the basis for the granting of independence. We can therefore see no justification for the continuing delay in its implementation. Indeed, the delay is contributing to the growing toll in lives and to the hardships imposed upon the people in that Territory.
The Malawi delegation has stated many times in the past that force and violence are not, and cannot be, the way to resolve political problems or any other differences. Force can at best provide only temporary solutions. We remain convinced that only through contact and dialogue can lasting solutions be found. That is why the Malawi Government welcomed the recent courageous initiative by some political leaders in South Africa in starting a dialogue with the African National Congress of South Africa (ANC), particularly in Senegal recently. We are convinced that this development can only be for the good of all South Africans, black and white, and we hope it will lead to more and more contacts and wider dialogue including not only the white liberals, on the one hand, and the ANC, on the other, but eventually also other white leaders - even Government leaders — and other representatives of the black majority, such as the Pan Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC).
We have followed with interest the initiatives and programmes undertaken by the United Nations during the past year in the area of social development. Among these, perhaps the major one was the United Nations-sponsored International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking, held in Vienna in May. The threat drug abuse poses to our future generations and the social problems it presents, particularly for developing countries, have been analysed. It has also been known for some time that combating the production and abuse of and illicit trafficking in drugs requires wide co-operation and concerted action by the world's Governments. Yet it somehow appeared that, except at the professional level, co-operation was never going to be achieved. While the political leaders of some countries saw the need for the problems of drug production, trafficking and abuse to be addressed at the political level, many others did not yet recognize the magnitude and urgency of the problem.
At a time when greater attention was suddenly being given to these issues and more countries were beginning to realize the need for co-operation, the convening of the International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking was most timely. We believe it provided an excellent opportunity to bring about a greater understanding of the problem. It provided an opportunity also for those who had already acquired considerable experience in dealing with the problem to share that experience with those who are new to the problem, and for all countries to come up with a strategy for international co-operation.
Malawi was represented at the Vienna International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking by a three-member delegation. We believe the Conference was a success, and we hope the decisions and plans of action adopted in Vienna will be faithfully implemented. We certainly hope too that a review conference will be held at the appropriate time to examine how successful - or unsuccessful - we have been in achieving the goals enunciated at the Vienna Conference.
It is Malawi's hope that, in the light of experience gained with regard to drug abuse, consideration will be given to a similar initiative concerning what is clearly emerging as the single most widespread problem with dire implications for the future. We refer here to the killer epidemic of the acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS).
We are pleased to note that the World Health organization (WHO) has already begun to devote its attention to the AIDS problem. We hope that from the lesson learned with regard to that drug problem it will be considered that the early convening of an international conference devoted to the question of AIDS would be most beneficial.
Meanwhile we would also like to express our appreciation for the decision by the United Nations to give special attention to the population problems in Sub-Saharan Africa. In this context we welcome the Strategy for United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) assistance to Sub-Saharan Africa, which was adopted by the United Nations Development Programme (ÜNDP) Governing Council at its thirty-fourth session last June. We are of the view that the Programme of Action envisaged in the Strategy will contribute greatly to the efforts of the Governments in the region as they seek to attain an equitable balance between the social and economic development needs of their national populations, on the one hand, and the resources available to their Governments to meet those needs, on the other.
However, this plan cannot be realized without the UNFPA itself having sufficient financial resources to carry out its programmes. We sincerely hope that Member states will join hands in assuring the UNFPA's financial health and that those who are in a position to do so will consider the possibility of making additional voluntary contributions.
In the area of economic co-operation between the rich North and the poor South there appears to be issues which require urgent attention if the serious poverty of the South is to be halted. These issues are, first, greater access for products from the developing South to the markets of the industrialized North; secondly, higher and more lucrative prices for the goods exported from the South in relation to products manufactured and exported by the North; thirdly, a halt in the reverse flow of funds from the developing to the developed countries caused basically by, fourthly, the repayment of debt to lenders in the North. Naturally we see these matters as being interrelated.
Despite the assurances of the industrialized countries to the contrary, we have seen an increase in recent years in both tariff and non-tariff barriers against the exports of developing countries. At the same time, there has been a steady decline in the prices of commodities - most of which are primary goods - from the South while those of manufactures from the North have continued to rise. This is a question of terms of trade. And faced with declining export earnings and soaring import bills, developing countries have been forced to borrow ever more at high interest rates from the same countries of the North in order to sustain their economies. Now, many developing countries nave frightfully large fractions of their national incomes committed to debt repayment. Herein lies the problem - a source of international dissension.
We are glad that at the meeting of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) agreement was reached on the need for greater economic assistance to the least-developed countries. The undertaking by the developed countries to encourage lending institutions in their areas to consider being more flexible in order to ease the debt burden of developing countries is also appreciated. However, it is my delegation's hope that greater practical efforts will be made towards helping the export commodities from the poor South to be more lucrative. In this way the debt problem begins to be alleviated. Naturally the developing South would have to follow sensible and workable economic policies, which appears to be what they are doing now.
In this regard it is also important for my delegation to acknowledge the crucial role played by all the United Nations agencies, in particular the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) , in our development efforts, in addition to that played by other bilateral and multilateral donors  Economic Community under the Lomé Convention and also the World Bank, in addition we are pleased with the important assistance offered to Malawi by the African Development Bank (ADB). In our opinion the ADB is a very good institution through which the developed countries could increasingly channel funds for the continent's economic development; I am therefore making an appeal to them.
Finally I should like to say that, in spite of all that has been said about the uncompleted work, unfulfilled promises and unresolved problems by the United Nations, many a speaker appears by implication and directly to support the continued existence of the Organization. Yes, we need the Organization.
For its part Malawi will continue to give the United Nations its fullest support and will always be ready to make its contribution towards ensuring the Organization's continued existence.


O Lord, with Thy holy name I begin and from Thee I seek guidance and support. My life and death, my petition, prayer and praise belong to Thee. I beseech Thee to grant the clarity and magnetism of the word of truth to my utterances and make them a message for the millions of people who passionately thirst after truth and for those who shall, in the future, seek the truth. 0 God Almighty, my nation and I offer our thankful salutations to the souls of Thy great prophets, in particular, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad - Thy peace be upon them - who did their utmost and gave their lives in order to spread and immortalize the message of awareness and salvation of man, and our humble salutations to the pure and enlightened hearts who obeyed Thy message, especially to those among them who sacrificed their lives because of it.
My country has been a centre of man's civilization and culture at some important, elevated stages of history and at present is the setting for a political system based on the same cultural background and traditions, which are now further enriched by an Islamic awakening. I come here from a land which is the birthplace of a more famed but Less understood revolution in contemporary history, a revolution founded on the religion of God, marching along the path of the prophets and great spiritual reformers, a path as long as the history of mankind.
Islam's Unitarian theory is the unshakable foundation and the fundamental thinking of this revolution. The meaning of man, the interpretation of history, the analysis of past, present and future events, the concept of the material world, the explanation of elements that bind man to the world outside him, the earth, human beings and objects, man's understanding of his own existence - in short, everything that goes into the formation of human society's value system to attain an orderly human administration - are rooted in and emanate from this divine outlook. In Islamic thought all existence is the creation of God and an image of His knowledge and power; the whole universe is attracted to Him and man is His creature superior to others and His heir on earth.
Exploiting his intrinsic talents man can build the world created for him in the most beautiful ways and, flying on the two wings of faith and knowledge, rise to the highest spiritual and material peaks. Conversely, man can create a hell of oppression and corruption by going astray and wasting and perverting his God-given potential. The only light illuminating his path is belief in God and submission to His commands. The temporal world is a cultivating ground for the next world and death is not the end of life but only a passage to immortality and the beginning of a new existence.
In Islam's divine thought all mankind are brothers and sisters and creatures of the Almighty. There is no discrimination because of colour, race, sex or geographical location of people and these distinctions do not make one man or a nation superior to others. When racial and geographical characteristics are disregarded, an act of aggression against a person is aggression against humanity.
The feeling of superiority and monopoly has set brother against brother, and the blood that has flowed has never dried. The same motives and the same actions created streams of blood and, finally, seas of blood have appeared between those seeking superiority and domination and the victims of such arrogance. In this way peace has been taken out of man's life.
The prophets invited people to submit to God, because this crushes the feeling of egocentrism and superiority in man and offers him the purity and tranquillity of a paradise on earth before the eternal one in heaven. They persuaded man to control his instinct of domination and superiority. They also warned against wasting human potential and slipping into the mire of moral corruption. They opened fountains of virtuousness, honesty, love, work, initiative, knowledge and consciousness and they stressed the love of God and His blessing of people, which are man's only insurance against perversions and are a guarantee of the sublimation of his soul.
They taught man to use his power to safeguard these values, to block the path of the intruding satans of corruption and perversion, to fight ignorance and the cruelty of slavery, to safeguard knowledge, justice and freedom. They taught him neither to oppress nor to let others oppress him  they taught him to rise in defence of equity and justice and not to give evil a chance. They also taught him that surrendering to enemies of justice, virtuousness and charity only results in the destruction of these values and amounts to acquiescence in evil, oppression and corruption.
In Islam's divine thought the religion of God is not only the crowning of man's virtuousness, but the very form of life itself. Religion offers man a complete social system, not merely some forms of worship and certain traditions  even though services of worship and traditions are full of the spirit of life and serve the same system. The social system is based on the same religious outlook. Freedom and liberty, the equality of people, social justice, awareness of society's individuals, the combating of corruption and perversion, the superiority of human ideals over individual desires, the rejection of satanic domination, personal behaviour and ethics, and occupational and political scrupulousness are all born of and inspired by the same universal interpretation of the world and man. Islam rejects as immoral all systems founded on force, oppression, ignorance, suppression, tyranny and humiliation of man through discrimination on grounds of race, nation, blood or language It commands the faithful to approach with love, affection and support all mankind, co-religionist or not, except those determined to fight the Islamic order, who must be faced uncompromisingly.
It was on such basic principles and with such objectives that an Islamic revolution emerged in Iran and laid the foundations of an Islamic republic. Many analysts have searched for the roots of the Islamic revolution in February 1979, and many of them have failed to understand it correctly. In our opinion, this great event was partly a consequence of the inefficiency of the existing systems in the world and the emptiness and falsehood of the slogans of democracy and equality in those systems. Islam was able once again to shine in this dark atmosphere through the dust of distortions and misconceptions thrown in its way for many centuries. The sun of Islam shone on Iran and brought about a revolutionary storm. It is expected to shine on many other parts of the world. We must wait and see. But, despite earfuls of adverse propaganda, the awakening of Muslims in many Islamic countries is not an offspring of Iran's Islamic revolution; it is its brother-in-Islam.
Iran is located at one of the most sensitive sites of strategic importance. It has a background of science and culture and abounds in material resources. The Islamic revolution in Iran was meant to be against a regime that had put all this at the service of the interests of the imperial-minded Powers of the world, particularly those of the United States of America, for almost a quarter of a century. Nobody needed the spiritual and material wealth of Iran more than the Iranian people, but they were denied it. The ancient regime's claims of progress and modernization were all false, but the West's propaganda machine, especially its Zionist component, keep publicizing them. It was such a regime that the Islamic revolution toppled, proposing its own significant goals. Nine years have passed, yet it is still felt that the answers too many questions are not quite clear. The fact is that in the case of our revolution and our views and principles much more uninformed opinion and evil talk has been heard than in other cases.
1 shall now try, for the benefit of those interested in truth, to shed light on certain exceptional aspects which give different characteristics to this revolution. I shall end my statement with a brief message.
First, the revolution was from its beginnings a people's revolution - totally, 100 per cent. None of the familiar forms that have been instrumental in certain other revolutions were active or even present in our revolution: no armed guerrilla groups, no active military-political party, no groups of revolutionary, free officers and the like. There were only people, and unarmed people at that, who filled Tehran and other cities and towns in Iran with their presence. They crowded the streets and filled the air in the cities with their revolutionary presence and revolutionary slogans, in such a way that there was no room to breathe for the ruling clique and its government·, they simply had to leave their castles and centres of power and, one by one or in groups, to leave the country hastily. The Shah, the Prime Minister, generals of the army, ministers and other important criminals fled the country when they could to avoid the wrath of the people.
This, of course, happened after a long year during which the regime had exploited all the political, military and police resources at its service to disperse people and force them back to work or to their houses, and in order to achieve this had shot and killed thousands of them in the streets, in the mosques, in the universities and in their workplaces, openly and indiscriminately. Despite all these measures, however, the people's presence had increased. In the very last months, when the regime became more violent, the people came out in millions. The regime, cracking under the pressure of people who no longer had any regard for their lives, could not withstand the onslaught of the masses and was forced to make its greatest concession; it sacrificed the Shah, He fled the country, never to return, and after this the regime's retreat accelerated.
The great leader of the revolution, whose every word to every individual Iranian was a lesson in awareness, resolve and purpose, was able to announce the formation of a revolutionary administration with trust in God Almighty, Who encompasses all other powers, and with reliance on the people's indomitable will. The Shah's tyrannical rule, which was left with no option, collapsed automatically and melted away. The last bastions of the regime were barracks with no soldiers or officers, in the last hours a few garrisons showed some resistance, but all was in vain, because people were everywhere and overcame them. The miracle of this revolution was the victory of the people. It was only after the collapse of the military garrisons that arms fell into the hands of the people·, but then the kingdom had already collapsed and these weapons were used for the protection of the new revolutionary order. People, young and old, men and women, were the agents who defeated the Shah's regime, which was armed to the teeth and enjoyed the support of the biggest Powers.
It was the people who established the order of an Islamic republic, and their weapons were their faith, their determination and their blood - and blood overcame the sword. The doctrine of blood overcoming the sword is the old policy of the oppressed resisting and fighting the oppressor that was declared by the leader of our revolution long before it took place. Thus the first victory of our revolution was against the armed regime of the Shah, who was strongly backed by the West and the United States, It has since gained us other victories, some of which may even be rated as more important than defeating the Shah. This unique experience - unique at least in the last century - deserves to be carefully studied by both the oppressed nations and those oppressive Powers which underestimate the power of the people.
Secondly, this revolution had its roots in religion, in Islam. There have been many revolutionary movements in history the combative spirit of which was fuelled by a religious faith, but little or no account has been taken of this factor by many analysts. In our revolution, however, everything was taken from Islam; its aims, its principles and its methods of struggle, as well as the formation of the new order and the particular form of its administration.
This fact gives certain surprising dimensions to the definition of revolution and new meanings to its victory. As we know, Islam has been a target of assaults for the last century and a half by colonial Powers and their subservient, reactionary agents exactly because of its inexhaustible capacity for revolution and reconstruction. Furthermore, Islam is a sacred faith and a divine religion in more than 50 countries and among some 1,000 million Muslims and, therefore, a revolutionary victory the spirit and substance of which is derived from Islam is in fact the victory of those billion people over all historic invaders against Islam. It is for this reason that hundreds of millions of Muslims in dozens of Islamic countries have welcomed the victory of our revolution.
This religious characteristic also stops the people, the leader of the revolution and its administrators from any retreat, defeat, fear or weakness, when you fight for God there is no defeat, let alone fear, weakness or retreat.
Thirdly, non-reliance on either East or West was another exceptional characteristic of this revolution and is now the fundamental policy of out revolutionary system.
This in itself is one of the manifestations of the belief and trust in God in all spheres of our individual and social life. The dominant thinking in the political world today believes that without reliance on one of the power blocs no movement may survive in the contemporary political world. There may be a difference of emphasis about this but there seems to be no argument on the sacred principle. There are also people who, ideologically speaking, endorse non-reliance or non-alignment but do not suppose, pragmatically speaking, that it could work. Our revolution has, in such an atmosphere, offered a new philosophy and followed it most sincerely. Our revolution proved that the imperial-minded Powers may be ignored, that their bullying tactics may be resisted and that blackmailing may not be effective provided that there is belief in a power much more powerful than all material powers; belief in God Almighty,
We know quite well that for this belief and in this struggle we have to pay a heavy price and we are prepared for it.
Let this experience illuminate the path of nations to true independence and the total rejection of the hegemony of the big powers; the present division of power threatens humanity with a very bitter future.
Fourthly, there is another peculiarity to our revolution — very active to the present; it had to suffer an incredible amount of hostility and receive many exceptional blows. Certainly no revolution is safe from the counter-strikes of the power system dominating our world but the variety, the depth and the enormity of the enmities and the wild anger unleashed against us for the last nine years is an exceptionally interesting story to hear.
The revolution had not yet reached its climax when hostile behaviour mostly by the United States of America started to challenge it. Certain officials, who reveal secrets through the passage of time, now confess that in the last months of the Shah's tyrannical regime the United States Administration, the President and his national security adviser tried to hearten the Shah by encouraging him to be "more decisive". The meaning of "decisiveness" was later explained in the statements of a fellow called General Huyser who had come to Tehran as the special representative of the President of the United States of America. In his opinion and according to advice given to him, the Shah's regime had to be safeguarded even if this resulted in the slaughtering of tens of thousands of people. And his incredible justification was: "It would be preferable to the killing of many more thousands later". In the honourable opinion of the United States authorities it was not valid that if the United States did not interfere in the internal affairs of Iran, neither the blood of tens of thousands then nor the blood of "many more thousands later" had to be shed!
Certainly there was no other reason for the abortiveness of Huyser's mission and his flight from Tehran as well as for the arrest or flight of all those elements whom the United States needed for the carrying out of its evil plans except the crushing ferocity of revolutionary waves and the great might of a nation who had risen to fight for God and feared nothing but God. It was not the enemies of revolution who simply walked off; it was the revolution that forced them to flee. They had already exerted all their pressure at the hands of the treacherous Shah. After the victory of the revolution, hostile plots were hatched in a variety of forms. The very first clever measure was the infiltration of revolutionary posts and positions by enemy agents and the second was the organizing of all sorts of "opposition" parties and groupings in a free, political atmosphere after decades of dictatorship and suppression. In the former case it is interesting to note that a loyal agent who, a few weeks after the revolution, was tried in a revolutionary court and executed for treason had, by hook or by crook, got himself appointed as the commander of the Air Force in the first days of the revolution! And in the latter it would suffice to say that in the very first months after our victory some 400 political parties and groups surfaced in Iran that included anything from Loyalist to Communist to Separatist to Pan-Iranist. And it should not, of course, be forgotten that certain foreign embassies in Tehran, especially the embassy of the Arch-Satan, were the centres that organized some of these groups and helped them financially and ideologically!
A bloody, merciless kind of terrorism was another vengeful hostility towards our revolution. Terrorist groups who lacked any form of popular base, by stealing arms and ammunition and explosive material, not a difficult job in those chaotic days of revolution, and through the assistance of certain foreign governments, established a vast, terrorist network in Iran. individual and group assassinations, colossal bomb explosions, the hijacking of aircraft, kidnapping, horrible incidents of torture, indiscriminate shootings and the deliberate slaughtering of people were among the measures carried out in Iran by some terrorist groups supported and encouraged by the infamous enemies of our revolution. The victims of this barbarous violence represented all strata of Iranian society; they Included important leaders and authorities of the revolution, as well as ordinary people such as the oppressed workers and toilers, men and women and, of course, innocent children and passers-by.
Today, the leaders of these terrorist groups, who have often claimed responsibility for their criminal actions, are given security and protection and are provided with a comfortable life in the United States, France and some other Western countries and go by the euphemism of "opposition to the Revolution"; and the countries that patronize these terrorists accuse the Islamic Republic of Iran of "terrorism". An astonishing paradox of politics is that the innocent victims of a blind, barbarous terrorism are themselves accused of "terrorism" by those who helped establish these terrorist groups and are at present looking after them well.
As the President and servant of my country, and as a victim of a savage terrorist attack, which was aborted by the will of the Almighty, I have the honour to declare here that none of these brutalities, none of this shedding of blood, could shake the will of our people despite the fact that the extent of the terrorism was unprecedented: in one act alone, some 72 leading members and administrators of the revolution, including several cabinet ministers, a score of deputies of Parliament, and some irreplaceable personalities of our revolution, such as Martyr Ayatollah Beheshti, died inhuman deaths; and in another incident the President and the Prime Minister were blown to death together. But these brutal atrocities have served only to strengthen the people's faith and trust in God and to increase their revolutionary wrath.
Military coups d'état are the traditional, sanguinary experiment in all revolutions organized by the great Powers. In the case of the Iranian revolution they were organized many times and in one case reached a very dangerous state. Had it not been for our people's support and for the vigilance of our officials, the predictions of the American General that there would be several blood-baths and the massacre of millions of people would have materialized.
But the greatest, the most painful and the most catastrophic act of hostility by our enemies was the imposition of war on our revolution, that is, the stirring of the ambitious instincts of a neighbour, persuading it to invade and assuring it of all sorts of assistance and support.
Today, after some seven years of war, it is quite clear to all that the invasion of Iran by the Iraqi army on 22 September 1980, that is, 19 months after the establishment of the Islamic Republic, was in fact aimed at defeating the revolution and at the overthrow of the Islamic Republic. The invasion was carried out with some 10 divisions and hundreds of fighter-bombers; they attacked from the ground, from the air and from the sea. There were also such expansionist aims as the annexing of a province of Iran, a fact that has frequently been confessed to in the Iraqi press and publications as well as in articles by non-Iraqi paid pens. The Iraqis have, more often than expected, declared both these goals openly and in a revealing way.
What Iraq anticipated as a reward for this invasion, apart from the stabilizing of its internal situation, was to emerge as the dominant Power in the region or at least in the Arab sphere. This would have been a lot for the nonentities ruling Iraq, access to a considerable coastal border in the very important Persian Gulf region was certainly another motive. By an Iraqi victory which would accompany Iran's defeat, its disintegration and the collapse of the Islamic Republic, the imperial-minded Powers would also reach an important goal: the removal of a new system which had disturbed the existing political-economic balance and put an end to the influence of big Powers, especially that of the United States, in the event of our defeat, the circumstances would be back to "normal" for the United States and some others, and the same old story of political and economic influence would be repeated.
We were at first taken by surprise, we should admit. Our preoccupation with innumerable internal problems relating to the revolution and our lack of sufficient experience made the invasion possible; but the particular characteristics of this revolution came to our rescue: within a few months the heroic, miraculous efforts and sacrifices of our people and their armed forces had resulted in the liberation of a large part of the occupied territories. Nevertheless, the catastrophic effects of this invasion are beyond description; prosperous cities such as Abadan, Khorramshahr, Hovaizeh and Qasre-Shirin were razed to the ground; even the small city of Dezful was hit by some 250 ground-to-ground missiles; numerous happy villages of which not even a half-smashed wall is left; factories that were turned into piles of metal rubble; numerous farms that were wiped out; invaluable cultural monuments that have been seriously damaged; and, most important of all, the innocent people who lost their precious lives.
The committing of war crimes, such as savage attacks against civilian, residential areas; the massacre of thousands of defenceless women and children; the imprisonment of passengers and passers-by on the occupied roads - all in the first weeks of the war - violations of international commitments and regulations, such as the use of chemical weapons on a large scale, air attacks on commercial ships, civilian aircraft and passenger aeroplanes and trains, are some examples of acts on the part of the Iraqi regime in the course of this war that have been identified but are continuing.
After the initial war efforts, when the people of Iran had time to think over and sum up the events, they realized a very bitter fact, namely that security based on the promises and commitments of a warmongering aggressor has no validity and that trusting in such security is illogical and very naive.
The Head of the Iraqi regime had publicly announced that its Agreement with the Iranian Government in 1975, otherwise known as the Algiers Agreement, was signed at a time when Iraq was weak, and therefore it was not binding or valid any more. He tore a copy of the Agreement to pieces and a few days later invaded Iran.
This was a bitter but enlightening lesson for the Iranian nation. From that moment on, our people, awakened and revolutionary, took a decision and set a clear objective for their efforts. They decided not only to liberate the occupied territories and seek war compensation - to both of which they are unambiguously initiated, despite the fact that they could not be compensated for a great part of the damages - but also, as a more important goal, to punish and remove the aggressor. By proposing the punishment of the aggressor we have sought not only a secure base for our national security but also security and stability throughout the region. If an aggressor is once punished by the international family of nations for its aggression, we can rest assured that the aggressor instinct, which is often found in evil and opportunistic elements, will be suppressed for many years to come, and our region, and perhaps the whole world, will not have to suffer the catastrophic consequences of unprovoked aggressive wars.
The Nuremberg Trials have guaranteed some 40 years of peace and security for the war-addicted European States. Why should we discard the experience of Nuremberg?
When thousands of square kilometres of our country were under occupation, the big Powers, exploiting their powerful weapons of publicity, put us under very heavy pressure to accept a cease-fire in return for the formation of a committee that would arrange for the invader to return to international borders. This would have meant our leaving part of our existence, our honour and our dignity under the feet of the enemy and soliciting the attention of this or that international committee in the hope of regaining our integrity. There could have been no bigger insult to the intelligence of an honourable revolutionary nation. Even the least informed people in the world have the sanguinary tragedy of the Palestinian people before their eyes and would reject such tyrannical proposals. If imposed cease-fires and deceitful, empty promises had restored the legitimate and obvious rights of the Palestinian nation, they might also help others to regain theirs.
In our case, even today, when we have liberated the largest part of the occupied lands through the heroic efforts of our people and at the cost of their precious blood, with some parts such as Naft-Shahr still under occupation, we believe that our most important task is to punish the aggressor. And today, when we look back at the irrecoverable cost of this imposed war, we consider this more important than ever and believe that without punishment of the aggressor any other achievement would be a loss for our people. As a nation which has borne the burden of a seven-year war, we long more than anybody else for peace, but we believe that that peace, a lasting peace, can be established only with punishment of an aggressor who has added many other sins to the original sin of aggression since it started the war.
Today, as in 1975 Iraq is again in a weak position and everyone knows this. The kind of peace approved by the Iraqi regime today would, after a few years or whenever it suspected itself to be in a strong position, evaporate in a moment, and another war would engulf the region. The only guarantee for the future is punishment of the aggressor.
Peace is, without a doubt, a beautiful and attractive word. This is so true that even the biggest international warmongers and the producers of weapons for global destruction flirt with it and love it hypocritically. But, in our opinion, justice, a word that the powerful and the oppressors regard with fearful caution, is even more important and more beautiful.
The number of those who have given up their well-being, their peace and their life to secure justice is not small. These people are always recognized as great heroes. European cities still take pride in their resistance against Hitler's aggression; Moscow still prides itself on a self-burning that astonished and disappointed Napoleon's army and Leningrad on its four-year-long resistance when besieged by the Nazi invaders.
The United Nations in particular has an obligation, according to the very first Article of its Charter, to secure justice through the special process of taking measures against acts of aggression. And this is all that we expect from the world and from the United Nations. The big Powers have hypocritically called the war imposed on us a meaningless war, but at the same time they have consistently supported the initiator of and aggressor in this war politically, militarily and economically.
There is no doubt that starting such wars is always meaningless, but as long as the aggressor was still hoping to achieve its evil end it was never called that.
Today, however, this war is very meaningful for our people: it means selfless, heroic efforts to eradicate aggression and prove that nations have the power, in the face of the will of the big Powers, to defend their revolution, their stability and their integrity. Our nation, through a great deal of sacrifice, is engaged in rejecting a concept that has always resulted in aggression and war: the concept that reliance on advanced weapons and the support of the big Powers is a guarantee of success.
In the last seven years the Iranian people have searched for the answer to an important question. Today I want to raise this question here from this rostrum. Why have all those Governments that know very clearly that it was the Iraqi regime that started the war and initiated aggression - and there is no scarcity of those that know this - chosen to remain silent vis-à-vis this great international crime? And why have the world mass media tended to ignore their great responsibility to the conscience of mankind and the interpretation of history in this case?
Perhaps the key to the solution of this problem lies in the particular political relationships in our world today and the defective geometry created by the domination of the big Powers in international relations. However, our people seem to have discovered the facts.
But the question to which no convincing answer may be found is this: why has the Security Council of the United Nations, as an organ that was created primarily to safeguard international security and oppose aggression, totally ignored its obligations and even acted in defiance of its duty? I think everyone knows that the Security Council did not show any reaction when Iraq invaded Iran on 1,OOO-kilometre front. The Iraqi army overran international borders in only a week and established itself at points ranging from 70 to 90 kilometres inside Iran. Some Iraqi authorities announced that their army intended to stay there forever.

.
It was only after the establishment of this invasion that the Security Council issued its first resolution, on 28 September 1980. This resolution neither mentioned any aggression or occupation nor made a request for a return to international borders, but, astonishingly enough, called on both parties not to resort to any further use of force. What this really meant was total connivance in the occupation of the affected areas and a conquest to the Iraqi army not to advance further. And as far as Iran was concerned, it called on our people to stop fighting against the aggressor.
This was the very first measure by the Security Council, in which it trampled upon all its principal obligations concerning the safeguarding of international peace and security in an ugly, tragic manner.
After that, a deadly silence fell upon the Security Council for a long time - that is, up to the liberation of Khorramshahr through a military operation that broke the back of the occupation army and resulted in the humiliating capture of thousands of enemy soldiers and officers. Yet, up to that time, the Security Council had completely forgotten about the bloody, continuing war that headed the international news bulletins every day.
Thus the Security Council suddenly remembered the Iran-Iraq war again. A few weeks after the liberation of Khorramshahr the Security Council's second resolution, dated 12 July 1982, was adopted. Now the Council called for a return to international borders. What it requested had already been achieved because our heroic people and their selfless and valiant combatants had by then liberated the greater part of the occupied lands. This resolution, too, was conspicuous for its many omissions: no reference to aggression; no mention of the aggressor; nothing about destruction, damages or any compensation; no guarantee of teal security and stability and not a word about punishing the agent of insecurity. The Council had chosen to be silent in its resolution about all those vital points.
Therefore, once again, we found ourselves quite alone in restoring our legitimate rights, and I must inform the Assembly that the Security Council's stance in relation to the war that was imposed upon us has not changed up to this moment.
Of course, the Secretary-General's independent initiatives went some way towards helping the United Nations in the realization of its objectives, but his good offices were not appreciated. I ought, however, to register a thankful note here for his efforts and his good offices. It would also be appropriate to remember the good name of the late Swedish Prime Minister, Mr. Olaf Palme, who, as the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, sympathetically tried to help.
The Secretary-General's trip to Tehran and the useful talks regarding Security Council resolution 598 (1987) were another step in that direction. We consider those talks objective and instructive, as is the report of the Secretary-General. Regrettably, it seems that some influential members of the Security Council wish to ignore that fact. They are the same members as have from the outset attempted to exploit that resolution as a means of exerting pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran. We have conveyed our unequivocal views to the Secretary-General and expect the Council to use correctly the possibilities open to it.
Has the Security Council anything to say regarding the infringement of its very first obligation, to take measures against acts of aggression, which is stated in the first Chapter of the Charter to be the most important objective; what pressures has the Security Council brought to bear on Iraq in relation to threatening peace, breach of the peace and resort to force as mentioned in Chapter VII? Impartiality is the least that the Islamic Republic of Iran - a victim of a bloody, devastating aggression - can expect from the Security Council, because we all know that the Council's obligation is to take measures against acts of aggression and to support the victim of aggression, rather than remain neutral between the aggressor and the victim. But can the Security Council even claim that it has behaved impartially in this case?
Our feeling is that the Security Council has been pushed into this indecent, condemnable position by the will of some big Powers, particularly the United States, Therefore, one may say that the foundations of the security supported by such a Security Council is nothing but a nice-looking house of cards. The nations of the world, especially the peoples of the third world, who wish to remain independent of the super-Powers, may never have the security guaranteed by such a Security Council.
The fact that Iraq was never condemned for aggression has not only helped keep the imposed war going but also fanned its flames.
And now, with the United States presence in the region and the presence of other countries that have followed as a result of the arch-satan1 a insistence and pressure, the Persian Gulf has turned into a dangerous powder-keg.
At this juncture I must draw the attention of the General Assembly and the people of the United States urgently to the very grave and immediate danger provoked by the United States Administration through its latest action in the Persian Gulf, which is threatening not only the region but the whole world. Yesterday United States battleships attacked Iran Air, an Iranian merchant ship. They murdered four people and wounded three. The ship was seized and its crew detained, American television stations announced yesterday that United States battleships fired at this ship while it was laying mines in the waters, and thereby, as usual, told a pack of lies to the American people. But I declare here that the ship was a merchant vessel called Iran Air, not a military speedboat.
This is the beginning of a series of events the bitter consequences of which will not be restricted to the Persian Gulf, and the United States, as the initiator of the trouble, will bear responsibility for all ensuing events. Should we now believe the passionate United States claims of a desire for peace and tranquillity in the Persian Gulf or this open, flagrant and concrete measure to fan the flames of war? I declare, very unambiguously, that the United States will receive a proper response to this abominable act. This is only one of the evil consequences of the imposed war and a direct result of the Security Council's inability to take proper measures against the Iraqi aggression. If the Security Council had condemned Iraq for starting the war, and later, for starting the so-called war of the cities, and Later, for attacking ships, today the United States would not dare threaten international peace and security so openly in spite of world public opinion, despite pressures from inside, and immediately after the adoption of resolution 598 (1987) for the preparation and adoption of which the United States had played a key role. Was resolution 598 (1987) only adopted to put pressure on the Islamic Republic of Iran?
I must here announce to the world and especially to the great people of the United States that the threatening, military presence of the United States in the Persian Gulf is yet another clear manifestation of the American regime's hostility towards the Iranian people.
A big chapter of our history, a very bitter, bloody and evil chapter, is saturated with American enmities and grudging hostilities towards our nation some 25 years of support for the Pahlavi butcher and dictator, complicity with the Shah in all his crimes against our people, participation in plundering the wealth of the nation, serious confrontation with our revolution in the last months of the Shah's regime, persuading the dictator to suppress the millions-strong demonstrations of our people, employing all sorts of means and devices to obstruct the path of revolution in the first years of our victory, the constant, provocative contacts of the United States embassy in Tehran with counter-revolutionary elements, continuous help and assistance to terrorists and counter-revolutionaries outside Iran, freezing of the people's assets and property, non-deliverance of commodities that had been already paid for, non-payment of assets taken from the public treasury by the Shah and deposited in his own name in American banks, efforts for an economic blockade of Iran and the formation of a United Western front against our people, flagrant and effective support of Iraq in its war against us and now the bullying and illogical tactic of throwing an American armada into the Persian Gulf and seriously endangering peace and tranquillity of the region.
These are pacts of our nation's indictment against the United States administration, an indictment that will bring under question all American claims for peace-loving and all statements by American leaders declaring their good intentions towards the Islamic Republic, which are apparently meant for internal consumption.
The latest in the long list of American hostilities towards out nation was the bloody massacre of innocent, defenceless pilgrims at Mecca in the holy sanctuary of God at the hands of the Saudi regime where some 400 Iranian and non-Iranian pilgrims, mostly women, were martyred and a greater number were beaten, injured or maimed. There are certain indications that the United States played an influential part in this unprecedented, historical monstrosity.
Do the United States administration and its Saudi stooges have any convincing explanation for the slaughtering of so many innocent men and women?
Undoubtedly the culprits will try to justify their evil actions with some excuses and allegations but the nature of the incident with some 400 dead visitors mostly women on the one side and the local police armed with machine-guns, clubs and poison gas on the other is very revealing.
Although blood that is shed wrongly at the hands of cruel, merciless tyrants will carry its clear message with it, not only for today but for all times, and will reveal the evil nature of the butchers, the Mecca incident also demonstrates the co-ordinated behaviour of the United States and the Arab reactionaries and unveils the secret co-operation of the two sides in the Persian Gulf region. This gives the incident an international dimension that must be carefully looked at by international forums.
I must emphasize here that this indictment is directed against the leaders of the United States regime and not against the American people who, had they been aware of what their governments have done against another nation, would certainly endorse our indictment. Our people have shown that they have faith in their goals and are ready to defend them at the cost of their lives.
Such a nation has no fear of the United States or any other Power and with the help of God it will prove that victory belongs to truth and the believers in truth.
This was the story of our revolution. This revolution brought great hopes for nations which suffered from the oppression of the imperial-minded Powers  equally it provoked the violent hostility of the big Powers which seek to dominate the world. This storm of opposition, however, could not break off the young tree of this revolution because of its very deep roots. The tree was growing fast but it did withstand some very strong, damaging storms. And now the revolution is still alive despite the opposition of the big Powers and it shall certainly survived that is the dictate of divine traditions in history and it shall not be altered. And that is our most vivid and emphatic message.
The system of domination had relentlessly tried to prove the contrary in order to make the nations of the third world believe that their fate is decided by the will of the big Powers. We have rejected and repudiated it. There is no doubt that the system of world domination did not wish the Islamic Republic to survive but our will overcame. Our message to all nations and Governments which wish to remain independent and ignore the wishes of the big Powers is to rely on their own people without any fear.
The message of our revolution remains as it was the rejection of the doctrine of domination. Today our world is in fact divided among the big, imperial-minded Powers, They believe that they are the masters and owners of the world. In other words the world is divided into dominator and dominated parts and the dominator s decide on the fate of the dominated. The system of world domination feeds on the existence of unequal relations between the two parts. The system of world domination arbitrarily rejects revolution and creates problems for revolutionary regimes. Nicaragua and the countries of southern Africa are a few living examples.
The system of world domination decides for peoples against their will. The innocent Palestinian nation is a perfect case and Afghanistan is another. The system of world domination fiddles with human ideas and concepts, changes and distorts them at will and tries to inject the distorted meanings into people's minds terrorism and human rights are two such manipulated concepts.
The system of world domination is bold enough openly and directly to invade such countries as have aroused its anger. The United· States invasion of Libya and Grenada are two recent examples.
The system of world domination makes decisions for the whole world and all nations. Yesterday it was Hiroshima and today the President of the United States is proud of the horrendous behaviour of his predecessors and even argues that if they did not kill those several thousands, mote people would have been killed throughout the world! The President of the United States does have a soft spot in his heart for all mankind - is he not the godfather of mankind?
The system of world domination supports fascist and racialist regimes such as the ones in Israel and South Africa and employs them as bloodthirsty, armed agents to bully the oppressed nations. Muslim Lebanon, patiently resisting the criminal aggressions of Zionists, and the African front-line States are good examples.
The system of world domination considers that it has the right to put pressure on international organizations; the Security Council and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) are living examples.
The system of world domination believes that its own interests are absolute and the interests of others are non-existent. A good example of this is the dangerous, peace-threatening presence of American battleships in the Persian Gulf that have come to "defend America's interests" while completely disregarding the interests of the countries of the region.
The system of world domination has, above all, the propaganda machine and the mass media of the world in its hands, distorts all the facts and gives a humane image to its satanic behaviour and in this way escapes confrontation with world public opinion. We believe that the nations and Governments of the third world as well as the peoples of the dominator countries should not tolerate this evil order of things. The big Powers must be told to go back home and leave the affairs of the world to its peoples. We must tell them: you are not anybody's legal guardians!
In the United Nations there are two unjustified distinctions - the right of veto and permanent membership in the Security Council. These must be removed. And their removal would indeed turn the United Nations into a truly popular organization in which all problems may be solved. Otherwise the Security Council will remain, as it is today, a paper factory for issuing worthless and ineffective orders. And the peoples of the world will continue to think that there is no place for settling international problems and that the only option left is to use violence.
Under these circumstances our message to the Governments of the third world, as long as the system of domination remains, is to unite with each other. This is the only way to become stronger. The Powers dominating our world do not value anything but power and we must speak with them in the only language they understand, the language of strength.
The awakening of peoples and their awareness of the nature and function of the system of domination is the strongest support for the third world Governments and a source of real strength to resist the dominating Powers. The leaders of these Governments will have nobody to help them except the will, the power and the ideas of their own peoples.
The union we propose to the third world countries is not a pact for fighting the big Powers; it will be a union for our own defence and the prevention of the usurpation of our legitimate rights.

The dominating Powers are also the big agents for dissemination and justification of corruption: moral corruption, sexual corruption and ideological corruption. The political, economic and espionage motives of the big Powers are the true perpetuators of these moral perversions. And the fact is that in our world today, which includes the nations of the big Powers too, moral values have been discarded, the foundation of the family has been weakened, alcoholism and addiction to drugs have become rampant and spirituality and morality have become least appealing.
We must start a tough campaign against corruption in our own countries. We must strengthen the foundation of the family and make this original school of man a home of affection, sincerity, love and spirituality. We must safeguard the rights and values of women. On this last issue, we must revise all the standards that were created by the system of domination and in order to liberate women from the humility of being "sex objects" that the dominant, Western culture has in practice imposed on them. Women as scientists, politicians, directors and managers, partners and mothers must be welcome but their exploitation as objects for pleasure, lechery and commercials should be rejected. This will help restore the dignity and personality of half of humanity and re-establish the lasting and holy foundation of the family.
These are some of the messages of our revolution, not only for those eager to listen but also for those who can decide to listen to the truth and to welcome fairness and justice.