Allow me to congratulate the President on his assumption of this high office. There are few men in this hall who have been associated with the United Nations as long as he has. If the fortieth session of the United Nations General Assembly is to provide meaningful new directions for the future, it will require vision and leadership. It could not have found a better man than him to guide it.
Please allow me also to pause a moment and place on record our deep appreciation for the work done by his predecessor, Ambassador Paul Lusaka. He brought great honor to his country and to the continent of Africa with his fine stewardship of the General Assembly through the thirty-ninth session. Not least among the achievements of the thirty-ninth session was the great outpouring of concern, both in words and deeds, for the crisis that afflicted many African nations. This was due in no small part to Ambassador Lusaka's efforts. We thank him.
In recent years, the United Nations has also benefited from the wise guidance provided by the Secretary-General, His Excellency Javier Perez de Cuellar. In a series of remarkably candid and insightful annual reports, from 1982 to 1985, he has openly discussed and analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of this Organization. Those who wish to understand where the United Nations stands today need go no further than these four annual reports to grasp the crisis and the challenges facing the United Nations today.
The prestige of the united Nations is at an all-time low. The debates of the Security Council and the General AssetrJaly, which once gripped world attention, are now generally given scant consideration. The Charter states that the United Nations was created "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war". Yet in the last 40 years there have been about 150 armed conflicts, big and small, which have killed 16 million people, and perhaps as many as 20 million. In 1983 alone, there were 40 separate armed conflicts, major and minor, involving 75 countries, or half the membership of the United Nations. The majority of the victims of these conflicts have come from the developing countries.
The United Nations has not been indifferent to these conflicts. Each year we have here taken principled stands on such key instances of foreign aggression and occupation as on the rights of the Palestinian people, and the Namibian people, and the occupation by Soviet and Vietnamese armies of Afghanistan and Cambodia. In spite of our clear statements, the conflicts persist, resulting in critics of the United Nations suggesting that this Organization may have failed.
Recent developments in South Africa have given us a ray of hope. The United Nations critics claimed in the past that persistent condemnation of apartheid in this Hall would make no difference. The events of the last few weeks, where both the South African people and the international community have ferociously broken down some of the pillars of the apartheid regime, demonstrate that the persistence of this Organization can pay off.
Unfortunately, in South-East Asia Viet Nam continues to denounce and reject United Nations resolutions on Cambodia, thereby undermining the credibility and legitimacy of this entire Organization. Only recently, the Non-Aligned Ministerial Meeting in Luanda reaffirmed that Movement's commitment to the decisions of the United Nations and the principles of the United Nations Charter. If, as it is often claimed by Viet Nam, Viet Nam sincerely desires to live in peace with its neighbors, it should conform to the spirit and principles of the Movement by immediately implementing the United Nations resolutions on Cambodia.
I do not belong to the ranks of pessimists who claim that the days of the United Nations are numbered. I do believe, however, that the United Nations today is in some peril. There is a clear danger that this Organization may become irrelevant to issues of peace and security, the primary issues for which it was founded. To prevent that from happening, let each Member of the United Nations ask itself this question: Who gains if the United Nations fails?
To use a contemporary analogy, we could liken the super-Powers to supertankers and the majority of nations of the world to little boats and some of them even to little rafts that are barely afloat.

In looking at contemporary issues of war and peace, the United Nations has often fallen into the trap of looking at the world' from the perspective of the super-tanker. Several disarmament resolutions proclaim that the central issue of the day is the danger of a collision between these two super-tankers. This, in my opinion, is not so.
While it is true that all of us may perish if there is a collision between these two super-tankers, such a collision is not going to occur because both of them have too much to lose from a direct collision. That is why Soviet or American soldiers have died fighting each other in the last 40 years.
Each super-tanker, however, has tried to recruit small boats to ram into each other, or to churn up the waters around them in the name of revolution and liberation.
Coming from a small nation like Singapore it has always been a source of amazement to us that there are so many small nations which are willing to be seduced into this task of generating turbulence. When such turbulence occurs, the super-tankers are not threatened. It is oily the other small boats that face the danger of capsizing.
It is therefore a myth - perpetuated especially by one super-tanker - that revolution and turbulence are good for the third world. The small States of the third world would do well to remember that a more stable international political order would increase our chances for survival. A stable order would increase trade, investment and financial flows to the third world, enhancing our prospects for economic development.
My remarks today are therefore not addressed to the super-tankers but to the over one hundred nations that are small boats and rafts. Let us pool our interests and work for a stronger, more credible and more effective United Nations because it is the only - I repeat only - international institution dedicated to such a stable international political order.

In historical terms, file, Charter of the United Nations is a remarkably revolutionary document.
Man's recorded history has witnessed the rise and fall of many societies and nations. The law of the jungle prevailed. Those that became mighty claimed the right to occupy neighboring territories, enslaving or massacring populations as their armies marched across different lands.
In June 1945, a brave little document emerged which declared that all this had to stop. This document was the Charter of the United Nations.
The critics of the United Nations who wish to see this Organization swept from the face of this earth should pause to consider the alternative. If the United Nations has not succeeded in erasing the habit of 5,000 years of recorded history, it should be remembered that the "forty years of the United Nations existence is a mere wink in time.
Going against the natural unfolding of history, the Charter of the United Nations states in Article 2 that the United Nations "is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members".
The Charter's concepts of national sovereignty and territorial integrity means that while nations have the right to become strong and mighty if they with to do so, they have no right to expand beyond their borders. It is therefore not surprising that all the fragile new States that have emerged in the last 40 years have quickly reaffirmed their commitment to the United Nations. They have done so not only because it is a noble idea but because it was the closest they could come to obtaining a guarantee for their survival.
Will this revolutionary concept of equal nation States survive into the 21st century? It may. But to do so, all nation States need to invest in a strong and stable international political order. A credible, effectively functioning United Nations which strongly reinforces the principles of territorial integrity and
 sovereign equality, will make it easier for even the smallest States of the world to retain their independence.
The small nations of this world which try to cheat on the rules of the Charter are really sowing the seeds of their own destruction.
Technological advances are making the united Nations more relevant each day. The world is shrinking at a pace unprecedented in the history of man. Nations that were once separated by mountains and oceans can now look squarely into each other's eyes. Tremendous developments in telecommunications and computer technology have made this possible.
In July this year, almost one and a half billion people or one quarter of this globe's population simultaneously watched a live concert held to raise aid for Africa. On this shrinking globe, where there are massive movements of peoples and goods every day, a political disturbance in Asia could lead to bombs being placed on aircraft in Canada; a new and frightening disease afflicting North America could be carried to the opposite side of the globe within twenty-four hours.
We fear that the international institutions of today are unable to cope with the new networks and patterns of interdependence that are evolving each day.
It is no longer accurate to say that we belong to the same planet. The old cliche that the world is a global village is more true today than ever before. Throughout history village communities have tended to be stable and enduring. People do care about their own neighbourhoods. They adopt careful and responsible positions on issues directly affecting them.
In this shrinking global village it is inevitable that nations will eventually view global issues more responsibly when they see the direct implications for themselves. That day will come.

We could help to expedite it by transforming this Assembly and perhaps the Security Council into a village council. This is not a frivolous or purely rhetorical suggestion.
In village meetings it is sometimes useful to let off steam. The United Nations has performed this function admirably. Countless small wars have been avoided because some wise leaders have transported their anger and the anger of their populations to the hall of this General Assembly, allowing it to explode in this hall, and thus bringing a catharsis to their populations and reducing the impulse towards war. No other global institution can perform this thankless task.
Too much anger and rhetoric, however, can poison the atmosphere. This too has happened in the United Nations. This institution is being overcome by the fumes of its own rhetoric. We are not the first to make this observation. In June this year, several former Presidents of the United Nations General Assembly met under the able chairmanship of Ambassador Paul Lusaka in New York to discuss the state of the United Nations. I commend their report to you.
Their prescriptions were many. The United Nations Secretariat needs tight management. In the debates, consensus building should be promoted. The number and the length of United Nations resolutions should be reduced. Every effort should be made to eliminate agenda items which are no longer relevant. Meetings should start on time.
If all these recommendations were adopted, the world would pay greater heed to the deliberations of this body and the important resolutions adopted each year.
If we, the smaller nation Members of the United Nations, can continue to steer a wise and careful course between the two super-Powers, if we can continue to reaffirm our commitment, both in word and deed, to the United Nations Charter, and if we can gradually cleanse the deliberations of this body of empty rhetoric and
 posturing, then I am confident that when we reach port in the 21st century, the United Nations will continue to be relevant.
Singapore, as one of the smallest member States of the United Nations, is solemnly dedicated to the task of moving the United Nations into the 21st century, and we begin by repledging our commitment, both in word and in deed, to the purposes and principles of the united Nations Charter.


): I feel doubly pleased to be addressing this Assembly on behalf of the people of Uruguay. I am pleased in the first place to see you, Sir, the representative of a people linked to the Uruguayan people by a past of common roots and a present of shared ideals, presiding over this Assembly. Secondly, I. am pleased to be here for the celebration of an anniversary of singular significance: the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations.
If having existed for four decades is in the case of any human institution a reason for rejoicing, this is even more true in the case of the United Nations, the embodiment of the ideal of the brotherhood of all mankind. Its survival from one day to the next in a world fraught with danger and dominated by national selfishness should be a cause for celebration.
In spite of the grave difficulties that it has had to face and the continuous crises that have tested its mettle, this vulnerable ship, which provides a refuge for the hopes of the world, has remained afloat and continued its journey, despite all skepticism, and has succeeded in living twice as long as its predecessor, the League of Nations.
In spite of the criticism directed against- the system, the world has lived for almost two generations without conflicts of world-wide scope. That is no mean feat. Currents of solidarity and co-operation which had never before existed in the history of humanity have been generated. A splendid process of decolonization has been launched with the support of the Organization.
Having started with 51 countries signatories to the Charter, the Organization today includes 159 independent, sovereign nations.
These achievements cannot disguise the weaknesses arising, above all, from the Governments' lack of faith in the Organization and the non-observance of the precepts of the Charter. For this reason, this is a propitious opportunity both to reform and change what must be changed and to undertake a cool analysis to determine which faults are to be attributed to the system as such and which to the flaws and inconsistencies of countries.
The Organization, in the last resort, is a reflection of the countries themselves, their faults and their virtues. Its value, moreover, should be measured not only by what it has done but also by what it has prevented, what it has averted - a perspective that highlights the peace-making activities of the United Nations.
The San Francisco Charter, although not perfect, seemed at that time adequately to reconcile the transparency of principles with the opacity of reality. But the world has changed and the forces of violence, destruction and discord have renewed their assault. It is true to say that .the United Nations has struggled for peace and justice for 40 years. But does this test of endurance, this persistence in existing despite so much adversity; give us grounds for hope with regard to the future? Do the conditions necessary to allow us to expect that future generations will celebrate a new anniversary of the Organization 40 years hence exist at present?

The United Nations has become an indispensable element o£ contemporary international life. We, its Members, who are responsible for its continuing to exist, should insist that a collective effort be made to establish the mechanisms which will allow the Organization to be more effective without substantially altering its legal framework.
The United Nations arose out of a cataclysm to replace the League of Nations, which was also the outcome of a tragic world upheaval. Let us not wait for a third cataclysm to improve and strengthen it.
In this Assembly Uruguay renews its commitment to continue to support the Organization unconditionally. It is prepared to promote and share in any effort designed to revise the practices and systems of the United Nations to make it more flexible and effective in both the political and the economic spheres and to increase support for the political functions of the Secretary-General.
This commitment by Uruguay is, today, backed by the moral and political force that emanates from the existence of its own democratic institutions, recently regained in a peaceful process of institutional normalization firmly rooted in the vote of the people. As the fifth decade of the United Nations begins, the spirit that Uruguay brings to bear in this forum is different from that in the previous decade. We have begun a historic phase of restoration of democracy and democratic reaffirmation in keeping with the deepest convictions of the Uruguayan people. These convictions are rooted in the long-gone era of the struggle for independence, when Uruguayans, in an act of renunciation and loyalty almost without precedent .n history, abandoned their towns, homes and property to follow Artigas, their liberating hero, who never forgot that the only support of his political power lay in the will of the people. The profound symbiosis of the people and their leader, the governed and the governor, is admirably reflected in Artigasis own words: "My authority emanates from you and ceases in your sovereign presence."

This is the concept of democracy that has remained in the soul of the of the Uruguayan people throughout our history and that now blooms once more as a part of our inner being, as an element of our -identity as a people, as a natural vocation that we can deny only at the risk of losing our way, of going astray, of being other than whom we are. With the democracy which we have now recovered, we have ourselves recovered.
As it returns to democracy, Uruguay returns to its traditional position of scrupulous respect for human rights and for the promotion and development of mechanisms and institutions that will ensure the observance and protection of those rights.
Because we were a people caught in the middle, between Spain and Portugal, the two great empires, because our Iberian roots were strengthened by a flood of Italian immigrants and later by the migratory currents of French, Swiss, Armenian, Jewish and other peoples, pluralism, tolerance, a belief in freedom and respect for human rights lie deep within the very nature of our being.
On the domestic level, no sooner had the new Government assumed power than it declared a generous general amnesty for political prisoners and fully restored political freedoms and civil rights. We have now set ourselves the task of carrying out as soon as possible the process of restoring the. rights that were violated and normalizing the situations that were altered by the previous regime. Uruguayan democracy is once more on the march.

On the international level, one of the first acts of our Government was to ratify the Inter-American Convention on Human Rights. In keeping with our traditions, we have renewed our struggle for human rights everywhere, under all systems of government. We shall pursue that struggle without bringing ideological considerations to bear and without making choices on the basis of self-interest.
For this reason, our Government cannot but strongly condemn apartheid, that remnant of a blighted era, and withhold recognition of the interim government of Namibia illegally established by South Africa.
Within the context of human rights, the international community must direct its attention to the effective application of that most basic of rights, the right to life.
When one thinks of the tragic fact that millions of children die for lack of assistance it is impossible not to question the so-called progress of our human society. There could be no better way to celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations than by concentrating our efforts on supporting the worthy task of child immunization undertaken by the united Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), so that the target of universal immunization by 1990 may be achieved.
As a country that is emerging from a painful experience in this area, we urge Governments that are dedicated to peace to demonstrate their respect for basic human values by ratifying the conventions on human rights. We feel entitled to make such an appeal. Uruguay was one of the first countries to ratify the International Covenants on human rights and one of the few to accept the competence of the Committee to look into the complaints of individuals who have been victims of their violation. Moreover, Uruguay has not only ratified the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, but was the first State to accept the competence of the relevant Committee.

All of us who, in ate way or another, took part in the transition from authoritarianism to democracy know what sacrifices, patience and dedication were necessary to ensure that such a transition took place peacefully. But, great as the effort demanded by the restoration of democracy may have been, it was no greater than that which its maintenance is now requiring from us.
Democracy is a fragile flower; we have ample and all too frequent proof of its fragile nature. It only grows and survives in the right soil and the right climate. A genuine democracy based on respect for the individual and on the periodical, free advice of the people can be preserved only within an economic context that allows its citizens to provide for their basic material and spiritual needs. In other words, the close link between democracy and economic development must be recognized. When this condition is not fulfilled and poverty and unemployment prevail, violence emerges and is unleashed, the sowers of disorder take advantage of the fertile soil, the fabric of society disintegrates and, in the international sphere, political loyalties become erratic.
This does not mean that we in any way deny the formal operation of democracy, which is always a substantial guarantee that rights will be respected, but, inasmuch as the formal operation of democracy is a necessary condition of the existence of such rights, it is not sufficient to ensure its stability. It is our duty to ensure that our people can enjoy the basic conditions for growth and development, not only for reasons of honor - since it places its trust in us and we must comply with its will - or for humanitarian motives alone - considering, as we do, that the assurance of a full life is a fundamental right - but also because we must ensure peace, since we love life and cast in our lot with it. "A hungry people," said Seneca, "does not listen to reason, is not pacified by justice, does not yield to entreaties."
 The stability of democratic institutions is seriously threatened in many developing countries. The threat is real, grave and current. We who are responsible for steering the destiny of those countries are conscious of the gravity of the situation and of the fact that we have to make enormous efforts in terms of work and austerity.
We cannot ignore the fact that, in order to correct this alarming situation, we must rely on ourselves and use our own resources. Let us not deceive ourselves; the strength that will enable us to surmount the obstacles to our development is also to be found above all within ourselves. A vigorous and bold attitude on the part of both our public and our private sectors is necessary to drive and guide this strength and mobilize the available resources.
If Uruguay and Latin America as a whole wish to deal with the present situation speedily they must make an unprecedented effort in which the overall consensus on certain fundamental problems must take priority over domestic contradictions, divisive quarrels or sterile ideological disputes.
However, we fully realize that our efforts, although indispensable, are not enough. It is our fate to live in a world in which international relations are beset by unprecedented difficulties. Our economies are affected by external factors that are beyond our control. Interest rates, which are still high, together with falling prices for our export products create situations that put a stranglehold on our balance of payments. In addition, we carry the burden of our foreign debt, the servicing of which, in present circumstances holds back any dynamic trend in our economies. The countries of Latin America face an unprecedented situation arising from the astronomical dimensions of their debts. They are thus caught in a spiraling process, in which each turn makes the possibility of repayment more remote.
How have we reached such a situation? There is no need to repeat the history of the economic misadventures of the developing countries, but here in the General Assembly we must once again point out something which at this juncture is obvious, and that is that the creditor countries are also responsible for the disastrous situation afflicting the debtor countries and that a large part of the responsibility for its solution rests with them.
It is short sighted and insensitive to believe that the only factors that have placed the debtor developing countries in this vertiginous spiral of debt that generates further debt are lack of responsibility on the part of those countries, their poor administration and their lack of foresight. We are raced with a situation that is imbued with tragic contradictions, not the least of which is that the creditor institutions and countries that demand payment of the debt and its interest are the same ones that, with their protectionist policies, their discriminatory messages and their subsidies, close off all the possibilities that the debtors have of generating the necessary resources to repay their debt.
If the industrialized countries persist in denying the real origin and nature of these problems, if they do not shoulder their share of responsibility for the situation that prevails in the developing world, if they do not become less inflexible with regard to just demands for more equitable treatment, all our sacrifice will be a forlorn, wasted effort and there will be no reason for optimism regarding the survival of democracy.
We do not expect acts of charity; we do not encourage anachronistic moratoriums. We ask for better trade; we ask for more technology; we ask to be allowed to sell *'n order to be able to pay and fulfill our obligations. We wish to grow in order to be able to pay, because we reject the alternative of paying and renouncing growth, just as we know that to ignore debts only leads to irresponsibility.

 These statements are made by Uruguay, a country which has just renegotiated its debt under the best conditions that can be expected in the present situation. We do not look at the problem, therefore, under the emotional influence of resentment. On the contrary, with the ease of mind provided by the long repayment periods obtained, we try to analyze it in historical perspective, over the long run and from the viewpoint of a legitimate mutuality of concerns.
We thus consider that the fact that the creditor countries have not understood or have not wished to understand the real essence of the foreign debt problem, together with the obstacles that they set up against trade with the developing countries, the lack of results in the North-South dialog, the reluctance with which the principles of the new international economic order are accepted and applied, can only lead to a deep sense of frustration on the part of the developing countries.
I do not believe that it is healthy for any of the sections into which the world is divided to continue this dialog of the deaf, where the only outcome has been to ease the guilty conscience of some and to offer only false and shallow remedies for the needs of others.
The proclamation of the principles of the new international economic order and the subsequent attempts to make some of those principles a reality raised great expectations in international forums. But let us not be deceived. The new international economic order is for the time being simply a rhetorical listing of good intentions.
The terms of trade of Latin America have deteriorated by 20 per cent during this decade, and in this very year, 1985, the continent is prey to a new decline in prices. It already seems quite probable that the drop in prices of raw materials in 1985 will mean a loss of export income for the region as a whole of close to 310 billion.
In the meantime, Latin America must continue to make new net transfers of resources abroad of nearly $30 billion, in addition to the $70 billion of the last > three years.
In terms of our small country, this has meant that so far during 1985, all the prices of our raw materials have dropped by about 10 per cent, in addition to the sharp drop suffered during the decade as a whole.
JSM/ed	&/40/PV.6
17

Traditional markets for our meats are being closed to us because of the ruinous competition from highly subsidized meat being exported by the European Economic Communiity (EEC) countries. Our exports of industrial products based on the agriculture and livestock sector are threatened or excluded by all kinds of protectionist barriers.
Does anybody believe that under these circumstances we can achieve a peaceful social climate and the conditions necessary to lay the foundations of economic development?
I trust that those countries whose level of economic, political and social evolution ensures that they obtain the greater share of the benefits of progress will understand that if they adopt an attitude based less on national short-term interests and more on common long-term interests, they themselves will benefit. Surely it is more to their advantage to coexist with nations that have prosperous economies and stable governments, that are active markets, sure sources of supply and friendly partners, rather than be surrounded, as they now are, by States that are plunging towards insolvency and that bear within them the seeds of misery and of its inescapable corollary, violence?
As Montesquieu said, "An injustice to one is a threat to all."
Any opportunity to negotiate is welcome. But it will also be useless if all that the developed countries seek in the negotiations is to consolidate their positions of power, or if we, the developing countries, only use them as a pulpit for spreading ideologies or for making Utopian claims, instead of putting forward realistic demands or exchanging concessions on an equitable basis.
We, the people of the developing world, must act more pragmatically and be aware that our solidarity has not yet developed sufficiently to be able to impose our conditions on those with whom we are dealing, we cannot expect gratuitous concessions. We must insist on our demands, but not expect too much from the
JSM/ed	A/4Q/PV.6
18

generosity of others. We must be radical in our principles but moderate in applying them.
At the same time we should place greater stress on the possibilities that co-operation among equals can open up,, Wa are convinced that if we were to put more energy and more imagination into managing our relations with countries that are in a situation similar to ours, either within our region or even elsewhere, we might find new avenues of progress. By intensifying or expanding co-operation with other developing countries, we can reduce the contradictions in our own economies.
Latin America is, with a few exceptions, self-sufficient in terms of most of our commodities. However, despite the existence of areas and subregions with excess production, and others that cannot meet their own needs, there is not enough intraregional trade.
During the last few years, only a fifth of the total value of commodity imports - including oil - came from Latin America. The Latin American region, for example, exported $7,300 million worth of food in 15)82, of which only $730 million worth went to other countries in the region.
The value of its oil exports in 1982 amounted to $48 billion, of which only $5 billion were intraregional exports, while oil imports from the rest of the world amounted to $26 billion. In view of the severe external restrictions which our countries face, the fact that we are buying abroad the very same goods that we are producing within our own borders is a sign that we have failed to organize trade that it will provide us the greatest possible benefits.
Consequently, we must stimulate economic integration among our countries. There must be more trade, more technical assistance, more transfer of technology, more co-operation in the areas of education and scientific research, more projects to establish multinational corporations, greater policy co-ordination, at the subregional, regional, continental or intercontinental level, in all areas in which
NR/gmr	A/40/PV.6
19
 we have common interests. All these are channels which have not been sufficiently explored, that may open up new prospects for emerging from our economic stagnation.
In this regard, I would like to call to mind the exercise in co-ordination and consultation that we, the debtor countries of Latin America, are carrying out through the Cartagena group with the purpose of negotiating collectively with our creditors on such a problem as that of the foreign debt which, has taken on a predominantly political dimension that requires a political solution, and that can no longer be dealt with simply as a mere relationship of a legal-financial nature between debtors and creditors.
In this regard, we welcome and firmly support what the Secretary-General has stressed in his annual report to the General Assembly, to wit, that in recent years economic, financial, monetary and trade issues have become so interrelated and are of such profound political and social importance that they can only be dealt with effectively as part of a wider political process.
We shall insist on that aspect of thiu problem, which in the long run will have to be accepted by industrialized countries. On this problem Latin America must be regarded and listened to as a united group. This does not imply a club of insolvent debtors seeking to reduce the amount or extend the term of their debts. No, a political focus has two meanings: one, that the merits of acting as a hemisphere be recognized; the other, that it be understood that the debt will be paid by means of growth and exports. Growth only comes about with investment. This implies receiving investments, and recycling into productive activities some of our savings from reducing the servicing of these liabilities. The aim of this political focus is not to default on our obligations or confront the financial system, but rather to seek a solution to the problem which, in the existing situation and with our usual resources, our countries will be unable to cope with in the long run, except at the price of chaos.
tfSM/ad	VW/W.6
20

Together with investment growth, however, we also need to increase our exports, in this regard we must be quite plain. The foreign debt problem is indissolubly linked to the trade problem.
If the prices of our raw materials continue to decline* if the present protectionist barriers remain unchanged, if the present new trends, which auguring the dangers of an undeclared trade war with outdated and suicidal protectionist policies, are confirmed, there will he no lasting solution to the debt problem and the whole edifice that we have .ried to build with our post-war institutions may fall and pave the way to a world of stagnation or uncontrollable crises.
MLG/giar	A/40/PV.6
26

We also wish to be among the driving forces of world growth. Let us be allowed to produce; give us the resources with which to strengthen our capacity for investment and productive modernization; open up the doors to our export capacity, and the debt problem will be just one more financial problem on our agenda.
Those are the essential terms of the problem; if today we were to imagine for em instant that foreign debt had magically disappeared, we would still not have found the solution to the roots of the problem. We would only have found incidental relief: that of maintaining the present international conditions of trade and investment flows. Within a decade we would surely witness a renewal of the same critical problems of today.
To view foreign debt as a purely economic problem is as mistaken as to view the crisis in Central America as a purely political problem. Central America has lately become the stage of a tragedy where violence is manifest in all its forms: civil wars, conflicts across borders, terrorism, repression.
How can we stop this infernal process that destroys lives, well-being and wealth, and that continues to inflict indescribable suffering on the peoples of that region, who deserve a better fate?
Basically, the problem is deeply rooted, going way back beyond the time when the present Governments or political systems were established. The disease afflicting Central America is one that will not be cured if attention is not paid to its deeper causes - both political, economic and social. Within a context in which poverty and backwardness prevail in most sectors of the population that have traditionally been left on the sidelines by dynasties and elites, ideological aggression finds fertile ground.
But to persist in viewing the Central American crisis as a crisis of an exclusively political and ideological nature is a mistake fraught with tragic consequences. Likewise, it would be a mistake to ignore the way in which these tragedies are exploited politically, or to think that there must be some lasting solution that is not based on strict observance of the principles held in greatest regard by the political traditions of Latin America, namely, non-intervention, respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of States, non-use of force and non-use of the territory of one State to undermine the sovereignty and independence of another, wherever it may be, in Latin America or elsewhere, in America or in another continent.
We believe that, at this time, the Contadora Group offers the most appropriate path to resolve the crisis. For this reason we have fully supported it and we have decided to contribute to its consolidation together with other sister countries of the region, as a mechanism through which peace in the region may be restored. But the work of the Contadora Group will be completely sterile if there is no change in the attitude of the countries involved in the crisis.
We urge the latter to soften their attitudes based on preconceived ideas and prejudice, and to marshal their will to respond to what their respective peoples demand and need - that is to say, purely and simply, peace.
I wish to remind those Governments - every one of them - that when they seek to satisfy their national interests without consulting the interests of others and without applying the basic standards of ethics and international law, their victories are short-lived and, ultimately, will not offset the damages suffered. Anecdotal history, as presented by newspaper or newsreel reports, radio and television, can extol the apparent but incidental successes obtained through pressure, the use of force or demagogy. However, the history that endures is very unremitting and will not be deceived, and it records and extols only those who respect the will of the people and struggle to meet their needs and aspirations.
There are other disorders that afflict Latin America. Some are peculiar to itself and cannot be transferred, such as the many unresolved border disputes, fueled by immature and anachronistic visions of nationalism which eventually serve only to support arms races, with their devastating effects on our institutions.
Others must be viewed in a different context, such as that in the subregion of which my country is a part - the South Atlantic, which was ravaged by war more than three years ago. The problem of the Malvinas is not simply a bilateral problem between Argentina and Great Britain. It is a Latin American problem and, as such, we assume it in its full dimension. The permanent British presence in the Malvinas ignores one of the principles which were the basis of the political organization of the Ibero-American continent, the principle of utipossidetis, which was formulated and applied on the continent long before Great Britain's de facto occupation of the Malvinas which had the effect, precisely, of not allowing any American territory to remain unclaimed and open to occupation by extra-continental Powers.
We trust that Great Britain, which knew when the historical moment was ripe to abandon vast possessions all over the world, will succeed in reconciling the dictates of law with the rules of international coexistence. Hence we support Argentina's claims and we are prepared to do everything in our power to contribute to a rapprochement between those two parties at the negotiating table.
Uruguay, the product of the same genealogy as that of Argentina, is convinced of the justice of its position; it has maintained historical ties of co-operation with Great Britain, sealed in brotherhood during the Second world War; and it appeals in this forum to the two parties to find solutions to a situation which cannot remain unchanged without peril to us all.
We are all aware of the long list of situations and conflicts that endanger in world peace and security. Small States, such as Uruguay, are powerless witnesses to the tragedy of subjugated States, of nations torn apart and of peoples victimized by ideological wars and by expansionist ambitions, in the case of the Middle East conflict the worst has happened: it has become a routine problem; we have learned to live with it. In the meantime, millions of human beings are experiencing insecurity, fear and exile, we believe that it is time for all those directly affected by the situation in the Middle East to accept the notion that there will be no prospects for a lasting peace while there are parties who insist on not recognizing Israel's right to existence as a State, while the need to establish safe and recognized borders is not acknowledged, and while the inalienable right of the Palestinian people to self-determination is not recognized, without the constant coercion of forces that only raise their flags for their own advantage. Moreover, peace in the region will not be secured if the independence and territorial integrity of Lebanon is not reaffirmed and respected. Its territory must be freed from the presence of foreign armed forces, regardless of their origin.
Afghanistan, Kampuchea, the Iran-Iraq war, the situation of Namibia and of the majority of the people of South Africa - all are situations that are not consistent with what the Governments involved state in international forums. It is tragic to perceive the deep gap between the world of words and proclamations heard in this forum and the world of reality. This gap is illustrated by the appeals for peace and the declarations insisting on the need for disarmament and the need to create an international atmosphere conducive to confidence and security that are made by the very same States that have embarked upon an arms race of colossal dimensions.
Let us not be content with our actions. Our children, surely, will have much to reproach us for and may never be able to forgive the omissions which are so prevalent. I propose that we discard the assumption of self-satisfaction and apply# in its place, Albert Einstein's maxim, "The most grievous fault is not to be aware of any fault."
The arms craze, which is taking on interplanetary dimensions, is the worst threat that hovers over the collective aspirations of our peoples and the individual happiness of their members.
It is a threat that makes us feel that we are not the masters of our destiny, which remains entirely in the hands of the ruling elites of the great Powers. It is stupefying to think that there are 50,000 nuclear warheads ready to be detonated, while the use of a small fraction of such an arsenal is more than sufficient to cause disasters, loss of life and catastrophic damage to the environment.
Perhaps the most tragic contradiction of the world we live in is that if the budget that finances that lethal fraction were to be earmarked, not for the massive construction of artefacts for destruction and death, but rather for co-operation and aid, the lives of millions of human beings who are suffering and dying of hunger at this very moment in the desolate lands of Africa could be saved, and disease and ignorance could be eradicated in the American continent.
One is justified in hoping that those responsible for the warlike escalation will have a moment of supreme enlightenment.which will lead them to put a stop to this suicidal race and devote to life a part of the resources, talents and energy that they now devote to death.
The world is at present going through a period that is as disturbing as it is promising.
Never before, since the post-war period, have we been shaken by so much uncertainty regarding the future, by so many threats to peace, which is being violated systematically in many corners of the earth and exposed every day to the risk of a nuclear holocaust, by so much ambivalence regarding the economic situation, by the tragic persistence of irritating differences between the rich world of the North and the poor world of the South, by so much racial, religious and nationalist strife, by the widespread daily presence of insane terrorism of all types.
As we face this situation, so often denounced and so often ignored, we view with similar apprehension the breaking-up of a whole edifice of multilateral organizations established to defend solidarity among men and nations, organizations that today are weaker than they have ever been since the post-war period and, in some cases, under serious threat of extinction.
The present state of international relations is not a cause for optimism regarding the future of the human race. But optimism is not a rational sentiment: in these sombre times it is the nutrient the spirit needs to continue living. Thus it was for us, even during the most difficult hours of the long night that lay over our country for more than a decade, during which freedoms were lost and happiness disappeared from our land. But time justified those of us who waited with faith; reason, commonsense and the instinct of coexistence finally prevailed. Power was returned to the people with not a drop of blood shed, and the democratic institutions recovered their status and their authority.
Our specific experience, very much our own, leads us to aver that if Uruguay was able to find its way peacefully back to democracy, it was because there were people who thought that peace would not come alone, that peace was not simply the result of abstaining from violence, that peace was a valuable political endeavor which required action, struggle and strategy.
In Latin America we have returned to democratic life. During this year both Uruguay and Brazil have done so, following the course taken earlier by Argentina.
We have seen the consolidation of the Peruvian and Bolivian processes, despite the threats that the wrathful unleashed against both sister countries.
We have hailed an exemplary peace agreement regarding the borders between Argentina and Chile. This is proof of a prospect for hope, which in turn makes co-operation in the region our duty: and we wish to state here and now that we are doing our duty, that we are already doing it in the political, cultural and commercial spheres and that we wish to continue to do it, with neither aggressive nor resentful feelings towards anyone. We know that a lasting peace will not be on a firm footing until democracy prevails in all our countries, because it is the only way to avoid the interference of alien dogmatisms and interests.
As Uruguayans we cast our lot with peace, as well as with change, the conferring of dignity on work and life, and the new approaches that the end of the century is already requiring of us. But, above all, we cast our lot with peace, which is nothing less than a means of achieving freedom and development. ■Revolutions," Bertold Brecht advised so correctly, "occur at dead ends." That will not happen in Uruguay where all the channels of understanding and comprehension are open, open within the country and open towards the rest of the world.
You may be sure that Uruguay will sow only seeds of harmony.
In closing, I wish to convey to this Assembly a deep feeling of shared pain and brotherly hope. Shared pain regarding the tragedy which has cast the people of Mexico, our noble brothers, into mourning. Its tragedy is the tragedy of America as a whole. I wish to reiterate that my country, within the context of its modest strength, wishes to be on the front line of solidarity and support for Mexico, which is so greatly admired and to which our people owe a debt of imperishable gratitude for the noble and generous way in which it remained at our side during the past years when so many Uruguayans found in Mexico a brotherly haven.
But I also wish to express a feeling of hope. Mexico always reaps growth from its adversities. That has been its history and that will be its present. It is for this reason that, faced with this pain, we oust pay tribute - and this is a final word here - to the cry of hope that has endured throughout the history of this nation: Long live Mexico!


I congratulate Mr. de Pinies most warmly on his election to the high office of President of the General Assembly at this most important fortieth session. I wish him and the officers of the Assembly all the best in their endeavors to guide the work of the fortieth session to a successful conclusion. Let me also extend to his predecessor, the Permanent Representative of Zambia, Ambassador Paul Lusaka, our warm congratulations and appreciation for the dedication, devotion and wisdom with which he guided the work of the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly. Also I wish to pay a tribute to our Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, and his staff for the eminent services they have continued faithfully to render to our Organization.
Many distinguished speakers in the course of our deliberations have properly recalled the tragic events leading to the founding of the United Nations. At the end of the Second World War the people of the world resolved to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war and on 26 June 1945 in San Francisco, at the conclusion of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, signed the Charter of the United Nations, which came into force on 24 October 1945, establishing the Organization. The Organization drew up aims and objectives for achievement as set forth in Article 1 of the Charter. As we assemble here to reflect on our achievements and shortcomings over the last four decades, I wish, on behalf of my delegation, to commend the Organization for its substantial achievements. To mention a few, the Organization has exerted every effort and has largely succeeded in, first, averting a major world conflict; secondly, promoting the course of decolonization by its adoption and implementation of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV); thirdly, promoting respect for human rights; fourthly, adopting the declaration and program of action on the establishment of a new international economic order and the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States; and, fifthly, codifying international legal instruments to regulate the conduct of States in various fields, including adoption of the Law of the Sea Convention at Montego Bay, Jamaica, in 1982, which was a milestone in the history of our Organization.
The lesson of the Second world war, in particular the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, should serve to remind us that war should never be a way of resolving international disputes. At this fortieth anniversary year, we should therefore rededicate ourselves fully to peace and co-operation, strictly adhering to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the provisions of the International Covenants on Human Rights and the established norms of international law.
The institutions already set up by the international community to this end and the progress achieved in the last 40 years should be further strengthened to ensure the full realization of the universality of our Organization, decolonization, disarmament, economic development and the full maintenance of international peace and security in a climate that respects the sovereignty of every nation and the dignity and worth of every individual in full freedom. In these efforts, Kenya will not be found wanting. Our national aspirations are rooted firmly in a philosophy of peace, love, unity and development which translates into a policy of positive non-alignment, good neighborliness and non-interference in the internal affairs of others. We wish to underscore the special responsibility that the Charter of our Organization places on the Security Council with respect to the maintenance and preservation of international peace and security. Unfortunately, the record of the Security Council in this regard has not been altogether satisfactory. There have been far too many occasions in which the abuse of the veto power by permanent members has resulted in its paralysis in the face of a number of explosive international situations. The result has been erosion of confidence in the United Nations and increasing incidents of unilateral actions contrary to the Charter. It is against the foregoing background that the record of our Organization in tackling troublesome situations needs to be reviewed.
I turn now to the situation as it obtains in South Africa. The continued existence of apartheid is an obstacle to peace and security in the region. In South Africa repressive measures are taken against all those opposed to apartheid, especially the, black population. The recent declaration of a state of emergency in a number of black townships and districts arising out of opposition to apartheid is no solution but an exacerbation of the problem at hand. The escalated political riots and social violence that have gripped the country is a clear manifestation of the total rejection of apartheid perpetuated by the racist regime. The intensity and dimension of the uprisings and demonstrations is a reflection that the patience of the oppressed people has been exhausted. The regime should note that no amount of force and brutality is capable of suppressing the demand for change. The people resolutely demand nothing else but democracy, equality and justice. We in Kenya wholeheartedly support these demands. We condemn the racist regime for invoking the declaration of a state of emergency in the black townships and districts of South Africa with its ensuing brutality. We strongly believe that there can be no peace in that country until the legitimate rights and aspirations of the black people, and of South Africans as a whole, are fully respected. We continue to oppose 'the creation of bantustans, for these buttress apartheid and serve as impoverished internal bases which the racist regime uses to provoke friction and conflict within the black communities of that country.
Kenya supports the liberation movements in South Africa in their struggle against oppression, exploitation and the denial of their legitimate right fully to exercise self-determination. We are deeply concerned that intensified arbitrary arrests, imprisonments without trial and tragic and brutal massacres of defenseless opponents of apartheid are the order of the day in South Africa. We reiterate and demand that apartheid be immediately dismantled, that Nelson Mandela, as well as all other political prisoners and detainees, be released unconditionally and that immediate arrangements be put forth for a constitutional conference to which all South Africans would participate to map out the future of their country.
We are fully aware of the racist regime's arrogance and defiance of the will of the international community and of resolutions and decisions of the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council. We are also aware that the racist regime uses negotiations as a camouflage while it engages in devious and dubious maneuvers calculated to entrench apartheid and give the illusion that the regime is working towards a peaceful accommodation with the oppressed inhabitants of that country, with this in mind and in order to compel South Africa to dismantle apartheid, we appeal to the Security Council to live up to the responsibilities entrusted to it and impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions against South Africa as provided for in Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. We demand total sanctions because apartheid is not only evil, but is also a threat to international peace and security, a crime against humanity and an affront to the very foundation of international law. The evil that apartheid is cannot be reformed. We commend those Governments and institutions which have voluntarily applied sanctions against the racist regime and those individuals who have taken positive action to pressure South Africa to abandon apartheid. We would welcome, in addition to other measures, the total cessation of the economic, military and technical co-operation that South Africa continues to receive from some Members of this Organization.
With regard to the question of Namibia, United Nations efforts continue to be frustrated by the illegal occupation of the Territory by the racist regime of South Africa. Instead of cc-operating with the United Nations, the racist regime has engaged in creating futile institutions through which it hopes to thwart efforts to ensure the independence of Namibia. The international community must embark on the path of marshaling every possible means by which to ensure the full implementation of Security Council resolution 435 (1978). Kenya will continue to give every support to the South West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO), the national liberation movement of Namibia and the sole and authentic representative of the Namibian people. We reject all attempts to link the independence of Namibia with extraneous and irrelevant issues.
The racist regime continues to carry out acts of aggression against the independent African countries within the region, particularly Angola, Botswana, Lesotho and Mozambique. The regime engages in intimidation, destabilization, terrorism and sabotage and employs mercenaries and outright aggression against the front-line States. We condemn those activities of the racist regime and particularly the recent invasion of Angola. We are convinced that the racist regime would not be carrying out those acts without solace and support from external quarters.
It is regrettable that for almost 40 years now we have been unable to settle the problems of the Middle East. The core of the conflict in the area is the plight of the Palestinian people who have been uprooted from their ancestral homes and denied the opportunity to exercise their inalienable right to self-determination. The conflict continues to escalate and has engulfed the whole region.
Moreover, it has become evident that countries far and near are not immune from Israeli aggression. The tragic situation in Lebanon is a case at hand. The recent Israeli raid on the headquarters of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Tunis was a flagrant violation of the territorial integrity of the peace-loving African State of Tunisia. We mourn the death of the innocent women and children who lost their lives as a result of that deplorable act, which we strongly condemn. Such actions cannot be justified under international law and norms of conduct. We call upon Israel to abide by and fully implement Security Council resolution 573 (1985), of 4 October 1985. On many occasions the international community has pronounced itself on the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by the use or threat of use of force. Kenya fully shares that view and calls upon Israel to withdraw from all territories occupied since the 1967 war.
We firmly hold to the view that no nation should ever justify its own existence at the expense of others. We believe that all States in the region have an equal right to exist in peace and security and within internationally recognized and secure borders. We reiterate that no durable peace can be achieved in the area until the legitimate right of the Palestinians to self-determination and to create an independent State of their own in the region are realized.
The ongoing war between Iran and Iraq is lamentable. My delegation joins others that have called on the warring parties to engage urgently in peace negotiations with a view to establishing lasting peace and security in the area.
On the situation in Kampuchea, we support efforts aimed at a negotiated, peaceful settlement and reaffirm the right of the people of that country to determine their own destiny, free from external interference and intervention. It is important that all foreign troops be withdrawn.
Likewise, the situation in Afghanistan has not changed. We reiterate the dire need for the withdrawal of all foreign troops and forces from that country.
As regards the Korean peninsula, we are happy to note the commencement of contacts and talks between the two sides. Kenya welcomes and encourages this development in the firm belief that direct contact is the best way to reduce tension on the peninsula thus leading to a peaceful solution of the Korean question in conformity with the three principles of independence, peaceful reunification and great national unity, as set forth in the Joint North-South Statement of 4 June 1972.
In Central America, tensions and conflicts continue unabated, fueled by internal and external factors. The harboring, financing and arming of dissident groups whose objective is to destabilize and overthrow legitimate Governments is not a solution to the peaceful resolution of the problems of the region, we fully support the peace initiatives of the Contadora Group and appeal to the countries and parties involved to solve their problems peacefully, in a spirit of good-neighborliness and with respect for each other's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity.
Since the world entered the nuclear era some years ago, the specter of self-destruction and the final annihilation of mankind has been ever present. In search of credible defense, very destructive weapons have been developed, and others far more destructive are in the making, in the name of deterrence. Several billion dollars are being expended in the manufacturing of armaments, while millions of people are wasting away every day because of poverty, disease, malnutrition and famine. Those enormous resources being squandered on arras build-up should be diverted towards alleviating the current grave socio-economic and human problems facing the world, especially the developing countries. In this connection, Kenya warmly welcomed and strongly supports the initiative which led to the decision by this Assembly to convene an International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development.
The resumption of the Soviet-American arms-control talks in Geneva is also an encouraging sign pointing away from the grave consequences that could lead to the total destruction of the human race by the nuclear armaments on earth and in outer space. Never before was the fate of so many dependent on the decision and action of so few. He urge the parties involved to exert the maximum political will and negotiate openly, faithfully and constructively. In the view of my delegation, such negotiations should include reliable and verifiable arrangements for security to enhance confidence, avert escalation of the armaments race and bring about reduction of the present arsenals.
One of the practical measures that can be taken to strengthen international peace and security is the establishment of zones of peace in various regions of the world. This year we witnessed the endorsement of the draft South Pacific nuclear-free zone treaty by countries of the region. Kenya endorses that move and considers it a positive development.
Kenya fully shares the view that, in the interest of the promotion of peace, stability and co-operation in the Indian Ocean region, the first step towards the establishment of a zone of peace in the Indian Ocean region is the convening of the much-awaited international conference. The conference would harmonize the viewpoints of the littoral and hinterland States of the region, the major Powers and maritime users. The success of the conference would depend largely on a firm and resolute commitment by the countries of the region, the major Powers and maritime users of the Ocean to the principles of the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace.
With regard to Antarctica, it is imperative that activities in the area be conducted by and for the benefit of the international comBunifcy as a whole, tn this context, the initiative and the call by the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries for a declaration that any and all resources in Antarctica are vested in the international community as a whole as the common heritage of mankind need to be understood and underscored. Thus all States, regardless of their size, socio-economic system or stage of development, have a legitimate interest in Antarctica and ought to have a say in the development and management of its affairs. That can and should be achieved through careful renovation of the existing treaty regime.
As we approach the forty-first year since the founding of our Organization, the world economy in general remains strained by a prolonged and disastrous recession and its devastating effects which have virtually crippled the development momentum of the overwhelming majority of developing countries. Cutbacks in new investments and the suspension of long-term development projects and public programs and the slashing of expenditures in social sectors that these countries have to endure over the years of recession have taken many of them to the verge- of serious political and social upheavals. These difficulties are too deeply entrenched to be overcome easily as a by-product of recovery in a few countries.
Certainly, a proliferation of protectionist policies in the industrialized countries has not made this task at all easier. Even existing commodity arrangements which have served the international community relatively well over the years are now falling apart owing to lack of political support by some of these countries. In finance, for example,, apart from the uncertainty surrounding debt rescheduling, the constraints of high interest rates and inadequate flows of official development assistance, the drastic decline in international bank lending and the overall deflationary tendencies of the international monetary system have stifled any stirring of economic activity in a large number of developing countries. It is imperative for the sake of the sustained health of the world economy that growth in the developing countries be undertaken as a self-sustained and mutually reinforcing process and not merely as a by-product of growth elsewhere, because if we do not deal with the more fundamental structural problems in an adequate and equitable manner, crisis will in the end overwhelm us. We must, therefore, act seriously and with pragmatism before it is too late.
It will be recalled that the General Assembly at its thirty-ninth session, cognizant of the serious economic and social crisis afflicting the African
continent, adopted resolution 39/29 together with its annexed Declaration on the Critical Economic Situation in Africa. The African region, which today has the highest number of the least developed countries in the world, continues to be faced with, inter alia, famine and food shortages; stagnation of economic growth; unfavorable terms of trade; high rate of population growth; unemployment and underemployment; high interest rates; degradation of environment by drought and desertification; and decline in official development assistance.
In reviewing the pressing problems confronting Africa, I wish to highlight the exceptionally grave situation the continent is undergoing - a situation which cannot just be described as an economic crisis, but a tragic human crisis. Fully to appreciate the dimension of the suffering, it is worth mentioning that an estimated five million children are feared to have died in 1984 alone as a result of the severe famine, while more than 150 million people were faced with the danger of serious food shortage in the same year. At the same time, per capita food production decreased by 11 per cent compared to the 1970 figures while per capita income in most African countries has been steadily declining throughout the past few years.
This gloomy picture should not be allowed to pass unchecked without the international community embarking on a comprehensive plan - whether in the short or long term - to contain this dismal situation, while the African governments do recognize that the basic responsibility in arresting the crisis rests in their hands, the complexity of the crisis is such that national efforts must be complemented by international action if we are to relaunch the continent on the path of development.
We in Africa have not just been sitting idle amidst the crisis. It will be recalled that as early as April 1980 the African Heads of State or Government,
aware of the developmental problems facing the continent, adopted the famous blueprint in the Lagos Plan of Action and the Final Act of Lagos. The Plan of Action drew up a development master plan, identifying the sequence of priorities to be followed towards the economic recovery of Africa. Recently, the African Heads of State or Government assembled once again for an economic summit Conference in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 18 through 20 July, where together they reviewed the implementation of the Lagos Plan of Action and came out with practical short-, medium- and long-term measures in search of a permanent solution to the problems that have plagued our continent over the years.
The recommendations, embodied in the Addis Ababa Declaration, have been presented to this session of the Assembly through the Economic and Social Council. It is my earnest hope and trust that the General Assembly will consider these recommendations immediately and take prompt action. He hope that the Assembly will be unanimous in endorsing the proposal made at the summit Conference of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) to convene a special session to discuss in detail the economic and social crisis afflicting the continent and come up with some action-oriented solutions.
The dramatic increase in volume of Africa's external debt and the heavy debt service burden are of serious concern to all the Member States. By the end of 1984, the total debt of all African countries was estimated to stand at $US 158 billion, and it is expected to exceed $US 170 billion by the end of this year. The total debt service as a percentage of export earnings was 19.8 per cent in 1982 and 27.4 per cent in 1983. For some countries the debt service ratio is far above this average whereas it is generally accepted that the average debt service ratio should not exceed 20 per cent of export earnings. The increasing costs of the importation of essential goods and services, especially industrial
commodities, are indispensable for accelerated economic development, of the African countries Consequently these countries are bound to continue to borrow in order to supplement their domestic resources. This constitutes one of the root causes of Africa's external debt. It is pertinent therefore to reiterate the appeal made at the OAU summit Conference that an international conference on Africa's external indebtedness be convened as a matter of urgency. This will provide a forum for the international creditors and debtors to discuss Africa's external debt with a view to arriving at appropriate emergency, short-, medium- and long-term measures to alleviate Africa's debt problems.
We do appreciate that the international community has increasingly recognized the importance of seeking ways to meet the challenge that has befallen Africa. This has been reflected, for example, in resources pledged to fund a special facility for sub-Saharan Africa in the World Bank and in the substantial pledges of assistance made at the Conference on the Emergency Situation in Africa in March 1985. The response of Governments, non-governmental organizations and individuals, including artists, is commendable. Nevertheless, despite these and a number of bilateral and other commitments, projections still point to a decline in net concessional capital flows to sub-Saharan Africa over the next several years in the light of the curtailment of some flows and the increases in scheduled amortization. In the view of my delegation, this international resource mobilization effort still falls far short of the target envisaged.
In the area of food and agriculture, many countries are experiencing severe losses ranging from between 25 to 30 per cent of their harvests, due in part to pest damage, poor handling and lack of storage. More than anything else, storage is the key to food increase and security. Priority by the international community should therefore be given to the development of storage facilities for the developing countries. My Government is fully determined to realize total food self-sufficiency for every Kenyan. In this connection, we are in the process of implementing our national food policy together with the recently launched District Focus for Rural Development. The District Focus, whose aim is to bring development to the people and to make the people the center for development planning, is meant to take development to the rural areas of Kenya where over 80 per cent of Kenya's population lives. Closely related to food production is industrialization. I wish to welcome the recent conversion of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) into a specialized agency. We look upon UNIIX), the sixteenth in the family of the United Nations specialized agencies, to make its expected contribution to the industrialization process of the developing countries, in particular those of sub-Saharan Africa.
I strongly believe that the objective of all development efforts is the improvement of the quality of life. In this connection, I wish to note with appreciation the efforts being made in the economic and social fields by the United Nations system, in particular the strategy being pursued by the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) to achieve a revolution in child survival and development and the efforts being made by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) concerning human resource development. I wish also to record my own personal appreciation and that of the Government and the people of Kenya for the commendable work that the Nairobi-based United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the United Nations Center for Human Settlements (HABITAT) continue to do in serving mankind in their respective areas of competence.
There are mutual advantages accruing from economic co-operation between developed and developing countries and also from co-operation between developing countries. Kenya emphasizes, as a priority, co-operation between developing countries, particularly at the subregional and regional levels. The countries of eastern and southern Africa are currently engaged in the development of a Preferential Trade Area (PTA) which, in the long run, has the capacity of encompassing 23 countries with a market potential of well over 160 million people. As a littoral country, we are participants in the recently concluded Northern Corridor Transit Agreement jointly with our hinterland neighbors. We are also actively involved in the newly established Djibouti-based Inter-governmental Authority on Drought and Desertification (IGADD). In this connection, we wish to call for increased support by all Member States, both developed and developing, to promote in all possible ways efforts being taken to enhance North/South and South/ South economic co-operation.
In conclusion, this fortieth anniversary year of our Organization is also the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. Since these anniversaries coincide with International Youth Year whose theme is participation, development and peace, the international community should take this opportunity to renew its commitment to the welfare of youth particularly in the provision of education, training, health and employment. Youth constitute the backbone of all societies and should rightly be given the highest priority in national development. Although much has been done during International Youth Year, the events of the Year have been overshadowed by many other events. It is our expectation that a framework of concrete action-oriented future strategies for youth will be agreed upon during the United Nations World Conference for International Youth Year later at this session of the General Assembly.
It will be recalled that as early as 1972 the General Assembly designated 1975 as a special year to be devoted to intensified action to promote equality between men and women, to ensure the full integration of women in the total development effort and to increase women's contribution to the strengthening of world peace. In 1975, the Assembly proclaimed 1976 to 1985 as the United Nations Decade for Women, with the themes "Equality, Development and Peace".
The World Conference to Review and Appraise the Achievements of the United Nations Decade for Women, which concluded in Nairobi last July, was an important milestone and indeed a rich experience for most of us. The Government and indeed the entire Kenyan people, with the co-operation of the United Nations system, did their best to facilitate a conducive conference atmosphere. I wish to take this opportunity on behalf of the Government and the people of Kenya to thank the entire international community for their co-operation, understanding and goodwill which prevailed during the Conference and which led to the adoption by consensus of the Nairobi Forward-Looking Strategies. We look forward to our joint efforts in implementing them. It is an honor for Africa, and indeed Kenya, that it was on our soil that the international community adopted them. This is a further affirmation of the commitment and dedication of us all to the goals, aims, purposes and the principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
At this fortieth session and as we step to the next 40 years and beyond, I wish to take this opportunity on behalf of the Government and the people of Kenya to renew our confidence, commitment and dedication to the noble principles, purposes, aims and goals of the Charter of the United Nations. We wish the Secretary-General, his staff and all gathered here today all the best as we forge ahead in pursuit of world peace, security and co-operation in all our endeavors. Let nations, big and small, and people the world over, be mindful of the well-being of others in this our interdependent world. Let us foster co-operation and let justice be our shield and defender, peace and love be our prosperity. Let us all, in unity, make the world, for our present and future generations, a better place to live in.