Allow me first of all, on behalf of the people of Togo and
President Eyadema and his Government, to join in the
congratulations extended to you, Sir, since the beginning of
our work on your election to the presidency of the General
Assembly at its fifty-third session.
We would also like to congratulate his your illustrious
predecessor, Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, on the effective
manner in which he conducted the work of the fifty-second
session.
I would furthermore like to pay tribute to the
Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, and his colleagues for
their continuous efforts to champion the noble ideals of
peace, justice, progress and solidarity embodied by the
United Nations.
By way of analysing the situation in Africa, I would
like to present Togo?s perspective of the world?s problems
in the context of improved international cooperation.
Africa is democratizing, but it needs peace and
security if it is to succeed. Africa is the continent most
affected by the great scourges of the planet, but its
development is also part of a dynamic of progress. The
scourges hampering its development are well known:
endemic disease, drought, poverty, political instability,
ethnic conflicts, civil wars and regional conflicts. These
scourges have a tendency to eclipse the successes.
Since the signing of the Abuja Treaty in 1991, Africa
has set itself a timetable for integration in the framework of
the African Economic Community, on the basis of
strengthening regional groupings of western, northern,
central, eastern and southern Africa. These groups are
themselves actively engaged in seeking joint solutions to
the challenges confronting its member States.
The rate of economic growth of certain African States
continues to make progress thanks to good management
policies.
A vast democratic movement has begun throughout
our continent to build States based on the rule of law.
This movement is being followed up by the adoption of
new constitutions and the establishment of independent
bodies to implement them. Numerous heads of State and
of Government have had their mandates challenged in
periodic elections. The majority and the opposition
representatives of the people have seats in the new
representative bodies — parliaments and national
assemblies. The success of the functioning of these new
constitutional bodies is ensured by independent legal
bodies. The press is now free, as are labour unions in
most of our States.
I am emphasizing these institutional aspects of
building a new Africa because the respect and support of
the international community for these institutions is a
factor in favour of peace within the particular States, and
therefore for peace in our regions.
Experience has shown us that a domestic conflict, by
giving rise to an exodus of people to neighbouring
countries, also has a rapid and serious effect on the latter.
I repeat, as the current situation in the Great Lakes region
demonstrates, such domestic conflicts can lead to regional
crises.
Togo is among the States that voluntarily established
institutions that safeguard the rule of law and that can
arbitrate disputes that may arise in the new context of
democratization. It is in this framework that the
Constitutional Court of Togo declared the results of the
presidential election of 21 June 1998 after having
arbitrated the disputes that resulted from the election.
Togo?s respect for institutions is the very foundation
of democracy and peace. On behalf of my Government,
I would like to invite all of our partners at the United
Nations to support without distinction the efforts of all the
countries of Africa that commit themselves to the difficult
but rewarding path of building a State of law. This is the
price of peace in Africa.
While we can be gratified at the end of certain
conflicts — particularly in Liberia and Sierra Leone —
and while solutions are in sight to relieve the tensions in
Guinea-Bissau, we cannot fail to express our concern over
the crisis in the Great Lakes region, the resumption of
hostilities in Angola, the continuation of the crisis in
Somalia and, finally, the armed confrontation between
Ethiopia and Eritrea.
7

We cannot stress enough the advantages of dialogue
and negotiation as the best paths to follow for settling
disputes between States on the basis of respect for their
territorial integrity.
In that connection, the international community must
put an end to the embargo imposed on Libya by
implementing the jurisdictional solution accepted by that
country and by ensuring a fair trial for the suspects in the
Lockerbie bombing. Togo firmly supports the efforts of the
Organization of African Unity (OAU) to settle this dispute
and end the suffering of the Libyan people.
My country takes this opportunity to repeat its
steadfast condemnation of terrorism in all of its forms and
to emphasize the need for urgent and concerted action to
combat this scourge effectively.
As we are aware, the proliferation of conflict
situations in Africa remains a real cause of concern for the
international community. I would like to note in this regard
the important report (A/52/871) presented by the Secretary-
General last February at the request of the Security Council
on the causes of conflict and the promotion of durable
peace and sustainable development in Africa. That report
contains specific recommendations on means of preventing
such conflicts and putting an end to them, as well as on
measures to be taken to create conditions for lasting peace
and economic growth. We hope that the implementation of
his recommendations by the Security Council, by the
relevant bodies of the United Nations system and by the
Bretton Woods institutions will result in the effective
prevention of conflicts and put Africa on the road to
progress, stability and sustainable development.
Elsewhere in the world, we were relieved to see the
signing of an agreement between the Government of Iraq
and the United Nations, which made it possible at the last
moment to avoid a new confrontation in the Gulf.
In the same region, my Government deplores the
present deadlock in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
We remain convinced that only the resumption of direct
negotiations between the principals will make it possible to
usher in an era of peace, security and prosperity in that
region. We were relieved to see the contacts that have taken
place between Mr. Yasser Arafat and Mr. Benjamin
Netanyahu through the mediation of the American
Government. Togo strongly supports this initiative.
With regard to the other crises that assail the world
and jeopardize the lives of so many millions of people —
particularly in Afghanistan and Kosovo — my country
hopes that through firm political will backed by candid
and sincere negotiations, the parties to the conflicts will
find appropriate solutions that are acceptable to all.
The world?s concerns at the dawn of the third
millennium are not linked solely to the effects of the
phenomenon of globalization. The preservation of peace,
security and stability for States and peoples continues to
be an important priority. In that context, Togo is gratified
to note that the United Nations is continuing to discharge
its mission of peacemaking and peacekeeping. In this
regard, I welcome the upcoming commemoration on 6
October of 50 years of United Nations peacekeeping
operations, and I would like to pay tribute to the memory
of all the men and women who have given their lives in
the service of the Organization.
My country, which firmly supports the ongoing quest
for peace and security for all, would like to emphasize the
need to strengthen cooperation in this area, in a spirit of
complementarity, between the United Nations and
subregional and regional organizations, in accordance with
Chapter VIII of the Charter of the United Nations. The
appropriate regional machinery necessary to give concrete
form to this shared desire for collective maintenance of
peace and security should be established.
It is in that spirit that Togo — together with other
countries of the West African subregion and in the
framework of the Economic Community of West African
States (ECOWAS) — is working to establish a viable and
permanent mechanism for the prevention, management
and settlement of conflicts and the maintenance of peace.
It is also within this framework that we welcome the
fourth extraordinary summit of ECOWAS, held in Lomé
from 16 to 17 December 1997, and the holding of the
joint military manoeuvres named “Cohesion Kompienga
?98”, held from 16 to 21 April 1998, in which the armed
forces of Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d?Ivoire, Ghana, the
Niger, Nigeria, Chad and Togo participated.
Among the goals of the United Nations are vigilance
over the maintenance of peace and security, the
establishment of conditions for harmonious economic
development to ensure the well-being of our populations
and working for a just world in which the rights of
individuals and peoples are not only recognized and
consecrated, but above all respected.
My delegation would like to take this opportunity to
hail the holding of the United Nation Diplomatic
8

Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an
International Criminal Court, which led to the adoption of
the Statute of the court which was held in Rome from
15 June to 17 July.
Togo believes that peace is impossible without justice.
The struggle for peace and the struggle for greater justice
must be viewed as two complementary aspects of one and
the same struggle for the realization of the deepest
aspirations of all the peoples of the world. The positive
outcome of the negotiations at the Conference resulted in
the adoption of the Statute of the court, illustrating anew
the vigour and ability of our Organization in dealing with
the present and preparing States to face the issues of
tomorrow.
It is for that reason that my delegation favours all
efforts to reform the Organization that aim to make it more
effective, more concerned with the problems of mankind
and more democratic, so that the views of all are better
reflected and taken into account in all of its bodies.
Togo would therefore like to see the rapid conclusion
of discussions to allow for the permanent representation of
Africa in the Security Council, in accordance with the
resolutions of the Organization of African Unity (OAU).
The democracy we are advocating at the national level must
also be reflected in international organizations.
The United Nations has always played an important
role in the advancement of economic and social
development and, when necessary, in providing the men,
women and children of the entire world with the assistance
on which their survival often depends. We are nevertheless
obliged to recognize that despite the efforts made, the
improvement of standards of living, full employment and
the conditions for progress and economic and social
development have not been realized. This is particularly the
case in Africa, where continued inequality and poverty,
among other things, dangerously imperil the stability of
States.
It is true that African economies have performed
remarkably well in the last three years; but it is also true
that the consolidation of these gains still depends on the
international economic environment. Global economic
structural constraints — including the continuing burden of
debt, the reduction in the flow of official development
assistance, currency fluctuations, the inequality of
investment flows, weak commodity prices and market
protectionism practised by developed countries — still
remain the major obstacles to the economic development
of African countries.
With regard to the debt burden in particular, my
country highly values the declaration of the eighth
consultative meeting of the Organization of African Unity,
the African Development Bank and the Economic
Commission for Africa, which was held in Abidjan in
January 1998. We believe that the efforts to alleviate the
debt burden must be continued in conjunction with
Africa?s partners in order to find appropriate solutions to
this thorny problem.
In this context, Togo would like to reaffirm the
imperative need to hold an international conference on
Africa?s foreign debt, and it requests the support of the
international community to translate that proposal into
reality.
Regrettably, at this time of economic globalization,
the marginalization of Africa in terms of international
trade is accelerating, even though today the development
of trade appears to be the most effective means of
managing the resources necessary for self-sufficiency.
Indeed, the development and economic growth of African
States requires as a basic condition sufficient currency
inflows from the export of their commodities. Thus, in the
view of my delegation, an open world system operating
under just and equitable regulations should be established
in order to ensure the active participation of African
States in international trade. To that end, more liberal
measures will be required in order to promote the
transformation and diversification of their products as
well as to attract and channel investments towards them.
The industrialized countries are attempting to join
forces. This shows clearly that today no country,
regardless of how powerful it is, can alone provide for its
own economic growth and cope with increasingly
aggressive international competition. Given this state of
affairs, the African countries have in recent years
reaffirmed their will to pool their potential by establishing
and strengthening subregional units. It is clear that the
development policy of our countries must be considered
within this framework, for this is the only way that Africa
can become a fully fledged and reliable partner in the
world of the twenty-first century.
In this respect, the entry into force of the Treaty
establishing the African Economic Community serves as
a good illustration of the will of African States to unite
their efforts to ensure their own progress.
9

Togo, which is firmly committed to the policy of
economic integration of the continent, wishes to take this
opportunity to once again urge the international community
to support the efforts of the African countries to achieve the
goals of sustainable development which alone can promote
prosperity and the well-being of their peoples.
I should like here to underscore an emerging trend in
Africa: inter-African parliamentary control of the activities
of our regional and subregional organizations. It is in this
framework that an inter-parliamentary committee of the
West African Economic and Monetary Union was created
recently in Bamako; its work is already under way. Also in
this framework, a parliamentary assembly was established
in the countries of the Southern African Development
Community (SADC), in southern Africa. This shows that
while, generally speaking, people tend to despair of the
future of Africa, we young Africans have faith that Africa
is on the right path as long as we have the unswerving
support of the international community.
Here I should like once again to welcome the
commitment of the Japanese Government to Africa through
the Tokyo Conference on the Development of Africa
(TICAD), aimed at seeking solutions to the continent?s
development problems. My delegation would like here once
again to thank the Japanese Government for all of its
efforts to strengthen cooperation between Africa and Asia,
and congratulates it on the convening of TICAD II next
October in Tokyo.
Moreover, Togo believes that the combination of
TICAD with other initiatives — in particular that of the
United States on equitable partnership, known as 20/20
Vision; that of the European Union, within the framework
of the Lomé Convention; and that of the francophone
world, within the framework of the Hanoi Plan of
Action — will help safeguard and consolidate the spirit of
solidarity, which Africa wishes to see ever more active and
ever more purposeful.
My country is convinced of the need for solidarity
among the Members of our Organization and is deeply
committed to the noble ideals of peace, freedom and justice
and of economic, social and cultural progress, which the
United Nations has contributed to advancing. During this
year of the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, Togo fervently hopes to witness the
realization, for the benefit of all humankind, of the
profound aspirations of peoples to greater freedom and to
a world of peace in which the struggle against poverty,
famine and illness grows is daily strengthened.


Permit me to offer, on
behalf of President Alhaji Ahmad Tejan Kabbah and the
Government and the people of Sierra Leone, our warm
felicitations to Mr. Didier Opertti on his unanimous election
as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-third
session, and to express our delegation?s confidence that
under his able guidance our session will be a successful
one. We are in no doubt that his distinguished public record
adequately equips him for the position he has been called
upon to assume, and we have already seen evidence of this
in the last two weeks. We must also express gratitude to his
predecessor, Mr. Udovenko of Ukraine, for a job well done.
Our gratitude also goes to Mr. Kofi Annan, Secretary-
General, and to the entire staff of the United Nations
common system for their relentless efforts in helping the
people of Sierra Leone in the mammoth task of
reconstruction, rehabilitation and resettlement of hundreds
of thousands of our compatriots who were the unfortunate
victims of nine months of junta misrule. Mr. Annan has
put the international ship of state on the right course, and
my delegation wishes him continued success.
This time last year, my President addressed the
Assembly on the subject of the situation in Sierra Leone.
I am sure most members will remember the picture he
painted of the tragic events and the turmoil that followed
when a democratically elected Government was
overthrown by a bunch of military adventurists, aided and
abetted by some civilian opportunists who became their
active collaborators. Thanks to the resilience of the whole
of civil society, encouraged and backed by the
international community, I am here today representing the
legitimate, reinstated Government of Sierra Leone.
Against all odds, our people defied the violent and
misguided gun-toting anarchists who appeared to have
one objective, and one only: the total destruction of the
civil society of Sierra Leone. Mercifully, that nightmare
is now behind us.
In February this year, the forces of the Economic
Community of West African States (ECOWAS)
Monitoring Group (ECOMOG), under the then ECOWAS
Chairman, the late General Sani Abacha of Nigeria, led
by Nigeria and with the support of our Civil Defence
Unit, removed the junta. This was preceded by several
attempts to arrive at a negotiated settlement. The
international community was to learn that the junta and
their allies, the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), always
negotiated in bad faith and were not to be trusted.
The atrocities committed by the junta during their
nine-month reign, especially after they retreated to the
eastern and northern parts of the country, had to be seen
to be believed. Rape, murder, mutilation, vandalism and
the burning down of whole villages were the order of the
day. Unarmed civilians, particularly women and children,
were their unfortunate victims.
Because of the wanton destruction perpetrated by the
junta and, much earlier, by the RUF, there is a great need
to revamp the economy and for reconstruction. In a report
to the General Assembly, the Secretary-General referred
to the Special Conference on Sierra Leone, which he
convened here at United Nations Headquarters on 30 July
this year. The international community was invited to
focus on the situation in Sierra Leone.
21

We were very much encouraged, not only by the
deliberations and results of that conference, but also by the
deliberations of the second ministerial-level Security
Council meeting on Africa, held last week, in which Sierra
Leone featured prominently.
The humanitarian crisis is immense: there are many
refugees and displaced persons. The disarmament and
demobilization exercise and the resettlement, rehabilitation
and reconstruction processes require many resources. Some
of the pledges that were made are now being fulfilled, but
much remains to be done.
Allow me to echo the appeal of the Secretary-General
to those who have yet to pledge, and to others who have
yet to deliver, to do all they can to help us. In the
meantime, I would like to express profound gratitude to all
members, and especially to the members of the contact
group to be coordinated by the United Kingdom, for what
has been achieved so far.
As soon as the legitimate Government was
overthrown, the Organization of African Unity (OAU), at
its meeting in Harare in June 1997, unanimously
condemned the takeover and called on the junta to return
power and constitutionality to the elected Government and
to the country respectively. The prompt action of
ECOWAS, the resultant peace in Liberia and now the
return of democracy to Sierra Leone, clearly demonstrate
what a regional organization can achieve if the
determination and the leadership are there. ECOMOG has
the capacity to deliver, but it needs the tools, which only
the international community can provide.
My country is fully aware that even though the Armed
Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC)/RUF junta has been
ousted, the peace and security that were achieved with
enormous sacrifice by the people of Sierra Leone have yet
to be consolidated. It is therefore in the interests of the
people that the international community in general and the
forces of the subregion in particular, maintain their presence
in Sierra Leone until we can create a new national army. In
this regard, the Federal Republic of Nigeria has agreed to
the secondment of Brigadier-General Maxwell Khobe,
Commander of the ECOMOG Force in Sierra Leone, as our
Chief of Defence Staff. He is already working on the
modalities for forming a well-trained and dedicated army
which will be alive to its responsibility as defender of our
Constitution. I have every reason to believe that that
assignment will be carried out with the same
professionalism that has been the hallmark of ECOMOG
operations in both Liberia and Sierra Leone.
At this juncture, I would like to state that the
Government of the Republic of Sierra Leone is committed
to the demobilization, disarmament and integration of all
ex-combatants, as provided for in both the Abidjan Peace
Accord and the Conakry peace plan, despite the lack of
good faith that has been demonstrated by both the RUF
and the junta. This programme is at the top of our post-
conflict agenda, and the Disarmament Committee itself is
under the chairmanship of no less a person than our
President.
Because of its overwhelming desire to uphold the
principles of democracy and good governance, the
Government lays much emphasis on the rule of law,
human rights and freedom of expression. There are over
48 newspaper publications in a country with 80 per cent
illiteracy. Despite propaganda to the contrary, no
journalists have been prosecuted, let alone convicted, for
practising their profession — not even when the headlines
of a few have sometimes bordered on libel. Of the 16
people recently convicted of treason, after a trial that was
declared transparent and fair, five were journalists; but
they were not charged for the practice of journalism.
President Kabbah and the ECOMOG Force
Commander informed the Special Conference on Sierra
Leone that more than 90 per cent of the country was
secure and safe. Remnants of the junta and the RUF are,
however, perched in small areas in the east and north-east
and operate only because they continue to have a safe
haven in a neighbouring country, while one other country
renders its support to them from outside Sierra Leone.
That notwithstanding, every effort is now being made by
both ECOMOG and the Civil Defence Unit to flush them
out and to finally put this whole tragic affair behind us.
The treason trials of both civilians and former junta
members are still in progress, under laws which have
been in existence since independence. Soon after sentence
was passed on the first group, some misguided
organizations began unfairly pressurizing the President to
intervene; they even mounted a vicious propaganda
campaign in the name of human rights.
My country is governed by the rule of law. Under
our constitution there is separation of powers between the
executive, the legislature and the judiciary. While the due
process of law is in progress, the President cannot and
will not interfere with it. At the end of the exercise those
who lose their final appeals to the Supreme Court can
apply to the Prerogative of Mercy Committee. Then, and
22

only then, will the President step in, and he has already
given that assurance.
Our President has not only gone the extra mile, but is
seen to be bending over backwards to bring together all the
main political groups into the mainstream of the post-
conflict nation-building exercise, so as to secure permanent
peace and security. There have been no instances of human
rights violations since President Kabbah assumed office.
With regard to the armed rebellion in the Democratic
Republic of the Congo and the rebel wars in Angola, Sudan
and elsewhere, we appeal to the parties in those conflicts to
lay down their arms, to refrain from further provocative
activities that ignite tempers and to give peace a chance.
Our Government welcomes the successful outcome of
the United Nations Diplomatic Conference on the
establishment of the International Criminal Court, which
took place in Rome, Italy, in June 1998. Sierra Leone is
firmly committed to the early establishment of a permanent
international court, and my Government has already signed
the Statute of the International Criminal Court. We urge
every nation to sign and ratify the Statute. It will be not
only testimony to the common desire to overcome long
neglected failures of national legal systems, but a unique
chance to contribute to international stability deterrence
and, hopefully, the prevention of atrocious crimes.
Security Council reform is one of the most difficult
issues which have to be tackled during this session. While
progress has been made in some areas, and new ideas and
proposals have emerged, the Working Group has not
presented recommendations to the General Assembly. Sierra
Leone agrees with the position of the Non-Aligned
Movement on the curtailment, limitation and subsequent
elimination of the veto. Sierra Leone fully endorses the
decision of the Assembly of the Heads of State or
Government of the Organization of African Unity for two
permanent seats to be allocated to our continent.
As for the expansion of the Security Council, Sierra
Leone supports the position taken by the Non-Aligned
Movement, that, in order to enhance its credibility, the new
Council should reflect the universal character of the world
and correct existing imbalances in its composition.
My country cannot talk of conflicts and peace without
referring to nuclear arms. When negotiations were being
conducted in Geneva on a comprehensive test-ban treaty, a
few years ago, the Republic of Sierra Leone was one of
those countries which prayed silently for its success. We
are relieved and thankful that the Treaty has been signed
by a large number of countries. We continue to call on all
nations to sign the test-ban treaty and refrain from further
tests, with their attendant danger to the future of mankind.
In the same way as we oppose all future nuclear
tests, we must with all the emphasis at our disposal
condemn all forms of terrorism, both domestic and
international. We refer particularly to the recent bombings
which claimed the lives of hundreds of innocent people,
not to mention the loss of property worth millions of
dollars in Nairobi, Dar-es-Salaam, Cape Town and
Northern Ireland. We call on the international community
to coordinate its efforts to fight this menace. Those who
insist on using this method to achieve their aims should
be tracked down and brought to justice. In this regard, my
country wholeheartedly supports the signing and
ratification of all the Conventions on terrorism and
appeals to the entire international community to adhere to
the Conventions in order to make the world a safer place
for our children?s children.
My Government noted with great delight the
conference convened last year in South Africa to focus
the world?s attention on the dangers posed to human life
by landmines. We revive the memory of the late Princess
Diana, who did so much to focus the attention of the
international community on the horrors of landmines. In
our own country, too, landmines were strewn around with
carefree abandon by the AFRC/RUF junta, resulting in
the maiming and death of innocent civilians, especially
children.
Many African and other third world countries,
including my own, are today still grappling with severe
economic problems. The effects of the debt burden, the
unfavourable balances of trade and payment, and the
unpredictability of the prices of their products on the
world market have all contributed to the deteriorating
economic conditions they are facing. In addition to these
external factors, misguided policies and political
instability caused by various kinds of civil strife have
caused their economies to sink further. Globalization and
trade liberalization have become inevitable phases in
world trade. It has, however, become obvious that our
countries have fared badly and will continue to be at a
disadvantage unless there is a change of attitude and even
procedure on the part of developed, industrialized
countries. The resultant imbalances can be overcome if
every effort is made to create a level playing field by
removing the debt burden of our countries and opening up
markets to African and third world products. Some
23

countries have already done so; we hope that others will
follow soon.
I have already mentioned the refugee situation in my
own country. It is grim, and yet the situation is the same in
other parts of the world, especially Africa, which has the
largest refugee populations. This situation has continued to
exert tremendous pressure on the already weak economies
of the host countries, which are forced to spend part of
their meagre resources on the welfare of refugees. Having
gone through this experience both as recipient and exporter
of refugees, we must commend the donor community and
especially the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Much is being done
for us, but even the Office acknowledges that the situation
of our refugees in neighbouring countries is desperate. I
would like to appeal to the donor community to shed its
donor fatigue syndrome and continue to respond positively
to the needs of a people who are the innocent victims of
events not of their own making. A very urgent need now is
for the repatriation of our people from neighbouring
countries, where life in camps is now a nightmare.
Sierra Leone is one of the countries in our subregion
that still have the remnants of what were once the Upper
Guinea rain forest, which stretches from Sierra Leone down
to the Cameroons. The reserve supports the largest number
of animal species in Sierra Leone: a total of 46 mammal
species, including Western chimpanzees, red colobus
monkeys, Diana monkeys, duickers, leopards and forest
elephants. Two hundred and seventy four species of birds
are to be found in the Gola rain forest. These include 10
globally threatened species — 8 restricted to the Upper
Guinea forest block — and 169 forest-dependent species.
There is a very rich diversity of interesting invertebrates,
including two species of dragonfly, endemic only to parts
of the Upper Guinea forest, as well as the rare African
swallow-tailed butterfly, which has Sierra Leone as the
westernmost limit of its range in Africa.
Unfortunately, the Gola rain forest, like most other
forest areas on the continent, is under considerable pressure.
Much of the forest cover is lost annually from logging and
from brush burning as well as shifting cultivation carried
out by an ever-increasing population. Conservation of these
forests in Sierra Leone, as in other parts of Africa, is linked
with poverty. The Forestry Division of our Ministry of
Agriculture and the Environment has a Gola Rain Forest
Conservation Programme. The programme is being operated
in collaboration with a local non-governmental organization,
the Conservation Society of Sierra Leone, the Sierra Leone
partner of Birdlife International, which sponsors the
programme.
Notwithstanding this valuable work, pressure on
forests in the third world will not be reduced unless we
enhance food production from the same piece of land year
after year, as happens in the industrialized countries. This
can only be achieved by a transfer of food production
technology to our own countries.
I have made frequent references to the role of the
international community in the restoration of democracy
to my country and to the reinstatement of President
Kabbah. I have mentioned the United Nations, the OAU,
ECOWAS and the Commonwealth. I would like to make
special reference to the United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP).
The restoration of constitutional order and the
various efforts of the Government to effect durable peace
and to rebuild the country provide us with an opportunity
to regain donor confidence and ensure the completion of
various initiatives and programmes interrupted by the
events of the coup of 25 May 1997.
As lead agency in the partnership between the
Government and the donor community, the UNDP, prior
to the coup, had spearheaded the following: preparation
of a national poverty-eradication programme; facilitating
the establishment of a coordination mechanism for relief
assistance by the humanitarian community; and
facilitating the peace process through the provision of
diplomatic, logistic, technical and administrative support
to the peace negotiations and the preparation of the
demobilization programme. Since the return of the elected
Government in March 1998, the UNDP has spent
considerable amounts of money in the development of
various other programmes as well. I urge the international
community to continue its support for these programmes
and to help us in our task of rehabilitation.
Let me close by referring again to the report of the
Secretary-General, whom I have already thanked. I shall
refer once more to the special conference he convened,
for which I thank the Secretary-General.


It gives me great pleasure to congratulate Mr. Opertti on
his election as President of the General Assembly at its
fifty-third session. I would also like to commend the
efforts of his predecessor, Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko,
whom we recently welcomed to our country.
I should also like to place on record our appreciation
to the Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan. He has been
working tirelessly to promote the authority of the United
Nations, advocating respect for the international
legitimacy for which it stands, especially in the area of
finding peaceful solutions to the explosive conflicts that
are raging in some parts of the world. The international
community has recognized his great achievement when he
succeeded a few months ago in defusing an ominous
military confrontation in the Arab Gulf region. We hope
that this will be followed by similar successes in other
volatile situations plaguing different parts of the world.
The hopes that are pinned on the United Nations
assume a special meaning at this session, which coincides
with the fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights, an instrument which Lebanon
participated in framing. Today, human rights are a major
pillar of the new world order. Respect for human rights
has become the yardstick by which the democracy
practised in countries is judged. Compliance with the
provisions of the Declaration under all circumstances and
conditions guarantees not only the peace, security and
stability of societies but also the establishment of relations
of cooperation and understanding among States.
The United Nations is duty-bound to enhance its
independence since it was liberated from the impact of
the cold war and of the bipolarity which held sway over
international relations in the post-Second World War era.
Today, it is called upon to reactivate its role in making
and consolidating peace. This task can be achieved
primarily by addressing the root causes of conflicts,
through preventive diplomacy and through various
18

technical and development assistance programmes in
various fields.
It is important here to refer to the fact that
international institutions have an important role to play in
providing the developing countries with the necessary
technical assistance. Such assistance will enable them to
take advantage of the accelerated pace of globalization in
the field of trade and finance. It will also give these
countries sufficient time to adapt and get ready to face the
new challenges. This will help many developing countries
avoid the negative effects of surging globalization, given
the inadequacy of their production capabilities and the
absence of a competitive edge. In this regard, Lebanon is
effectively contributing to the establishment of a free trade
zone specifically in the Arab region while continuing its
commitment to the establishment of trade liberalization
worldwide.
On the eve of the twenty-first century, the United
Nations role requires it to fulfil the tasks of reform and
streamlining so that it can keep up with the fast pace of
international relations. Thus the reform measures initiated
by the Secretary-General must be completed. Furthermore,
the reform of the working methods and streamlining of the
Security Council to increase its membership and make it
more representative should also be completed. Once
reformed, different States, particularly small States, will be
enabled to participate in the decision-making process
relevant to the maintenance of international peace and
security.
We commend the efforts that went into the
establishment of the International Criminal Court whose
Statute was recently adopted in Rome. Lebanon supports
the establishment of the Court and is determined to study
its Statute positively.
More than ever before, the international community is
called upon to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes,
especially in extremely sensitive regions of the world. We
need also to address the root causes of the problems and
thereby to defuse the crises before they turn into full-scale
conflagrations.
The time has come to solve pending problems,
particularly those of the Middle East region. For instance,
a settlement must be found to the question of the three
islands in the Gulf disputed by the United Arab Emirates
and Iran. Such a settlement should restore the disputed
islands to their rightful owners and thus promote peace and
stability among the States and the peoples of the region.
If we are truly interested in the promotion of
regional and international peace and security, we must
work in all seriousness to build a world free from
weapons of mass destruction. In this context, we aspire
and call for the establishment of a zone free from nuclear
and other weapons of mass destruction in the Middle
East.
Five years ago, I was privileged to stand here before
the General Assembly to speak about Lebanon and about
its commitment to a just and comprehensive peace. From
this very rostrum, I declared that Lebanon is committed
to the principles of democracy, liberty and human rights,
and that it has succeeded in safeguarding these principles
even through its darkest moments.
In this context, reference should be made to
Lebanon?s firm position of condemning terrorism in all its
forms and manifestations including political, cultural and
economic. We condemn terrorism whether sponsored by
States or by individuals. Lebanon condemns attacks
against civilians, embassies and diplomatic missions,
plane hijacking and any other act that jeopardizes the
lives and property of civilians. However, we must stress
the importance of distinguishing between terrorism and
peoples? rights to resist the forces of foreign occupation
in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and
in its successive resolutions adopted by the international
Organization and other fora, especially the Declaration of
the Occasion of the Fiftieth Anniversary of the United
Nations.
Lebanon is fully committed to the role of the United
Nations and is keen on furthering this role and on
safeguarding the equilibrium and integrity of international
relations. We therefore believe that it is important for all
States, large and small, to commit to the principles of
international legitimacy and refrain from undertaking
unilateral measures that are driven solely by narrow
interests and dictated by expediency.
Today, as we reiterate these constant positions of
principle, we can point with confidence to the originality
of our experience in coexistence, which is based on
moderation and tolerance, and our firm belief in both
deserves to be a living model that should be emulated
whenever solutions are sought to the problems of societies
afflicted with wars, racial or factional strife all over the
world. This is particularly true of societies that are trying
to restore civil peace as part of their post-conflict peace-
building efforts.
19

Lebanon, with an open and creative society, a society
that is Arab by identity and orientation, has remained united
in territory, population and institutions; Lebanon has
remained a vibrant oasis of goodwill and beneficial
interaction.
As is well known, Lebanon has for the past few years
embarked on a reconstruction plan following a protracted
devastating war. It has been tirelessly working to regain the
prominent cultural and economic position it once held in its
region and in the world, depending on God Almighty, then
on the will and resourcefulness of its own citizens and on
the support of its brothers and the contributions of its
friends all over the world.
Throughout this period of reconstruction, Lebanon
faced difficult circumstances caused first and foremost by
the continued Israeli occupation of parts of its territories
and by the continuity of its devastating attacks against its
villages and peaceful citizens. These attacks have claimed
the lives of many innocent civilians, men, women and
children, and wounded many many more. I am confident
that the international community still remembers very well
the Qana massacre perpetrated by Israel in 1996.
Lebanon has faced a critical stage of its history
through the past few years while implementing the
reconstruction plans. The only parallel to the intensity of
this stage is the determination of the Lebanese people to
face the various challenges on more than one front.
Lebanon has succeeded in regaining the world?s confidence
in its ability to play once more a distinguished and shining
role in the cultural, economic, commercial and financial
fields. Beirut is back to its position as the crossroads of
various cultures and civilizations, a fact attested to by the
many conferences and the regional and international
meetings that were convened there. The United Nations
building that Lebanon has recently completed as the focal
point for United Nations activities in Lebanon and in the
region is proof, if any was needed, of Lebanon?s keen
interest in the return of international organizations to Beirut.
As an indication of international confidence in our
performance, the world financial markets traded in treasury
bonds issued by the Lebanese Government and institutions
of the private sector. This was made possible by the
cooperation between the Lebanese financial institutions and
their international counterparts. It is a demonstration of the
confidence that the world has in the present and future of
the national economy and of the confidence of the Lebanese
themselves in their country and its future.
But to date, Israel has not wanted to meet its
commitments; it has not done what it promised to the
Palestinians and to the international community; it does
not want to resume the negotiations with Lebanon and
with Syria from the point at which they left off.
We invite the institutions of the international
community to play a more effective role in securing
compliance with the resolutions of international
legitimacy. They must bring the necessary pressure to
bear on the aggressor to remove the causes of this conflict
and lay the foundations of a just and comprehensive
peace.
Israel cannot merely pay lip service to peace and
expect to be considered a truly peace-loving State.
Talking about peace is one thing; Israel?s actions on the
ground are another. Israel?s claim that it is a weak
country surrounded by hostile neighbours is one thing;
Israel?s military might, based on weapons of mass
destruction, nuclear weapons and state-of-the-art Western
weaponry, is another. Israel has all those weapons and is
the mightiest Power in the Middle East. But it does not
want to implement or respect the resolutions of
international legitimacy.
We went to the Madrid Peace Conference with the
other Arab parties sincerely hoping to achieve a just,
permanent and comprehensive peace that would end the
continued cycle of violence that has engulfed our region
over the past 50 years. The negotiations on the Palestinian
track remain in a vicious circle, and the repercussions of
Israeli intransigence could very well shatter our hopes for
peace; the negotiations on the Lebanese and Syrian tracks
have come to a complete standstill as a result of the
intransigent position of the Israeli Government.
We reaffirm our permanent commitment to the noble
objective of achieving peace. We have previously
declared that the accomplishment of this goal lies in the
full, immediate and unconditional implementation of
United Nations resolutions. On this occasion, we reiterate
our total rejection of any settlement of Palestinian
refugees in Lebanon. We call upon the international
community to increase its voluntary contributions to the
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine
Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) pending the
implementation of international resolutions relative to
refugees, particularly resolution 194 (III).
As we repeat our commitment to a just,
comprehensive and permanent peace, we declare that we
20

in Lebanon and in Syria are ready to resume the
negotiations from where they were stopped. We are ready
to sign a peace treaty with Israel within three months, on
the condition that it withdraws from the South, from the
West Beqaa, and from the Syrian Golan to the lines of 4
June 1967. Peace negotiations aimed at achieving a just and
comprehensive peace — the peace that we always
proclaimed our desire to achieve — can only be
accomplished on the basis of the Madrid terms of reference,
in accordance with the principle of land for peace. These
should be pursued on two parallel, inseparable tracks with
Israel: the Lebanese negotiation track and the Syrian
negotiation track.
The interdependence of the twin tracks was a strategic
decision dictated by the supreme interests of both Lebanon
and Syria. This interdependence enhances the prospects of
a just, permanent and comprehensive peace. We have
previously declared, and we repeat today before this
assembly of nations, that neither Lebanon nor Syria will
sign a separate peace agreement with Israel. Lebanon and
Syria are committed to the resolutions of international
legitimacy. We continue to be committed to peace as a
strategic choice.
Peace as we see it is a peace built on justice, a peace
that will restore usurped rights to their rightful owners fully
and without diminution. Any initiatives that ignore these
principles and bases are nothing more than manoeuvres
predestined to failure. They will only prolong the conflict
with all that this implies in terms of squandering the human
and economic resources of all concerned. They will further
postpone the permanent, just and comprehensive peace
which we still uphold and aspire to. To us, this will always
be the only viable means to achieve the prosperity and
progress of our people and of the other peoples of the
region.
The voices that were recently raised calling for the
establishment of military alliances in the region on the
pretext of confronting certain trends of thought can only be
seen as attempts to bring the region back to the atmosphere
of alliances and confrontation. Time and again, history has
proven these to be harmful to the interests of peoples. They
can only lead to negative results that will obstruct the peace
process.
So long as the Israeli occupation and assaults against
our people continue, we shall continue to uphold our right
to resist occupation and to use all legitimate means to
which peoples who have had to endure the injustices and
evils of occupation have resorted previously. The Lebanese
resistance in southern Lebanon and the West Beqaa is in
pursuit of a legitimate right supported and endorsed by
the entire Lebanese people. The Lebanese people who,
like other peoples whose lands have been occupied, have
been resisting occupation, and appeal to the international
community to spare no effort in helping to secure the
release of its citizens who are incarcerated in Israeli
prisons and in detention camps under Israeli control in the
occupied Lebanese territories. Hundreds of our sons have
been languishing in Israeli jails and detention camps for
years. Some have already served the prison sentences
handed down by Israeli courts, yet are still in custody for
reasons unknown to anyone. Others have been in custody
for years but have not yet been arraigned. Their
incarceration continues under an arbitrary measure that
Israel calls “administrative detention”.
We have been trying to secure the release of all
Lebanese detainees from Israeli jails with the assistance
of friendly and brotherly States and with the active
involvement of the International Committee of the Red
Cross. We appeal to the United Nations and to other
international humanitarian agencies to give this matter
their utmost attention. We also call upon them to plead
with Israel to improve the living conditions of these
prisoners, who live in unbearable, inhumane
circumstances that run counter to international laws and
conventions.
Lebanon finds itself today twice victimized. On the
one hand, it has to endure continued devastating attacks
by Israel, attacks that can be justified only under one
rubric: Israel?s stubborn clinging to its occupation and to
the flimsy pretext of security. On the other hand, Lebanon
sees how the international community is incapable of
doing what it takes to restore its legitimate rights through
compliance with the just resolutions adopted by this
international Organization, in particular Security Council
resolution 425 (1978), which calls for unconditional
Israeli withdrawal from the Lebanese territories. Lebanon,
which for 50 years has dearly paid for the establishment
of Israel, suffers from the double standards which have so
far obstructed the implementation of Security Council
resolution 425 (1978).
The United Nations, which has made continuous
efforts, and whose peacekeeping forces have made the
ultimate sacrifice, in the South, remains the best witness
to the indiscriminate nature and ferocity of the Israeli
attacks against the Lebanese. The United Nations
peacekeeping forces have repeatedly been the direct target
of Israeli bombardment, including the 1996 shelling of the
21

headquarters of a battalion of the United Nations Interim
Force in Lebanon, in Qana, which was the scene of a
heinous massacre in which scores of Lebanese lost their
lives. Here we would like to pay tribute to the fallen
soldiers of the United Nations who have died in Lebanon,
victims of Israeli acts of aggression. Lebanon considers
them to be its martyrs too. From this rostrum, we honour
their memory. We salute each and every member of the
United Nations peacekeeping Force stationed in Lebanon.
We express special thanks and appreciation to the friendly
States that have contributed troops to that Force. On the
occasion of the departure of the Norwegian battalion that
has worked in Lebanon for over two decades, allow me to
express, on behalf of the people and the Government of
Lebanon, our thanks and gratitude to the Norwegian people
and Government for their enduring commitment to and
participation in the Force. Many members of the Norwegian
battalion sacrificed their lives in the line of duty.
Lebanon has the right to demand that the international
community and the United Nations, which represents
international legitimacy, should make every effort to secure
Israel?s compliance with international resolutions and its
withdrawal from its territories.
Lebanon, which believes in peace, will work with its
brothers to consolidate this peace and make it a foundation
for a new life in the Middle East region. Achieving this
noble objective will not only translate just resolutions into
tangible action, but it will also further the confidence of
small States and nations in an authority that will guarantee
their rights, their very existence and their future.
In conclusion, I would like to address the Israeli
people to tell them that the Arabs, specifically Lebanon and
Syria, have taken a strategic decision, namely the peace
option, which is the difficult choice. This is the strategic
option which we uphold and for which we work in the
interest of the future of our nation and that of our children.
For peace to be realized, Israel also has to follow suit for
the sake of the future of its children. Peace requires courage
and a broad vision of the future. Lebanon and Syria have
made their choice. Will Israel make the same choice?


May I start, Sir, by
congratulating Mr. Opertti on his election as President of
this great Assembly, and wishing him well as he guides
its deliberations. I was privileged to visit his country,
Uruguay, earlier this year, and appreciated the warmth
and hospitality on that occasion.
I would also like to express our thanks to his
predecessor, Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, who, with
considerable commitment, presided over the introduction
of many important reform measures during the past
session.
Each year this debate provides an opportunity to take
a longer perspective on the United Nations — to look
back and, of course, to look ahead. We have
achievements to acknowledge and challenges for the
future to consider. In doing so, our view is informed by
present-day conditions. We are living in very difficult
times. The economic events that have unfolded over the
last year, initially in Asia, now show signs of having a
global impact. They will affect developed and developing
countries alike across most regions of the world. The
problems that face us demand a calm and steady response
if financial troubles are not to spill over into wider
instability. This presents a direct challenge to us all, and
a test of the component parts of the multilateral system.
This year we mark 50-year milestones in two major
areas of United Nations work, two areas that distinguish
this half-century from earlier times: international
peacekeeping and the development of international human
rights law. Both have a part to play in responding to the
challenges of the present day. Both typify the unique
contribution of the United Nations system. It is in this
global setting that universal international norms can be
established. The international rule of law gives us a
framework with which to deal confidently with the
7

problems that confront us. And it is through collective
security that the countries of the world can work together
to promote and reinforce peace and stability.
New Zealand, as a small country, has from the outset
valued the opportunities for global debate and collective
action provided by the United Nations. We are committed
to the strengthening of that system. We believe its effective
operation is essential to the well-being of our world.
We are, of course, as many are, conscious of the
criticisms that have been levelled at the United Nations in
recent years. Ten years ago the United Nations stock was
very high. The end of the cold war was seen as heralding
a new age. In 1988 the United Nations peacekeeping forces
were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. At the turn of the
decade there was talk of a new world order.
But the world community?s expectations of what could
be achieved sometimes exceeded Member States? own
political will to deliver. And the United Nations machinery,
which had grown and expanded to meet world expectations,
proved too cumbersome — and often very costly — to
respond effectively.
Euphoria about the United Nations began to give way
to cynicism. One editorial writer this year referred to the
United Nations as “a busted flush”. But when we take a
longer view it is clear that neither euphoria nor cynicism is
the appropriate reaction.
Since the end of the cold war the United Nations
peacekeeping machinery has been used as never before.
There have been some marked successes and, regrettably,
some failures. Much has been learned. Future peacekeeping
mandates must reflect the lessons learned.
The need for the United Nations to be able to carry
out its peacekeeping role remains. Its successes point to
what it can achieve. But today fewer troops are wearing the
blue beret, and troop-contributing countries do not receive
timely reimbursement.
The largest contributor?s arrears in peacekeeping and
the regular budget cast a long shadow over the
Organization. Dues outstanding at present have reached
alarming proportions. This affects all — large nations and
small nations.
We cannot afford to have the capacity of the United
Nations restricted by this constant budget uncertainty.
In my own area of the South Pacific we developed
a regional response to a regional problem. I am referring
to the island of Bougainville in Papua New Guinea, an
island which was ravaged by civil war for nine years but
has enjoyed peace for the last 12 months. It was the
Governments of the region that set out to help the
Government of Papua New Guinea and representatives of
the Bougainville people to bring this horror to an end.
The contributions of Australia, Fiji, Vanuatu, the Solomon
Islands and my own country have played a valuable and
significant role, and there is now growing hope and
confidence on Bougainville — rare commodities for
almost a decade. The Lincoln Agreement, signed in
Christchurch, New Zealand, in January, while formalizing
the ceasefire, paved the way also for United Nations
participation. We welcomed the United Nations decision
to set up a small political office on the island. This
commitment by the United Nations will help strengthen
the peace process there.
Today the world faces uncertainty caused by the
financial turmoil which began in Asia. It is affecting the
Russian Federation, is putting many countries in Latin
America under pressure and is now touching just about
everybody. The sudden plunge in investor confidence and
the reversal of developing markets? short capital flows has
dramatically changed economic and social prospects.
World economic growth this year will be significantly
reduced.
This most serious economic situation in many years
has the potential to intrude upon all of our lives. We must
cooperate to turn this crisis around. And at the national
level we must take the actions required, not just for our
own sakes but in the interests of the broader international
community. This includes refraining from protectionist
reactions, which could only exacerbate it, and pushing
ahead with liberalization of markets wherever possible.
A serious challenge is to ensure that economic
insecurity does not threaten political and social stability.
We must resist pressures to take political actions that we
would normally avoid. The best way to achieve this is
through a collective approach to the problems that
confront us; to strengthen our multilateral institutions in
the United Nations system and elsewhere and build
confidence in our joint ability to work through difficult
times.
I was particularly struck by the comments of the
Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan, on these matters in
his statement on Monday. His characterization of the
8

crisis — that it is not just financial or economic or social
or political, but all of these things at once — is exactly
right. I thoroughly endorse the Secretary-General?s
conclusion that we must address the crisis on all these
fronts.
As a forum for debate, and as a body capable of
taking global action, the United Nations, together with its
specialized agencies, has an important role to play in
building capacity and providing social support where it is
needed. Much of what the United Nations has achieved
provides the norms and mechanisms to help us through
difficult times of the sort we are facing right now. The
challenge for the Organization is to act decisively to tackle
the problems that have the potential to undermine our
security, problems that have their greatest impact on
ordinary people in developing countries. Now is not the
time to go backwards.
Recent tragic events in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam
have underlined that the fight against terrorism is far from
over. The response to terrorism must be decisive and
unequivocal. The international community has a duty to
ensure that there are no safe havens for terrorist groups.
Universal commitment to the network of anti-terrorist
instruments must be a fundamental objective of all
Members of this Organization.
War crimes and crimes against humanity have seen a
resurgence in this last part of the twentieth century. New
Zealand supports the work of the ad hoc war crimes
Tribunals in bringing criminals to justice. But this is not
enough. New Zealand has long called for an international
criminal court that would have jurisdiction over such
crimes. We commend the effort of those who, through
much hard work, dedication and compromise, enabled the
Statute for the International Criminal Court to be adopted.
It is our expectation that, with the support of the
international community, the Court will prove an effective
tool in the fight against those who carry out appalling
atrocities.
Nowhere is the need for multilateral action more
clearly obvious than in our efforts to halt environmental
degradation and promote sustainable development.
New Zealand is honoured to have our own
Environment Minister, the Honourable Simon Upton, chair
the Commission on Sustainable Development for its seventh
session. It is our strong hope that this session will see us
advance Agenda 21, and take further steps towards
achieving the goals set at the Rio Earth Summit six years
ago. It is appropriate that in the United Nations Year of
the Ocean the session?s themes will include oceans and
seas and the review of the Barbados Programme of
Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island
Developing States in preparation for next year?s special
session of the General Assembly.
The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted last
December was a positive first step in dealing with this
quintessentially global problem. There remain some
important implementation issues to be resolved. The
Fourth Congress of the parties in Buenos Aires will
provide an opportunity to make further progress.
Thanks to the commitment of the Secretary-General,
we now have an Organization that is efficient and
effective. There is more to be done if this great
Organization is to meet the challenges of the present day:
changes that make it possible to redirect efforts from the
administration of the Organization to its front-line work
in development and confronting global problems.
New Zealand looks forward to continuing the
dialogue on financing for development. Through our
current membership of the Economic and Social Council
we have followed closely the evolving debate on this very
important issue. We very much welcome the initiatives
taken by the Organization towards closer linkages with
the Bretton Woods Institutions. Those institutions are
themselves at the forefront of the effort to tackle the
present economic crisis, probably the greatest challenge
they have ever had. However, we must decide whether in
their present form they are appropriate for the twenty-first
century.
This Organization, too, like any other, needs to
respond to changing circumstances, and be flexible
enough to meet new challenges. It must reflect the world
of today, not stay fixed in the patterns of earlier times.
The East-West conflict is well behind us. We now need
to address anew the divide between North and South. The
United Nations development role is crucial. Once again I
believe the Secretary-General hit the nail on the head
when he described in his statement on Monday the need
to restore development to its proper place in global
economic strategy. Also essential are measures to free up
trade and investment flows, and promote access to
information and technology. All of these are tools with
which to fight the economic downturn which is
confronting us.
9

The United Nations clearly has the leading role to play
in development. Other international institutions play a
complementary part. I am personally conscious of the
particular contribution made by the Commonwealth through
the recent Commonwealth Small States Mission. That
Mission highlighted the special vulnerability of small
States, which has led to the establishment of the
Commonwealth/World Bank task force on the issue which
will have relevance to the work of the Economic and Social
Council and the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTAD) on the question of vulnerability.
Within the United Nations we need to correct the
North-South imbalance to which I referred through reform
of the Security Council. More equitable representation on
the Council would better reflect the world as it is and
today?s United Nations. Expansion is proving a complex
issue, but there has been some good progress this year in
the equally important area of reforming the Council?s
working methods. Altogether, these are matters which
require careful consideration and negotiation. Setting
artificial deadlines ahead of general agreement on a reform
package would not be helpful and could in fact prove
damaging to the Organization. Any reforms must enjoy the
support of the greatest possible number of Member States.
I should add that regional groups in the United
Nations still reflect an earlier era. New Zealand is certainly
open to new ideas on how groupings can be reorganized to
create a more equitable distribution of electoral
opportunities and to recognize modern-day political and
economic linkages.
In the field of disarmament and arms control, it is
timely to consider how far we have come and what we
have achieved. The adoption of the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty in 1996 certainly promised the end
of nuclear testing. But the global non-proliferation norm
was shattered by the nuclear testing in South Asia, raising
grave fears of a potential arms race. New Zealand has taken
some encouragement from statements made in this Hall in
recent days, and hopes that 1999 will be the year in which
all countries that have not yet done so will sign up
unconditionally to the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban
Treaty.
The Conference on Disarmament has now agreed to
proceed with negotiations on a fissile material cut-off
treaty. New Zealand wants to see those negotiations
concluded as soon as possible. There must be no stepping
back from the objective of complete disarmament, including
the elimination of nuclear weapons. New Zealand?s
commitment to this objective was reiterated in the
declaration which I, together with the Foreign Ministers
of seven other countries, issued on 9 June. New Zealand
is now working with those countries on a draft resolution
based on the concerns outlined in the declaration.
One achievement which I personally see as a top
priority for 1999 is the conclusion of a verification
protocol to the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Development, Production and Stockpiling of
Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on
Their Destruction. Following a very successful initiative
from Australia, I was pleased to chair a group of
ministers who this week issued a statement urging
Governments to commit themselves to completing this
task.
New Zealand supports the actions of the United
Nations to ensure the elimination of Iraq?s stockpiles of
weapons of mass destruction and the threat they pose to
the security of the region. We urge the Government of
Iraq to resume cooperation with the United Nations
Special Commission so that the elimination of these
dreadful weapons can be confirmed. Then the Security
Council can once more address the question of lifting
sanctions.
In the 50 years since Member States adopted the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the significance
of the Declaration has been demonstrated time and time
again. Yet there remains much to be done before the
vision in the Charter and in the Declaration can be
realized for all. We are confident that, under the
leadership of the High Commissioner for Human Rights,
we will continue to make good progress towards the
realization of that vision.
The United Nations can add value in promoting and
protecting fundamental human rights standards,
emphasizing practical capacity-building efforts. We have
been supporting the High Commissioner?s efforts in this
area, and we will continue to do so.
We see countries in all regions of the world seeking
the international community?s support as they build
structures to provide good governance and deliver hope
and greater well-being to their people. In particular, I am
encouraged by developments in Nigeria and in Sierra
Leone in this regard.
As the last 50 years have demonstrated, this
Organization has added a whole new dimension to
10

cooperation among nations. No lesser body could have
achieved so much. In the longer perspective of history it
will be the dramatic development of the international rule
of law and the evolution of collective approaches to
security, both political and economic, which will
characterize our era. In other words, that really is the work
of the United Nations.
Now, with the challenge of the economic problems
that face us, we nations of the world are more dependent
than ever on solving our shared problems together. New
Zealand therefore rededicates itself to the United Nations
and to the ideals that this Organization stands for.


Allow me at the outset to convey my sincere
congratulations to Mr. Opertti upon his election as
President of the General Assembly at this session and to
express my full confidence that he will lead its work
wisely and ably.
It gives me pleasure as well to pay tribute to the
wise leadership of the former Foreign Minister of
Ukraine, President of the Assembly at its last session,
particularly in promoting the efforts for reform and
renewal in the United Nations.
14

I would like also to salute the Secretary-General,
Mr. Kofi Annan, who displayed his wisdom and expertise
in dealing with world crises and for his outstanding
contribution to increasing the efficiency of the Organization
in order for it to keep pace with the changing times,
contribute to the building of the new international order and
avoid the pitfalls.
This is the next-to-last session of the General
Assembly in this century. Let it be a session for reflection
and preparation for the last session of the twentieth century,
next year. Let us take stock of the international work of a
whole century, its positive and negative aspects alike. Let
us evaluate the achievements and innovations of mankind,
where it failed and why. Let us list and analyse the work
done and the progress made by the United Nations to create
constructive international cooperation and establish peace.
Let us also talk about what remains on the international
agenda and what will be left for succeeding generations to
finish and accomplish.
In the Charter of the United Nations, we determined
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.
Have we done so? Where did we succeed, where did we
fail, and why? We also reaffirmed our faith in fundamental
human rights and in the dignity of nations and human
beings. How far have we gone in translating this solemn
reaffirmation into a reality? We committed ourselves to
promoting social progress and better standards of life, and
to using the United Nations for the promotion of the social
and economic advancement of all peoples. Have we
honoured that commitment? We determined to practise
tolerance and live together in peace and neighbourliness.
Have we achieved that? We determined to unite our
strength to maintain international peace and security and not
to use armed force except for common interest. Has this
determination come true? Have we achieved what we
determined to do?
Immediately after the end of the cold war in the late
1980s, some spoke of “the clash of civilizations”. This is a
dangerous theory that concerns humanity and the course it
will chart for itself — whether conflict and conflagration or
coexistence and peace. We, the representatives of the
international community, cannot, at this historical juncture,
ignore such a dangerous argument and a destructive theory
that runs counter to the common work and collective
obligations we agreed upon for international life. We, the
children of the twentieth century, must deal with this theory
and respond to it clearly. We cannot let such a negative call
go without a response or correction. What President Clinton
said in his address before the Assembly, rejecting this
theory and expressing respect for Islamic civilization, is
really worthy of consideration and appreciation.
In our opinion, we must offer the next century our
confident view that we are one community based on
pluralism — intellectual, religious and cultural pluralism
and diversity. We must reaffirm that this diversity does
not prejudice the unity of the international community.
Rather, it strengthens that unity, making the international
community a dynamic whole based on healthy
competition, positive coexistence and a common
appreciation for the achievements of the many societies
that constitute the international community. Our
community cannot be dependent on the achievements of
one single society or tend to follow one single culture.
The true path lies in positive interaction, complementarity
and coexistence among civilizations. It does not lie in the
creation of causes for conflict or in fanning the flames of
confrontation and of clash between civilizations. If this is
allowed to happen, it will create a dangerous hotbed of
world tension and will ultimately result in a grave loss for
one and all.
Once again we are at a historic juncture where a
strong message from this generation is indeed necessary.
We want to see the rights of people and nations upheld
without differences as to priorities and definitions. We
want rational disarmament and an end to the arms race
without distinction or discrimination. We want genuine
development that does not entrench poverty or ignore its
causes. We want a clean environment, a science that
benefits all and a technology whose achievements and
applications are beneficial to all. We want a common
position in the face of international terrorism. We want
freedom and liberation for all peoples and a firm stand in
the face of the forces of oppression, racism and
occupation. We want a commitment to the rule of law
and respect for established norms and for the purposes
and principles we consensually consecrated in the Charter
of the United Nations.
In order to evaluate the experiences of the past and
to chart our future course, I propose that this session
create a committee to commence drafting a clear
statement to history to be issued at the close of the next
session. This statement should include our assessment of
the past and our vision of the future. It should be issued
a few days before the end of the century and the
beginning of the new millennium.
The world today is passing through a stage of chaos,
and there is a general feeling of discontent. Wars,
15

terrorism, backwardness, racism, religious intolerance: are
these the remnants of past eras? Or are they the result of
practices that continue to plague our societies? Or are they
an integral part of the fabric of human life? Or are they the
result of globalization and the factors of tension and
instability contained in the new world order?
I believe we all sense the instability in international
life. We have witnessed and continue to witness widespread
acts of terrorism throughout all continents of the world. We
have witnessed widespread extremism in various faiths and
widespread injustice in various societies. All this points to
the fact that richness and poverty, despite their undisputed
importance as two of the facts of life, do not constitute the
only causes of world instability. There are other causes,
foremost among which is the policy of double standards,
the lack of democracy in international relations, the brazen
call for a clash of civilizations and the varying
interpretations of the principles of legality. All these
elements lead to the feeling of discontent, indeed, to the
general feeling of insecurity.
I believe it is incumbent upon us to consider this
matter. These questions call for a clear answer because the
challenge is enormous, and the results could therefore be
grave. We are all in the same boat. This responsibility is
not the responsibility of any one society. If globalization
and universality are much talked about, this should mean
that they call for a sharing of responsibility.
I would like to deal briefly with some of the central
issues that occupy our minds at this stage.
I shall start with terrorism. Some note, and rightly so,
that this international crime against all societies is
perpetrated using tight organizations, facilitated sometimes
by circumstances in which some have misguidedly
supported certain groups by encouraging and dealing with
them until those groups turned against them. This is a
lesson we must learn in order to avoid its repetition.
Furthermore, some have noted, and rightly so, that the hand
of terrorism has struck more than one place at the same
time: Nairobi, Dar-es-Salaam and Omagh in Ireland. Before
then, that hand of terrorism struck many places in the
world, for different motives, certainly. But the phenomenon
is one and the same, and it is intolerable. We must reflect
upon this matter together.
In this regard, I would like to underline the importance
of the legislation enacted by the British House of Commons
on dealing with the acts of conspiracy committed on British
territory, of the proposal of President Jacques Chirac of
France on controlling the financing of terrorist groups,
and of what was said by President Clinton in his
statement before the Assembly in this regard. I find it
important also in this connection to put before the
Assembly the call of President Hosni Mubarak to convene
an international summit under the auspices of the United
Nations. The summit should direct the international
community to deal with terrorism legally, politically,
economically and technologically. This call was supported
in the final communiqué of the recent summit of the Non-
Aligned Movement. I suggest that the General Assembly
consider the Egyptian call for the proposed summit. I also
call upon the Secretary-General to start working towards
its convening.
Turning to disarmament, allow me to say that recent
developments have proved the shortcomings of the
nuclear non-proliferation regime in its current form,
which lacks universality. This reaffirms the need for
urgent and serious steps to remedy that shortcoming, and
to strengthen the efficiency of the regime through
achieving its universality and avoiding the policy of
double standards; otherwise, we will end up with a state
of deep mistrust and an arms race that would in turn lead
to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,
especially nuclear weapons.
For the last three decades, Egypt has consistently
called for making the Middle East free from nuclear
weapons. This call was further reinforced by its 1990
initiative to make the region free from weapons of mass
destruction. Today, we reiterate this call with a view to
maintaining peace and security in the region.
Starting from this same premise, Egypt, together
with seven other States, recently proposed a new agenda
to strengthen the international commitment towards a
world free of weapons of mass destruction, an initiative
we invite the Assembly to support. In this connection,
allow me to place on record the call of President Hosni
Mubarak to convene an international conference to
consider the elimination of those weapons from the whole
world within an agreed time-frame. I invite members of
the Assembly to work together in order to translate that
call into a reality.
I now move to the question of the reform of the
United Nations. Here, the premise of the Egyptian policy
is the same as that adopted by the summit of the Non-
Aligned Movement in Durban: we call for commitment to
the principles of the Charter and international law as a
common position on the agenda for reform.
16

Here, I would like to pay tribute to the Secretary-
General for his ideas and initiatives in this regard. I would
also like to reaffirm what the summit of the Non-Aligned
Movement adopted concerning the importance of taking
into account the views of the Member States of the United
Nations in the implementation of the reform policies and
the reaffirmation of the pivotal role of the General
Assembly in the decision-making process, as the main
democratic framework of the United Nations.
Concerning the Security Council, the position of Egypt
is based on the same elements adopted by the non-aligned
States as follows: first, the need to deal with the questions
of the reform of the working methods of the Security
Council and the expansion of its membership within an
integrated framework; secondly, increasing the membership
of the Security Council by no fewer than 11 members and
the allocation of a number of permanent seats for
developing countries, with strict observance of the
principles of equitable geographical distribution and
equality of States; thirdly, the unacceptability of any
attempt at a partial or selective expansion of the
membership of the Security Council; fourthly, the
inadmissibility of any predetermined time-frame to
complete the process of restructuring the Security Council;
and lastly, the need for any resolution that would result in
amending the Charter, the so-called framework resolution,
to be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the States
Members of the United Nations, in accordance with Article
108 of the Charter.
In addition, Egypt is committed to the decision of the
summit of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) in
Harare in 1997 on the allocation of five non-permanent
seats and two permanent seats for the African continent, to
be rotated in accordance with agreed criteria of the Group
of African States.
On the subject of the reform of the United Nations, I
would like to refer to a matter that was the subject of
extensive deliberations in the United Nations and in the
recent summit of the Non-Aligned Movement — namely,
the sanctions imposed by the Security Council. As the
ultimate objective of such sanctions is to influence certain
political regimes to bring them into compliance with the
rules of international legality, it is therefore necessary that
all means under Chapter VI of the Charter be exhausted
before resorting to Chapter VII and its applications. The
clarity of the objective of imposing sanctions and a
thorough consideration of their consequences in the short
and long terms, including human suffering, are of
paramount importance.
An excessive imposition of sanctions, or their
perpetuation without acceptable reason or a clear time-
frame, will erode their credibility and the commitments
made to applying them. Therefore, there is a need for
patience, prudence and a determination of the time-frame
of sanctions.
I now turn to the Middle East, which is suffering
from numerous problems, some chronic and others fairly
recent, which we hope will not also become chronic ones.
I am referring here to the situation of Iraq, which must
reach its natural conclusion: the lifting of the sanctions
through implementation of the Security Council?s
resolutions and in accordance with their provisions. This
requires goodwill, proper conduct and the establishment
of constructive and stable cooperation between Iraq and
the mechanisms of the Security Council. This is a shared
responsibility, not the responsibility of one party alone.
Needless to say, the elimination of weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq is an integral part of their elimination
in the region as a whole, as was indeed reflected in
Security Council resolution 687 (1991).
I would also like to refer to the Lockerbie issue and
express our satisfaction at the recent positive development
of the situation by the consent of the parties to that yet-
to-be settled dispute. This represents significant progress
towards the trial of the two suspects and establishing the
truth. We all hope that progress will be made, in good
faith, as soon as possible within the framework of the
contacts made by the Secretary-General and that an
agreement will be reached on the required procedures and
guarantees. Thus, the whole matter will be put behind us,
the sanctions imposed on Libya will be lifted and a long
overdue end to a period of tension will come to pass.
At another level, we believe that the region must
avoid anything that could add to its tensions: declarations
of strategic alliances that create discord and lead to
counter-alliances; sneaking into the nuclear club, which
will lead to an arms race in the region, unless Israel, like
all other States of the region, accedes to the Non-
Proliferation Treaty; the lack of a solution to the problems
and disputes of sovereignty, foremost among which is the
question of the three islands of the United Arab Emirates
in the Gulf; and attempts at partitioning and jeopardizing
the unity and territorial integrity of States, as is the case
with Iraq and Sudan.
As for the peace process, which is about to collapse,
the situation is indeed grave, not only because of the
deadlock it has reached, but also because the roots of the
17

problem go much deeper than that. The deadlock is related
to the negative change in the policy of Israel, which
believes that the current international situation enables it to
impose its exaggerated demands on the Arab parties and to
impose an Israeli peace on the Middle East. This is
probably due to the belief which it has evolved, namely that
no person, no Government and no State would be able to
stand in its way, pressure it or refuse its demands.
We reject this policy, which uses security
considerations to justify occupation, thus stripping security
requirements, which could be legitimate, of any meaning.
Such requirements could have been negotiated and
reasonable ones accepted on a reciprocal basis. Yet the
validity, true weight and credibility of those Israeli security
requirements have become dubious. Egypt, the first Arab
State to establish peace with Israel and the largest one with
a role in the Middle East and the Arab and Islamic worlds,
cannot accept such negative policies, which will drive the
region once more towards the flames of tension, conflict
and instability.
We have made peace with Israel. The Arab States
have moved towards the same objective on the basis of
Security Council resolution 242 (1967), which is based on
the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of
territory by force and on Israel?s right to live in peace
within its borders — which are, of course, the borders and
the lines of June 1967 — as well as on the basis of the
Madrid framework, namely, the principle of land for peace.
With respect to the Palestinians, the Oslo accord provides
for significant Israeli withdrawals before the final status
negotiations between the Israeli and Palestinian sides can
begin.
At their summit meeting in Cairo in 1996, Arab
leaders at the highest level expressed the commitment of
Arab States to the peace process, since Arab-Israeli peace
is a strategic objective to be achieved under international
legality. But it requires a corresponding commitment from
Israel to follow the road to peace in a manner that restores
the rights and the occupied territories of the Palestinians
and ensures balanced and equal security to all the States of
the region, in accordance with the principle of land for
peace.
The Arab summit decided that any disruption by Israel
of these principles and bases of the peace process; that any
reneging on the commitments it has made and agreements
reached on the same path; and that any procrastination in
their implementation will only set back the peace process.
The attendant dangers and repercussions of such actions
would relaunch the region into the spiral of tension and
compel the Arab States to reconsider the steps they have
taken towards Israel within the framework of the peace
process. The Israeli Government alone would bear the full
responsibility for such a development.
Regrettably, it has become evident that the Israeli
Government is reneging on the commitments it has
undertaken in the context of the Security Council?s
resolutions, the Madrid framework and the Oslo accord.
This attitude logically compels us to take a forthright and
determined opposition to Israel?s negative position, which
runs counter to the objective requirements for peace. If
we do not, the effective international action necessary to
deal with this grave situation will not be forthcoming.
We wonder what the Israeli Government really
wants. The Arabs have given it acceptance, coexistence,
peace and recognition. But it would seem that what the
Israeli Government really wants is all of the above, plus
most of the land and the privilege to disregard the rights
of the Palestinians. This is simply unacceptable. Peoples
have their dignity and the rights to their own land and to
self-determination. No generation is entitled to cede such
rights. They are the rights of all generations — past,
present and future — throughout history.
We reiterate that Israel must reconsider its position
and its policy. The international situation is ever
changing. What may be imposed today without justice or
balance will disintegrate tomorrow. We want a stable,
enduring agreement. This can be achieved only once we
agree on a comprehensive package that includes Israel?s
complete withdrawal from the territories of Syria,
Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza in Palestine; the
establishment of a Palestinian State; an agreement on the
final status of Jerusalem and the fate of the Palestinian
refugees; an agreement on security requirements, without
undue exaggeration; the recognition of Israel as a State;
and coexistence with it as a member of the family of the
Middle East, within the framework of normal relations. I
repeat that all this must constitute a package deal that
cannot be divided to serve the interests of one party at the
expense of the others.
Does the Israeli Government recognize the
importance of justice and legitimacy? Does it realize the
grave and present danger of spurning this opportunity to
achieve peace? Letting this historic opportunity slip away
and entering the next century with the file of the Arab-
Israeli conflict still open will lead to tension and
instability not only in the Middle East, but in the
18

international community as a whole. Historical experience
has proven that tension knows no boundaries, that
instability cannot be confined to one specific region and
that international peace and security are indivisible.
The international community must therefore raise its
voice against the setback of the peace process and play its
role in salvaging it. We are not calling for an international
trial. Rather, we ask the international community to play its
role in safeguarding the bases of peace agreed upon
unanimously in the Security Council and at the Madrid
Conference, and in the consideration of the measures
necessary to restore the process to its correct track and to
avert the eruption of further crises in the future.
It was in this spirit that Presidents Hosni Mubarak and
Jacques Chirac announced their initiative to convene a
conference of States determined to save the peace. We must
emphasize that this Franco-Egyptian initiative does not aim
at replacing or hampering any current positive efforts. It
aims, rather, at reinforcing these efforts and ensuring their
success, particularly those of the United States, which we
support as long as they seek balanced agreements.
Egypt accords equal attention to issues of the African
continent. Today, we are faced with two urgent and serious
matters. The first pertains to the Horn of Africa, namely,
the conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea. We strongly
support the mediation efforts, led by the Chairman of the
Organization of African Unity, to arrive at a peaceful
solution and the continued cessation of military hostilities.
In this way will normalcy be restored and peace
established.
The second question is the situation in and around the
Democratic Republic of the Congo. Here, the efforts made
by the leaders of Africa and the United Nations Secretary-
General continue to be important. Such efforts preserve the
unity and territorial integrity of the Democratic Republic of
the Congo and establish positive relations between it and its
neighbours in the larger context of a cessation of military
operations and of interference in its internal affairs. They
also require the maintenance of its national unity within
rational democracy.
The situation in Africa is being dangerously
aggravated by these problems and by the continent?s grave
socio-economic situation. This requires special attention,
which we call on the international community and the
United Nations to give.
In conclusion, I must refer to the phenomenon of
globalization. We must face its challenges and address its
negative aspects, while maximizing its benefits. A number
of developing countries have successfully dealt with
globalization and achieved their necessary integration into
the world economy. At the same time, many developed
countries have adopted covert protectionist measures and
new conditionalities, such as environmental and labour
standards, and continue to maintain tariff barriers against
the primary exports of the developing countries. These
measures run counter to the equitable bases of the world
trading system. This is an important issue which we must
address in the context of evaluating past achievements
and challenges, and of shaping a new international order.
These are the questions which Egypt wished to put
before this session as a modest contribution to shaping a
common vision that would inspire the march of humanity
in the coming decades, during which we hope that justice,
equality, progress and prosperity will prevail.