Today’s world offers
one clear lesson: to survive and prosper, we have to work
together better. That much is clear.
We share a global environment. We depend on each
other for development and prosperity. Regional conflicts
affect us all. Our peoples suffer together under the
shadows of drugs and terrorism.
We can no longer separate what we want to achieve
within our own borders from what we face across our
borders. Rapid change of the sort we have seen recently
can inspire fear. But we must face and conquer that fear
together.
And if our finance, our trade, media,
communications and even our culture are, day by day,
more and more transnational, it would be strange and
potentially dangerous if our politics remained locked in
the old compartments built just after the Second World
War. If the challenge is international, then the response
must be international too. We must launch a new era of
international partnership in which we modernize those
institutions that allow us to cooperate and to work
together.
The United Nations has a real record of
achievement. That is true. But it is true also that it has
had its failures. It has stood by or intervened ineffectively
when brutality was abroad. It has sometimes delivered
words when action was needed.
But the United Nations is no more than its Member
States. Its failures are our failures. The values of the
United Nations Charter are as valid now as when they
were written. But we have to find new ways of applying
them.
So I believe in the United Nations, but I also believe
it must modernize, and do so urgently. All parts of the
United Nations need proper accountability to go with
secure funding, better management and more effective
coordination in all their activities.
Our Secretary-General has given us a lead. But it is
now up to us, the Member States, to give him our full
support. We must not allow reform in the United Nations
to falter.
And let me emphasize today that we need to
strengthen too the authority of the Security Council. This
means broadening its composition: new permanent
seats — for the developing world as well as for Germany
and Japan. More non-permanent seats alone would be an
unacceptable compromise. We have been talking about
this now for five years. It is time for decisions.
28

We face many challenges, but none more immediate
than the contagion of recession spreading from those
countries currently in difficulty to affect the wider world
economy. The solutions do not lie in misguided attempts to
impose new panoplies of controls on international capital
movements, or in a retreat from open trade. Rather, we
must all recognize that the absence of proper financial
structures and disciplines in individual countries, coupled
with a lack of transparency, will be punished by the
markets sooner or later.
However, we can act. We can devise new mechanisms
to support a process of change: rules to encourage greater
transparency in international and national financial dealings;
better supervision and regulation of financial operators;
adequate resources for the international financial institutions
to deal with short-term liquidity problems; structural reform
programmes for countries in difficulty, programmes that
take account of the social effects of the restructuring we are
asking for.
The only way to tackle such complex problems is a
new, high-level, international collaborative effort. Global
problems will require global solutions. As Chairman of the
G-8, Britain will play our full part in ensuring the necessary
look at the international financial architecture and how it
can be improved for a new age. This is a priority, I believe,
for us all.
However, we know that, unlike in the 1950s, this
cannot be left simply to a few developed countries. Getting
the financial framework right is only a start. We must
create the conditions for sustainable development in all our
countries.
The international community has set itself exacting
targets. Most important is the target to halve the proportion
of people living in abject poverty by the year 2015. Our
own development effort is now geared to the eradication of
poverty. I told last year’s special session that we would
reverse the decline in our development assistance. Recently
we have announced that we are raising our development
budget by £1.6 billion, and our support for health,
education and water projects in Africa by 50 per cent. We
have helped pay for the World Health Organization’s
campaign to roll back malaria. We are trying to put our
money where our mouth is.
Of course, however, these development programmes
only work if the conditions are right, and too much money
has been wasted over the years. That is again why the work
the United Nations is doing to create strong development
partnerships is so important and must be given our full
backing. I call today on all parts of the United Nations
system, including the Bretton Woods institutions and the
World Trade Organization, to give top priority to effective
coordination of their development efforts. The poor of
this world will otherwise be the losers.
If we want to eradicate poverty, we also need to
ensure that the least developed countries benefit from this
global economy. That means, for example, letting them
sell their goods without imposing tariffs on them. It
means actively helping them benefit from globalization.
And it means rejecting any false allure of protectionism.
The European Union is committed to zero tariffs for
these countries by the year 2000. And I would urge all
developed countries to follow suit.
We also have to ease the debt burden on the poorest
countries. Britain has proposed the Mauritius Mandate to
speed up assistance for those in the debt trap who are
genuinely ready to help themselves out of it. By the year
2000 all qualifying highly indebted countries should have
embarked on a systematic process of debt reduction, with
the aim of a permanent exit from their debt problems. But
we need to make sure it happens. Again, a huge
collaborative effort between the countries represented here
today will be needed.
Development must not be at the expense of the
environment. We all know this. But, again, this is a
challenge to us. The success of Kyoto was a close-run
thing. Buenos Aires will be hard work, but it has to work.
Countries with the biggest emissions must come forward
quickly with credible plans to meet their Kyoto
commitments. We in Britain will shortly publish a
consultation paper on how we will meet our obligations.
And I hope that others will come forward and do the
same.
The world has high expectations of the United
Nations as the guardian of global peace and security. The
United Nations should not get involved if regional
organizations are better able to tackle a local conflict. But
sometimes we must demonstrate collective global will.
And if we act, we must act decisively. Clear principles
must be our guiding hand. Let me set some out briefly.
First, prevention is always better than cure. The
resources spent on averting conflict are tiny compared to
the expense of peacekeeping once the guns start to fire.
The United Nations is building up its capacity in this
29

area, but it needs more support — and again Britain
pledges to play its part.
Secondly, where we do have to send in the Blue
Helmets, they should be given a clear and achievable task.
There must be no repeat of Bosnia, where peacekeepers
were inserted into a live conflict and told to make safe
areas safe. But they were not given the means to do so.
United Nations peacekeepers need a way out as well
as a way in. They must have the tools to do the job, and
clear and effective command.
Thirdly, the United Nations needs to be able to act and
respond fast. Fast action can prevent a conflict escalating,
underpin a fragile truce, save lives. Again, we in Britain are
trying to play our part. The reshaping of Britain’s armed
forces following our Strategic Defence Review is
transforming our ability to contribute to peacekeeping and
humanitarian operations: more and better equipped rapid-
reaction forces, additional strategic lift and better logistics
capability.
I can announce today that within six months we will
conclude a specific agreement with the United Nations to
ensure that it can make rapid use of what we have to offer
when it is needed — the first such agreement by a
permanent member.
Fourthly, peacekeeping has to be accompanied from
the start by peace-building, to restore justice, democratic
institutions, prosperity and human rights. The Security
Council has to deal with the symptoms of conflict, not
simply with its causes. It needs to work with the rest of the
United Nations, the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund if it is to have lasting impact. Again, I will
be asking the Secretary-General to put to us new proposals
dealing with the consequences and the causes of conflict to
make this a reality.
Too many of those conflicts sill abound. There are few
higher priorities than restoring peace to the Great Lakes
region. The Middle East peace process remains an apparent
deadlock. We have managed to make progress in Northern
Ireland, and the support of the world community in our
doing so has given us great strength and courage to carry
on. We owe a debt of gratitude for that support, and I hope
that the world will continue it. I believe now is the time for
a further move forward in the Middle East, too. Again, we
in Britain are ready to play our part in bringing this about.
I want to focus, however, on one other area of
urgent concern: Kosovo. It almost defies belief that, yet
again, the security forces of President Milosevic´ are
ignoring the clear will of the international community and
inflicting brutality and repression on those they claim to
see as fellow citizens. Of course, we recognize that the
unacceptable actions of the so-called Kosovo Liberation
Army have contributed to the present appalling situation.
But nothing can justify scorched-earth tactics and forcible
creation of hundreds of thousands of refugees.
We have some clear responsibilities in this situation
as an international community. First, we must make it
clear that our patience with broken promises — phoney
assurances that are not honoured — is exhausted.
Continuation of military repression will inevitably lead to
a new kind of response. Secondly, we must impress on
both sides the need to negotiate, with a realistic
appreciation of what is possible, and point the way to a
mutually acceptable solution. Thirdly, we must make it
clear that we have to meet the immediate humanitarian
needs of the refugees in Kosovo and prevent, by any
means necessary, the humanitarian disaster which we can
see just over the horizon as winter approaches.
We propose a new Security Council resolution
calling for an immediate ceasefire and demanding an
urgent end to the trampling of the rights of the inhabitants
of Kosovo. It should be adopted this week, and President
Milosevic´ would ignore such a resolution at his peril.
The international community faces another serious
challenge in Iraq. The Security Council is unanimous in
insisting that Iraq resume cooperation with the United
Nations, and Kofi Annan courageously reached an
important agreement with the Iraqi leadership about the
United Nations Special Commission earlier this year.
Again, this agreement has to be honoured, and we will
play our part in ensuring that it is.
Finally, we face two global scourges which can
undermine our institutions and, indeed, our way of life:
drugs and terrorism. We all know the growing links
between drugs and crime and instability in so many
countries. The insidiously corrupting effect drugs have on
all who come near them — growers, smugglers, pushers
and users alike. We have, as we know, to tackle every
link of the drugs chain, but we are in danger of losing
sight of the size of the mountain we have to climb. If we
are honest with ourselves, this is a war that we are risking
losing, but we must win. Britain, again, is spending a
30

further £200 million at the national level on our priorities,
but our collective efforts need a much stronger focus.
We are not short of organizations looking at this
problem; indeed, there may well be too many. But we are
desperately short of results: cutting supply lines, eliminating
illicit crop cultivation and stopping the profits of the drug
dealers. We have a new instrument, the convention against
organized crime. Too many countries still provide sanctuary
for the proceeds of crime. We must demand together that
those countries root out the traffickers and their dirty
money — hit the drug barons where it hurts. The
convention will provide practical means to achieve this, but
the negotiations are dragging. Let us set ourselves the task
of completing them by the millennium, at the latest.
The fight against terrorism has also taken on a new
urgency. The past year’s global roll-call of terror includes
Luxor, Dar-es-Salaam, Nairobi, Omagh and many others.
Each one is a reminder that terrorism is a uniquely barbaric
and cowardly crime. Each one is a reminder that terrorists
are no respecters of borders. Each one is a reminder that
terrorism should have no hiding place and no
opportunity to raise funds, and that there should be no
let-up in our determination to bring its perpetrators
justice. This applies to the new phenomenon of stateless
terrorism as much as to its more familiar forms.
As a start, it is surely vital that all countries sign up
to the 11 international conventions to ensure that terrorists
have no safe haven. We have ourselves, again, in Britain,
just passed new legislation to ensure we can tackle
terrorist conspiracies aimed at third countries. But we
must go further. We can hope to defeat terrorism only if
we all devote ourselves to doing so. So I welcome the
recent initiative by the President of France to tackle fund-
raising for terrorism on an international basis. As
Chairman of the G-8, I again offer today to host a high-
level conference in London this autumn to deny the
terrorists this means of support. Effective new measures
on an agreed international basis could make a real
difference.
I have covered many points in my speech to the
Assembly, but my main point is really a very simple one.
We face multiple new challenges as we approach the new
century. Our only hope, as we all know, of tackling these
challenges successfully is tackling them together. We
need effective international cooperation and modern
institutions to deal with our political problems and our
economic problems. We need the United Nations system
pulling together as never before. We need to revitalize
and modernize our international institutions to deal with
the crisis in the global economy. But, above all, we need
political will and a sense of urgency. The problems of our
modern world are too pressing, their consequences too
immediate, their impact too far-reaching for us to hesitate
or to look away any longer. We are being given a
warning to act, to give purpose and direction in resolving
these challenges we face together, or pay the price. And
the time to do it — to respond to that warning — is now.


At the outset,
Mr. President, let me extend to you Sri Lanka’s warmest
congratulations on your well-deserved election. We wish
you well and have no doubt that you will guide the work
of this session with wisdom, skill and commitment.
The Assembly owes a debt of gratitude to His
Excellency Mr. Hennadiy Y. Udovenko for his wise and
astute leadership as President of the General Assembly at
its fifty-second session.
22

This year Sri Lanka celebrates the golden jubilee of its
independence. We reclaimed our freedom in 1948, ending
nearly five centuries of colonial domination. We have given
shelter within our land to all the great religions of the
world: Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. We are
a multiethnic and multicultural society. We are deeply
committed to the democratic way of life. Our people have
exercised universal adult franchise since 1931. We have a
parliamentary system of government, with elections held
regularly, where voter participation is uniquely high — as
much as 80 per cent on average. We have an independent
judiciary and free media. The rule of law is observed and
respected. Fundamental rights are guaranteed and rendered
justiciable. We are constantly alert to the protection of
human rights, even in the face of grave provocation from
some lawless elements that are bent on destroying our
democratic society.
Shortly after the achievement of its independence, Sri
Lanka became a member of the United Nations. In the
preamble to the Charter, the founding fathers expressed
their determination to save succeeding generations from the
scourge of war. They reaffirmed their faith in fundamental
human rights. They pledged to establish an environment in
which international law and treaty obligations would be
observed, and to promote the economic and social progress
of all peoples. The United Nations has succeeded in
keeping its basic promise of saving the world from the
holocaust of a global conflict.
But more than 50 years after the Charter was written,
we cannot conclude that the world today is a safer place
than it was when the United Nations was founded. Global
nuclear disarmament remains a distant dream. Nuclear
weapons and weapons of mass destruction have proliferated
with no concern for the safety of humankind despite the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and
the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. Members of
the nuclear club that possess these weapons show no
inclination to dismantle them even though the cold war has
ended and conflicts between States have lessened. The
United Nations has the responsibility to redouble its efforts
to achieve global disarmament. That is a duty we owe to
mankind, to unborn generations. We do not accept the
thesis that these weapons are safe in the hands of some.
The Movement of Non-Aligned Countries has been
demanding for a long time that the Conference on
Disarmament should establish, as its highest priority, a
committee to commence negotiations on a programme for
the complete elimination of nuclear weapons within a time
bound framework.
In 1976 my mother, Mrs. Sirimavo R. D.
Bandaranaike, addressing the Assembly as Prime Minister
of Sri Lanka and chairperson of the Movement of Non-
Aligned Countries, spoke of disarmament in the following
words:
“General and complete disarmament has been
a declared objective of the United Nations and of the
international community for nearly three decades.
“Despite many initiatives taken by this
Organization ... the world has witnessed not even the
semblance of disarmament but a race for supremacy
in destructive power, based on the myth that peace
can be preserved only by strident and single-minded
preparations for war and the refinement and
sophistication of its techniques. It is, indeed, a sad
reflection on the moral and intellectual standards of
the twentieth century and of its values and priorities
that so much of the world’s resources, which might
have been devoted to the eradication of poverty,
ignorance, disease and hunger, are being [wasted on]
the production of monstrous weapons ...
“[We] do not accept the thesis that
disarmament is the special preserve of Powers that
possess the paraphernalia of war. Every nation and
every individual has a right to peace, and just as
peace is indivisible so is the responsibility for its
preservation. Hence the call of the non-aligned
nations for a special session of the General
Assembly devoted to disarmament and agreement for
a world conference.” (A/31/PV.11, paras. 37-39)
At the recently concluded Non-Aligned Movement
Summit, held in South Africa under the chairmanship of
President Nelson Mandela, the Movement once again
expressed its preoccupation with the issue of global
nuclear disarmament. In the years ahead the clamour for
disarmament among the great majority of nations will
grow in volume. The Non-Aligned Movement has
consistently called for the Geneva-based Conference on
Disarmament to establish, as the highest priority, an ad
hoc committee to commence negotiations on a programme
for the complete elimination of nuclear weapons within a
time-bound framework. In addition, there is also a
proposal for a nuclear weapons convention. We have to
address these challenges as we approach the new
millennium. The longer we shirk our responsibility, the
greater the danger that looms ahead.
23

Today I have the honour and privilege of addressing
the Assembly as the newly appointed chairperson of the
South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation
(SAARC), which met in Colombo a few months ago.
SAARC represents one fifth of humanity. South Asia is heir
to a rich and complex plurality of cultural and religious
traditions of great antiquity.
Like any other association of sovereign States, we
have our share of problems. But I wish to convey my
confident belief that our summit meetings last year and this
year have marked a turning point in the life of our
association. Our leaders are aware of the awesome
obligations that we jointly owe to the hundreds of millions
of people who inhabit our region. We are determined to put
aside the political differences that bedevil relations among
some of us, in a common and united effort to improve the
quality of life of our peoples.
The message I bring from the Colombo Summit is that
the prospects for enhanced economic, technological, social
and scientific cooperation in our region are exceedingly
bright. It is the will of our leaders, as vigorously manifested
at the Colombo Summit. I am deeply indebted to my fellow
Heads of State and Government for their invaluable advice
and cooperation, and especially to the Prime Ministers of
India and Pakistan for the magnificent spirit of friendship
and understanding they showed for the collective regional
interests and concerns.
SAARC too, like the Non-Aligned Movement,
recognizes that the twin currents of globalization and
liberalization which are swirling around us contain both the
potential for prosperity as well as the seed of a dangerous
new process of uneven development. It must be
remembered that developing countries need special
consideration in regard to the problems they face in
globalizing their economies.
However, what is abundantly clear is that not a single
State, not even the most powerful, can hope to remain
immune from economic disease and contagion. Ripples
have spread widely from the economic upheavals of East
Asia and Russia. The maladies that spring from economic
globalization require remedies which are global in scope,
remedies which must take account of the ailments of all
States and not be based solely on the prescriptions
advanced by those who may seem to be secure.
United Nations bodies must play a critical role in all
this, particularly by facilitating and fostering international
cooperation for equitable development that could resist the
economic contagion that now afflicts us. The international
monetary mechanism has proved desperately inadequate
in handling the recent crises. We now have to think in
terms of a new financial architecture to obtain radical
reforms of the international monetary system. This should
aim at achieving a balance between the adjustments
demanded as against available financing.
I wish to propose three areas of action that merit
serious consideration: first, that a “lender of last resort”
facility must be formulated to meet the problems of
volatile capital movements; secondly, that effective
international surveillance devices must be designed to
anticipate problems before the demolition squads of
speculators move in; and thirdly, that the resumption of
the Special Drawing Rights of the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) be a vital requirement of the proposed
restructuring. The major voting Powers of the IMF, as
well as the developing nations, will have to consider
larger allocations than are now contemplated. In the
meantime, we should beware of attempts to liberalize
capital accounts before the modernization of national
financial structures and the reforms of the international
monetary system are in place.
A constructive dialogue between developed and
developing countries must be pursued on the basis of
mutual benefit and shared responsibilities. Closer
consultation should be promoted between groups like the
Group of 7, the G-77 and the G-15.
Institutions such as the World Trade Organization
must live up to their declared aims and genuinely
facilitate a transparent, rule-based trading system that
would permit stable growth. The United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
should not be neglected. It should be strengthened as the
focal point in the United Nations family for the integrated
consideration of issues of trade, finance, technology and
investment.
More funds for development activity need to be
diverted from the United Nations administrative budget.
The United Nations Agenda for Development, which was
launched with great expectations, seems to be losing
momentum. Its implementation should not be delayed.
Development is not merely a matter of economic
growth and financial enrichment, to be measured in
statistics, which can sometimes be misleading and
illusory. The totality of the human condition must be
enhanced and improved. Our commitment and
24

responsibility towards economic and social development
should not be minimized and made secondary to other
issues which, though important, do not touch on the well-
being of humanity. It is a grievous indictment on us that the
age-old problems of grinding poverty and starvation still
exist in today’s world. I appeal to the assembled nations not
to allow ourselves to be beguiled or dazzled by the
explosion of exciting new technologies, the seductive
blandishments of global trade and high finance to the extent
that the poor, the deprived, the desperate fall away from
our agenda into the limbo of forgotten things. We must not
forget that the least developed countries have special
problems that cry out for attention. We must strive
mightily, relentlessly, to banish these problems in the next
century.
The G-77 has proposed that a third world summit be
held in the year 2000 to mark the dawn of the new century.
Sri Lanka supports the proposal as an opportunity for
developing countries to chart their own agenda for
development in the new era.
The countries of SAARC agreed at Colombo that to
complement economic progress, a Social Charter should be
drawn up for the benefit of our peoples in South Asia. This
would focus on determining practical, basic norms in the
areas of poverty eradication, the empowerment of women,
the mobilization of youth, the promotion of health and
nutrition, and the protection of children.
We must make a special effort to dissipate the effects
of the discriminatory, social and psychological perceptions
that affect the status of women. The SAARC heads of State
or Government condemned violence against women as well
as acts of discrimination and humiliation which further
depress the dignity of women. There was particular concern
over the plight of women and girl children caught in
situations of armed conflict.
In Colombo, the SAARC States finalized the draft text
of a regional convention on combating the crime of
trafficking in women and children for prostitution, which
will be signed at the next summit in Nepal. Within Sri
Lanka, my Government has adopted a national plan of
action based on the relevant conclusions of the Fourth
World Conference on Women, held in Beijing, and on the
specifics of our own national situation. The Constitution of
Sri Lanka enshrines the fundamental right of equality
between the sexes. We have ratified International Labour
Organization (ILO) Conventions guaranteeing equal
remuneration and other benefits to women. We have
strengthened legal provisions against harassment and
sexual abuse of women.
With regard to children, my Government has
recently passed legislation to set up a National Child
Protection Authority directly under my supervision. This
Authority deals with such issues as child employment, the
sexual exploitation of children, education, health and the
plight of children trapped in armed conflict. We have
formulated a “Children’s Charter” and a National Plan of
Action to provide for the safety and protection of our
children. While we are conscious of the tragic incidence
of child prostitution and pornography in our country, we
have also traced the insidious international linkages which
aggravate the problem further. We urge the international
community to tighten laws and enforcement mechanisms
to ensure that those responsible for such heinous crimes
will not receive refuge anywhere.
A particularly cruel offence against the innocence of
children is their forced recruitment by a terrorist group in
Sri Lanka to serve as suicide killers in the name of a
cause they are too young even to comprehend.
This is just one sordid aspect of the activities of a
terrorist group known as the Tamil Tigers — or the
LTTE. They seek to dismember Sri Lanka, with the
objective of creating in our land a monoethnic and racist
entity — an objective totally unacceptable to the
overwhelming majority in the country and even to the
very community whose cause the LTTE claims to
represent.
We believe that ethnic grievances exist in Sri Lanka.
I said so in my address to the nation at the fiftieth
anniversary celebrations of our independence this year. I
said that the golden jubilee of independence was an
occasion for reflection, as well as the renewal of hopes
and aspirations. It was an occasion to savour applause for
our achievements and also to rue the consequences of
failure. I said:
“We must also with humility examine our failures.
We have failed in the essential task of nation-
building. We have meandered and faltered along that
path, whilst among our neighbours in Asia and in
many other countries, peoples of various racial,
religious and linguistic communities live in
harmony. The causes of this failure will be judged
by history. Others will apportion and assign blame.
25

“Let us, those of us who have undertaken the
responsibility to guide and govern the Nation, march
towards the future in unison, putting behind us mean
desires for petty personal or political gain. The
Nation’s need today is so great and urgent that it
permits space only for largesse of heart and mind,
which will supersede in the national interest all that is
irrelevant and small.”
My Government is firmly committed to redressing
ethnic grievances peacefully through political discussion.
We have presented a comprehensive proposal for
addressing the ethnic grievances through a wide devolution
of political power. The vast majority of our people, of all
communities, have welcomed these proposals. Only the
LTTE chooses to prowl the path of violence, resorting to
terror to achieve goals which it alone espouses. However,
we have kept the doors open to the LTTE to join other Sri
Lankans in negotiating a settlement of all outstanding ethnic
issues if it eschews terrorism and its bloody call for a
separate State.
The LTTE claims to be a “liberation organization”
while it murders hundreds upon hundreds of the Tamil
people it claims to liberate when they disagree with the
LTTE’s terror politics. Several Tamil leaders of democratic
political parties, including members of parliament and two
mayors, as well as Tamil human rights activists, have been
brutally murdered by the LTTE. Its claim to be a
“liberation organization” is negated by its unilateral resort
to violence and its constant refusal to put its claims to the
true test — that of participating in an open, democratic,
peaceful process of consultation with the people.
By contrast, in Palestine, Chairman Arafat pursues
what he calls “the peace of the brave”, confident not only
of the justice of his cause, but also of the strength of
support freely given by the Palestinian people to achieve
their inalienable right in Palestine. During the SAARC
summit, we expressed growing concern at numerous
setbacks affecting the peace process in the Middle East,
including illegal attempts to change the jurisdiction and the
borders of Jerusalem.
Over the past few years the Government of Sri Lanka
has in various international forums strongly advocated the
need for collective international action in order to overcome
the scourge of terrorism. Our reasoning has been that a
group like the ruthless LTTE, which continues to frustrate
every effort at finding a negotiated political settlement to
our ethnic problem, has found sustenance in the liberal
asylum policies that prevail in some countries. This group,
which recruits children as young as 10 years,
indiscriminately targets innocent civilians, assassinates the
elected representatives of the people, including Tamil
political and human rights leaders, destroys places of
religious worship and assassinates foreign heads of
Government on their soil, is permitted to operate freely in
many countries. It maintains an international network
which engages in fund-raising, narcotics trafficking, trade
in illicit arms, the smuggling of illegal immigrants and, in
more recent times, maritime and cyber-terrorism.
Addressing the United Nations fiftieth anniversary
celebrations in New York three years ago, I observed:
“Concerted international action is essential to combat
terrorism and to compel the terrorists to renounce
violence and enter the democratic process.
Unfortunately, effective action to that end has been
frustrated through sterile philosophical debate about
the nature of terrorism.” (A/50/PV.35, p. 9)
I am happy to note that since then significant
measures have been taken. The adoption of the United
Nations International Convention for the Suppression of
Terrorist Bombings earlier this year has been a
considerable moral victory for the international
community in its fight against terrorism. Sri Lanka is
hopeful that all States will speedily take steps to
implement the necessary domestic legislation, aimed at
giving effect to the commitments made in the Convention,
to ensure that terrorists are neither provided safe haven
nor permitted to raise funds within the borders of one
State to sustain terrorist activities in another State.
While we enact legislation, we must also be eternally
vigilant to ensure that terrorists do not find loopholes in
our laws to circumvent the emerging international
consensus against terrorism. We are particularly conscious
of the capacity of terrorist groups to resort to the strategy
of using front organizations for raising funds which end
up in the LTTE war chest to contribute towards
murdering and brutalizing our people. Moral and legal
sanctions against terrorists are not enough. Laws must be
effectively implemented. Only by such concerted action
shall we be able to ensure that terrorists are compelled to
renounce violence and enter the democratic process.
Here I would like to thank India and the United
States of America, in particular, for having recognized
and declared the LTTE to be the terrorist organization
that it is, as well as for encouraging my Government to
settle this problem by political means. I would like to add
26

here that this is an internal problem that Sri Lanka is fully
able and ready to resolve, with the full support of its
peoples. We will not tolerate any outside interference, while
we appreciate all the support given us by our friends abroad
in resolving this conflict.
If at this stage I mention Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi of
Myanmar it is because I am personally aware of the
loneliness, the anguish, the difficulties and dangers that a
woman leader faces in political life. The people of Sri
Lanka and the people of Myanmar and their Governments
have been friends over many centuries. Our peoples share
an invaluable heritage — the timeless message of the
Buddha, the enlightened one who taught the world the
meaning of compassion, tolerance and understanding. This
message moves me to express the hope that political issues
in Myanmar may be approached in a spirit of conciliation
and tolerance.
In all this, a catalytic role can and must be played by
the United Nations system. The United Nations has passed
its half-century mark. The Secretary-General has described
the United Nations as “a noble experiment in human
cooperation”. Last year was designated the year of United
Nations reform, and we are happy that a major portion of
the reforms introduced have been implemented. Some
others require further study.
We are aware of the financial crisis the United Nations
is facing due to the default of certain Member States in
paying their contributions. We urge them to pay their dues
fully, without conditions and on time.
We are disappointed that agreement has not been
reached over the reconstitution of the Security Council to
reflect better the generality of United Nations membership.
The Council should be more representative, and its
deliberations more transparent and democratic, thus
responding to the concerns of all and shedding its image,
not entirely inaccurate, of largely serving the interests of
the major Powers.
In the closing years of the present millennium, the
world is a far more complex place than it was when the
United Nations Charter was adopted. The range and
ramifications of the issues with which the Organization
must contend have dramatically increased. Change in the
orientation of the United Nations must keep pace with new
realities. The Secretary-General’s Programme for Reform
is a step in the right direction. Yet nothing will contribute
more to the success of the United Nations than the extent
of Member States’ commitment to the Organization’s
decisions. The credibility and strength of those decisions
will itself depend on the transparency of the decision-
making process and on how closely Member States
identify with those decisions. If the United Nations is to
continue on its voyage into the twenty-first century with
renewed vigour, to achieve its objectives of peace,
security, economic development and social reform, all its
Members must be empowered to participate meaningfully
and at every level of the decision-making process.
To this end, two important reforms must be placed
on our agenda. First, the enlargement of the Security
Council so that it will more fully represent two thirds of
the world populace is an indispensable requirement. The
developing nations and the regions of the world in which
they predominate must have permanent representation on
the Security Council.
Secondly, the crucial role of the General Assembly
in the decision-making process of the United Nations
must be recognized and guaranteed. The United Nations
General Assembly is the supreme parliament of mankind.
Today the era of the cold war is over. Economic
globalization is breaking down national boundaries to an
extent that would have been unimaginable a few decades
ago. The world is truly on the threshold of a new order
which surely cannot be driven any more by the narrow
national concerns that have paralysed the imagination of
mankind for so long. Never before in human history have
we been presented with the stupendous possibilities that
surround us today of breaking the mundane bonds that
bind us to banality and triviality. When the unconquered,
unconquerable spirit of mankind is allowed to soar to its
full potential we will achieve a world in which truth and
justice prevail, a world which we can proudly bequeath to
the unborn generations of our peoples.
Prime Minister S. W. R. D. Bandaranaike, my late
father, addressing this Assembly at its eleventh session, in
1956, spoke as follows:
“In an Organization such as this, the service that a
country can render ... is not to be measured alone by
the size of that country, its population, its power or
its strength. This is an Organization which expresses
itself most effectively by bringing to bear a certain
moral force — the collective moral force and
decency of human beings. That is a task in which
the weak as well as the strong can render a useful
service, and I give the Assembly the assurance, on
behalf of my country, that as far as we are
27

concerned, every endeavour that we can make in all
sincerity to assist in the achievements of those noble
ideals for which this Organization stands will always
be forthcoming in the fullest measure.” (A/PV.590,
para. 42)
Addressing this Assembly 42 years later, I make bold
to say that Sri Lanka remains a loyal and dedicated
Member of this Organization. We have made a contribution
to the quality of its deliberations and to the implementation
of its programmes. We are deeply committed to the
principles of the Charter. We believe in the United Nations.
We want it to be a strong, principled and effective body,
the common inheritance of all mankind, not the preserve of
a few wealthy and powerful States, but the guardian of all,
especially the poor, the weak and the defenceless.


Allow me first to congratulate
the President and wish him every success in carrying out
his responsible task. The delegation of Poland will do its
best to assist him in his important functions.
I also pay tribute to the outgoing President,
Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, an eminent statesman from
Ukraine, a country with which we have developed good-
neighbourly ties of friendship and cooperation, for his
excellent guidance of the work of the Assembly during its
fifty-second session.
I would also like to assure the Secretary-General,
Mr. Kofi Annan, not only of our respect and admiration,
but also of our continued support for his tireless efforts to
make the United Nations live up to the expectations of
the twenty-first century and to the ideals set out in the
Charter.
We have a saying in Poland that is variously
attributed to the Chinese or to the Jews — two nations
well steeped in suffering and in wisdom:
“Unfortunate one, you shall live to see your dreams
satisfied.”
And I, indeed, have come to experience the full measure
of that truth. Ten years ago a dissident, I could barely
even dream that I would be at the helm of my free
nation?s foreign affairs, and in that role preside over the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE), an organization which spans three continents in
its attempt to promote security and cooperation in a
conflict-torn world.
And yet those 10 years ago, had I imagined that
such a future were possible I would probably have
believed that a man in my position could indeed help
change the world, make it a better, safer place. Like so
many of us present here in this Hall, I had to learn the
bitter lessons of the limitations of power. These lessons
should indeed teach us humility, but not serve as an alibi
for not assuming our obligations.
The world today is a better and safer place than it
was 10 years ago, before the fall of the Berlin Wall. For
all the needless suffering, the agony of hunger, the
scourge of ethnic hatred and war, the shame of
underdevelopment, the evil of oppression that human
beings had to endure in so many places on the face of the
planet — these are less than a decade ago. And even now
the perpetrators attempt to conceal their doings, to show
it is not so, and more, that suffering is contentment, war
is peace, and oppression is liberty. Hypocrisy, as we all
know, is a compliment sin pays to virtue.
The world is a better place because time and time
again evil has been avoided, circumscribed or reduced
thanks to preventive action taken by concerned States.
This action could be something as simple as sending food
20

where there is none, or as complicated as over a dozen
nations pooling their military resources to prevent a new
outbreak of ethnic hatred in Bosnia, and helping to rebuild
that devastated nation.
The world will never be the same. The world economy
is currently confronted with the biggest financial challenge
in a half century. We note the increasing interest on the
part of politicians as well as economists in market
intervention and capital controls. Obviously, a serious
situation may indeed call for desperate remedies, but the
really serious risk to the world economy seems to lie in a
retreat from free market ideals and principles.
Actions to limit the spread of weapons of mass
destruction are an evident reflection of efforts made to
consolidate peace and international security. Systematic
progress in the field of nuclear disarmament, apart from
important American-Russian and American-Chinese
agreements, could become even more notable if the
Parliament of the Russian Federation, heeding the appeals
by the international community, ratified the START II
agreements. We expect and hope that the indispensable
decision will be taken in Moscow with no further delay.
We welcome the decision of the Geneva Conference
on Disarmament to enter negotiations on a treaty banning
the production of fissile material for nuclear weapons and
other nuclear weapons and other nuclear explosive devices.
This is a significant and indispensable step for the further
consolidation of the global regime of non-proliferation of
nuclear weapons.
At the same time, we witness with concern and regret
the developments in South Asia that are so dangerous to
peace and international security. Although we do not
question the right of any nation to sovereign decisions on
issues concerning its national security interests, nothing, in
our opinion, justifies acceptance of the nuclear option. The
choice of the road of nuclear armaments by India and
Pakistan comes as a blow to the ideals personified by
Mahatma Gandhi.
Together with the entire international community, we
address to the leaders of India and Pakistan an appeal to
refrain from any actions that could make the situation
worse in the Indian subcontinent and to join, immediately
and unconditionally, the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban
Treaty (CTBT).
The sixteenth-century Polish humanist Jakub Przyluski
wrote:
“Since man is ... more inclined to live in society
than bees, ants or cranes, an isolated life is a thing
most contrary to human nature. Man could then
neither suffice to himself, nor come to the rescue of
others... And since nature has established some kind
of affinity between us, and the same definition
encompasses all humankind, we are to consider it
vile if man threatens man.”
We, indeed, consider it vile if man threatens man.
But it is in our nature, or at least in our better nature, to
come to the rescue of others, the more so if by making
others more secure, our own security is enhanced.
Furthermore, neighbours usually know best the nature of
the problems affecting the neighbourhood; they are
therefore best placed to try to resolve them. That is why
the concept of collective security is becoming so
increasingly important and popular. But we must all learn
this if this Organization is to successfully negotiate the
transition into the twenty-first century. The United
Nations has grown beyond the hopes and expectations —
indeed, beyond control.
Many of its specialized agencies accomplish their
important jobs quietly and efficiently. We have perfect
relations with many of them, especially with the United
Nations Development Programme office in Warsaw.
The Secretary-General is to be praised for his efforts
to make the United Nations a better example of how the
world?s institutions could function, rather than a cartoon
of the way they actually do. But he can do this only with
our support. Also, we can no longer delay the reform of
the Security Council and the General Assembly. I am sure
all of us look towards these changes with some dread,
because knowing how wrong things could have turned
out, we cannot believe that they have been going right
until now. The United Nations is ripe for change.
One of the most pressing issues on the United
Nations reform agenda is the financial crisis. It is true this
crisis is due in great part to the mismanagement of
resources and, at times, excessive spending. But at least
as much can be attributed to the deficit brought about by
some Members? refusal to pay their dues on time. True,
it is in large part because that pressure that a favourable
climate for change emerged within the institution itself.
It has become a truism to say that peacekeeping is
ineffective when there is no peace to keep, and that
peacemaking is impossible if there is no will to sustain
the unavoidable costs. But this does not mean that
21

peacekeeping is ineffective. A wide spectrum of examples,
from Cyprus to Moldova, shows that the contrary is true.
But even in a successful peacekeeping operation we run the
risk that we will not only keep the peace but also preserve
the hatreds, envies and jealousies which were the root
causes of the conflict in the first place. In this sense, each
peacekeeping operation must also be one of peacemaking.
Armed conflicts between States are giving way to
internal conflicts, as in Rwanda and in the former
Yugoslavia. Consequently, the United Nations peacekeeping
forces are being faced, in many cases, with the dilemma of
having to depart from the principle of non-interference in
the internal affairs of the State that is being torn apart by
a civil war. We remain convinced that when a direct threat
is posed to peace and security, the United Nations must be
properly equipped to discharge its role and should not
remain indifferent and ignore human suffering.
Poland is proud of its continuous participation in
United Nations peacekeeping efforts, following our old
tradition of struggle “for freedom, ours and yours”. We are
currently providing the largest contingent of troops involved
in United Nations peacekeeping operations. We are
convinced that the Organization should not allow the
highest price to be paid in terms of the lives of women and
men serving in the field under the United Nations banner.
The security of people in United Nations peacekeeping and
humanitarian operations must be ensured.
My country finds itself at the centre of European
transformation. Our aspirations to join European and trans-
Atlantic political and military structures are in the process
of being satisfied, fulfilling the dreams of a nation long
subject to the cataclysms of European history. But far from
turning our back on our neighbours who as yet remain
outside these structures, we indeed wish to intensify our
cooperation with them. We believe this would be conducive
to a better climate on the continent, and in the best interests
of both our neighbours and our allies.
This is especially true of our cooperation with other
Central European nations. Poland, solidly anchored in
collective security and regional cooperation structures, can
develop in peace and security and substantially contribute
to the development of others. If there ever was a win-win
scenario, this is it.
It would be arrogant and unhelpful if we believed we
could give lessons to others. But we do believe deeply that
our experience of the last decade shows that nations can
move away from authoritarianism, through negotiations —
what we called round-table negotiations — to then
successfully build a democratic system based on the rule
of law, individual freedoms, freedom of economic
enterprise and political democracy. To those, near or far,
who proclaim that theirs will be a different course, based
on the presumed specificity of their culture, history,
customs and circumstance, we say, “Please reconsider. Do
not waste the creative energy of your nations in futile
experiments and grotesque performances.” This will not
work. And time is a resource none can afford to waste.
But at the same time, to those who would say,
“Follow us, for history has proved that we are right”, —
we would like to say that even among friends we can
differ. We do not believe too much in the efficacy of
punishment and sanction. Rather, we expect that nations
need to develop apace. We can but help them on their
way.
This is best seen in the functioning of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE), which my country has the honour of chairing
this year. It would be hard to imagine a collection of
nations more geographically, historically, economically,
culturally and politically diverse. Assuming the
chairmanship of this organization for 1998, we have faced
important questions and challenges. Can the organization
that is the heritage of the past successfully cope with the
challenges of the future? Is it needed during a period of
both globalization and regionalization, a period of multi-
polarity, when we are striving for the universalization of
the Earth?s civilization? Will it be able to prevent
conflicts and regulate inter-State relations?
The Polish chairmanship started at the moment of
significant changes in the so-called European security
environment: when the Atlantic Alliance decided on its
enlargement; when a conflict erupted in Kosovo,
threatening South-Eastern Europe with destabilization;
when the countries of Central Asia, born from the
territory of the former Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics, signalled their more intensive interest in
joining the current of values that are the foundation of the
OSCE; and when signs of another crisis appeared in
Russia. There arose the question of how to include OSCE
activity in United Nations efforts for peace and security.
We have found constructive and positive answers to
many of those questions. The organization of an all-
inclusive membership of the States of the region, from
Vancouver to Vladivostok, turned out to be necessary to
respond to threats left by the cold war. Two priorities
22

came to the fore: to prevent conflicts by reaching the roots
at their early stage of appearance and to strengthen human
rights and democracy, which the OSCE calls the “human
dimension”. We have also taken up the ambitious challenge
of preparing a European security charter, which would help
to facilitate the functioning of cooperation in security within
the OSCE, and would make it possible for all States,
regardless of their membership in alliances or other
groupings, to participate in the common effort of building
a safe, democratic and united Europe.
We want the OSCE community to have neither centre
nor peripheries, neither more equal nor less equal. In many
cases, as in the conflicts in Kosovo or Tajikistan, the lesson
was bitter. One of the conclusions is that in the
contemporary world, no organization can act alone. The
consolidation of standards of civilizational cooperation
within the OSCE must be coherent with the activity of
other organizations, in this case the United Nations, the
European Union, the North Atlantic Alliance, the Council
of Europe and subregional organizations such as the
Council of the Baltic States.
We need this solidarity. There I wish to comment on
the resolution adopted by the Security Council yesterday
concerning Kosovo. It was an example of unity and
solidarity, and I hope it will send a message to stop the
bloodshed in that region and stop the activities of all those
who are trying to introduce violence, repression and
terrorism there.
The OSCE has been able to engage in preventive
diplomacy. We have done so together; we have
strengthened our collective security together; we have
fielded a host of projects in almost every imaginable sphere
of human collective activity. In all fairness, one has to take
into consideration the conflicts avoided elsewhere in the
Balkans, as well as in Central Asia and in the Caucasus.
We do not proclaim to be a model for others. The
organization itself developed almost by chance, as a
fortuitous assembly of the members of the two cold-war
blocs. But we have been able to manage the transition and
to set standards that we all try to maintain. Maybe other
regions of conflicting interests could use some of our
experience, both the successes and the mistakes.
In the Middle East, we are facing a challenging and
difficult time. Poland is committed to a just, lasting and
comprehensive peace in that region. Therefore, we are
deeply concerned by the stalemate in the peace process, and
we strongly support all efforts to revitalize it, on the basis
of Security Council resolutions, the principles of the
Madrid Conference and the Oslo accords.
In many aspects the world is now a safer and better
place to live in than it was a decade ago. But there are
new threats and dangers. We must deter and defeat
terrorist acts. Poland continues to promote the idea of the
elaboration of the comprehensive convention against
organized crime, which should generate wide and efficient
cooperation between States, since organized transnational
crime cannot be successfully suppressed by any State
alone.
Borderlines are blurred. Ordinary crime blends with
the organized underworld, which in turn intermingles with
the terrorist community, and that in turn finds support and
relief in more than one of the world?s capitals. Drugs and
guns are replacing more conventional currencies as the
universal currency of evil, profits from one serving to
promote the dissemination of the other, in a concerted
assault on human life itself. It is indeed a culture of death
which seems to unite those who put guns and drugs into
the hands of the young and teach them to hate others
because they are of the wrong faith, race or nation. We
cannot counter that evil with the same decisiveness, haste
and cunning. We can, however, continue to support the
alternative: a culture of life, founded on respect for the
individual, his inalienable rights, dignity and freedom. In
terms of everyday reality, this means that the determined
effort of all States is required to implement the basic
conventions guaranteeing these values — to implement
them at home and to refuse to tolerate their violations
abroad.
Of these conventions, perhaps none is more
important than the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, whose fiftieth anniversary we have been solemnly
celebrating. And yet, among States whose representatives
have expressed their attachment to that document, not a
few deny their citizens the basic rights the Declaration
guarantees. Obviously, the powerful political interests
which lie behind such behaviour will not bow to simple
declarations, nor will the international democratic
community use force to implement its values.
It is our deep conviction that we should continuously
adapt United Nations human rights machinery to present
and future developments in this area. The biggest
challenge we have been facing over recent years is the
violation of human rights in the context of armed
conflicts and tensions of a domestic or civil character. For
years the international community has not been able to
23

cope with this problem, although in the meantime the
United Nations has developed a significant peacekeeping
capacity. It is only after the traumatic experience in the
former Yugoslavia and in the Great Lakes region that the
approach has changed.
“No man is an island”; no State is an island.
Connected, as the Polish writer whom I quoted said, by a
common definition of our humanity, we cannot help but try
to implement the noblest goal, incarnate in the name of this
Organization: the Nations United, in our common humanity,
our planet and our future.


Allow me first of all, on behalf of the
delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
to congratulate Mr. Didier Opertti, Minister for Foreign
Affairs of Uruguay, on his election to the presidency of the
General Assembly at its current session. We believe that his
rich experience and diplomatic skill in dealing with
international affairs will lead this session to fruitful results.
We also express our gratitude to the former President,
Mr. Hennadiy Udovenko, for his successful stewardship of
the fifty-second session of the General Assembly. At the
same time, I wish to take this opportunity to express our
appreciation to Secretary-General Kofi Annan for his efforts
devoted to the maintenance of international peace and
security.
It is the wish and aspiration of humankind to make the
forthcoming twenty-first century peaceful and prosperous.
In this connection, we believe that working out appropriate
ways and means to achieve that end should be the main
focus of the current session.
The next century should be one of independence. In
order to build a world free of all forms of domination and
subordination and to ensure equality among all countries
and nations, independence should be realized throughout the
world. Only when all Member States adhere to the Juche
character and the national character and firmly maintain
independence in all fields of State activities can
international peace and security also be ensured.
At the first session of the tenth Supreme People’s
Assembly of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
held on 5 September this year, our people unanimously reelected with high esteem the Great Leader Comrade Kim
Jong Il as Chairman of the National Defence Committee.
The chairmanship of the National Defence Committee is the
highest post of the State, organizing and leading the work
of defending the country and the destiny of the people, as
well as strengthening and increasing the defence capabilities
of the country and State power as a whole through
command over all its political, military and economic
forces. It is a sacred and important post that symbolizes
and represents the honour of the country and the dignity
of the nation.
The election of our Great Leader General Kim Jong
Il as Chairman of the National Defence Committee is the
most significant event in the sacred cause of strengthening
and developing our Republic and in achieving prosperity
and happiness for all generations to come. It is a vivid
expression of our people’s absolute trust in, support for
and boundless loyalty to their leader.
Some time ago, our people enthusiastically
celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the
Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. What pleased
our people most at this emotional juncture was the fact
that our scientists and technicians successfully launched
into orbit an artificial satellite, Kwangmyongsong No. 1,
using a multi-stage rocket carrier developed by us in our
own way, with our own knowledge and 100 per cent our
own technology. It was the first of its kind in the country.
The successful launching of our first artificial satellite
was an historic event demonstrating the might of our
scientific and technical development, and it will make a
great contribution to safeguarding world peace and
enriching the store of science and technology for
humankind.
In the last 50 years, the Government of our Republic
has been able to safeguard the sovereignty of our country,
advance the socialism chosen by our people towards
victory and defend peace on the Korean peninsula by
holding fast to the Juche character and the national
character, while firmly maintaining independence in all
fields of State activities.
Throughout the country our entire population is now
fully determined to glorify our socialism, which is centred
on the popular masses, under the banner of the Republic
founded by our Great Leader Comrade Kim Il Sung, the
founding father of socialist Korea. The people uphold the
leadership of the respected and beloved General Kim Jong
Il. In the near future, the world will see the independent
and peace-loving Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
develop into a prosperous Power.
The reunification of Korea and peace and security on
the Korean peninsula have long been a main area of
concern for the international community. From the
viewpoint of both the misfortune and suffering of a nation
31

and the peace and security of a region, the division of the
Korean peninsula should not last any longer. Due to the
fact that Korea has not yet been reunified, military
confrontation and tensions grow increasingly aggravated
between the United States, Japan and South Korea, on the
one hand, and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea
on the other.
As a result of the present military manoeuvres against
the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on and around
the Korean peninsula, there is a growing danger that either
the twentieth century may close or the twenty-first century
may open with another Korean war. This danger should be
removed by all possible means. In order to remove the
danger of war and ensure a durable peace on the Korean
peninsula, the reunification of the country should be
achieved without fail.
Independence, peaceful reunification and great national
unity are the three principles of national reunification
agreed upon between the North and the South. These
principles were also welcomed and supported by the United
Nations. The Government of our Republic consistently
maintains that Korea should be reunified by means of
confederacy on the basis of the three principles of
reunification. In April this year, our Great Leader, Comrade
Kim Jong Il, advanced the five-point policy for the great
unity of the entire nation as part of his continued efforts for
national reunification.
The main elements of the five-point policy are the
principle of national independence; a change in policy by
the South Korean authorities towards reconciliation and
alliance with the North; dialogue for the unity and
reunification of the whole nation; the promotion of
coexistence, co-prosperity and public interests between the
North and the South; and solidarity and coalition between
the North, South and the international community. The
Government of our Republic will spare no effort to achieve
these points.
We have been consistently in favour of dialogue for
reunification and to improve relations between the North
and South of Korea. The North-South dialogue should be
conducted on the basis of the principles of placing the
common interests of the nation above all, removing distrust
and confrontation between the North and the South and
subordinating everything to the cause of national
reunification. No one should be allowed to use dialogue for
dishonest political purposes or to perpetuate the division of
the country. If the South Korean authorities show their
sincere desire for reunification by taking practical
actions — such as abolishing the National Security Law
and the like — we will meet with them at any time and
hold dialogues and consultations to discuss the common
destiny of the nation and work together for national
reunification.
In order for the Korean people to resolve the
questions of national unity and reunification by
themselves, concerned countries, including the United
States and Japan, should refrain from hindering the efforts
of the Korean people. The United States Army is the
main military entity in South Korea and has long been in
belligerent relations with us. This is a quite abnormal
phenomenon in today’s post-cold-war international
relations and the product of anachronistic thinking. It is
the United States military entity and no other that
constitutes the major obstacle in the way of the
independent and peaceful reunification of Korea. In this
forum, we once again strongly urge the United States to
withdraw its forces from South Korea and to end its
belligerent relations with us. The States Members of the
United Nations should no longer claim to be unaware that
the name and flag of the United Nations continue to be
abused to conceal these belligerent relations.
We are convinced that the most appropriate way of
maintaining peace on the Korean peninsula is to dissolve
the United Nations command in South Korea and to
conclude a peace agreement between the Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea and the United States. This is
our unchanging position.
Japan should not hinder the cause of our
reunification by aggravating the tense situation on the
Korean peninsula. Japan must discharge its responsibility
for the Korean question by sincerely apologizing and
providing compensation for its enormous crimes against
our people, instead of attempting to declare war against
us by drawing up so-called “emergency legislation”,
aimed at keeping pace militarily with the United States,
the belligerent party with us.
Recently, too, the Japanese authorities behaved
unreasonably when they publicly questioned our satellite
launch and acted rashly in taking the issue to the Security
Council, insisting that it respond to our launch. This was
a flagrant mockery of the international community. If our
satellite launch is a serious security concern, Japan’s
satellite launches should be top priority for the Security
Council’s consideration.
32

With just one year to go before the twenty-first
century, the United Nations is faced with the task of
building a new world free from all forms of domination and
subordination. New challenges in safeguarding world peace
and security, achieving the denuclearization of the world
and ensuring social progress and economic development
require the United Nations to find appropriate new
measures.
Almost all the recent attempts by a few big countries,
as opposed to the United Nations membership as a whole,
to deal with international matters have met with failure.
This proves that the era of power politics and big-Power
arbitrary action ended with the cold war. The United
Nations is now at a crossroads. It can either be dictated to
by big countries or become the Organization of a new era
in which the purposes and principles of its Charter are
safeguarded and fully realized. The reform of the United
Nations should correctly reflect this reality.
At present, the most undemocratic organ in the United
Nations system is the Security Council. The current
composition of the Council does not represent the general
United Nations membership and the veto power of its
permanent members often subverts the wishes of the
majority of member States.
If the United Nations is to be democratized, the
Security Council should be reformed. To this end, the
expansion of the non-permanent category should be given
precedence, thus correcting, to a certain extent, the current
imbalance in the Council’s composition. Its working
methods must be improved for the sake of transparency.
Priority should be given to the developing countries in the
expansion of the Council’s permanent membership. Any
State that has failed to atone for its past is not eligible for
permanent membership. As for relations between the
General Assembly and the Security Council, the authority
of the General Assembly should be enhanced decisively.
Recent events in southern Asia, witnessed by the
entire world, remind us all that disarmament, especially
nuclear disarmament, should remain a priority on the
agenda of the United Nations. Although several years have
elapsed since the end of the cold war, nuclear stockpiles
around the world have become more sophisticated rather
than being reduced. When the international community
called for a ban on all nuclear explosive tests, the nuclearweapon States opted for subcritical tests.
The proliferation of nuclear weapons cannot be
prevented so long as the nuclear-weapon States pursue a
monopoly of nuclear weapons. The policy of the nuclearweapon States to provide a nuclear umbrella and their
double standards in dealing with nuclear issues are among
the obstacles to making nuclear disarmament a reality.
The United Nations should decisively strengthen its
role in the field of disarmament. In this regard, we
believe that there is a growing need to convene a fourth
special session of the General Assembly on disarmament.
The issue of human rights needs to be dealt with
objectively and impartially within the framework of the
United Nations. In today’s international relations, the
human rights issue has became synonymous with
intervention in the internal affairs of other countries.
Attempts to impose the values of one nation upon others
are rampant. Consequently, the rights of people to choose
and the sovereign rights of nations are being infringed.
The United Nations should reject the politicization of
human rights and never tolerate double standards in the
implementation of human rights instruments.
The twenty-first century should be devoted to
development and cooperation. Economic development and
the sustained growth of the developing countries should
become a main theme in international economic relations.
To this end, the current inequitable international economic
relations need to be redressed and the external debt issue
resolved.
Economic sanctions run counter to the ideal of
cooperation, are anachronistic, and only incite
confrontation among nations. Countries that see economic
sanctions as an instrument of power and authority should
pay due attention to the fact that many people, at home
and abroad, are increasingly sceptical about and opposed
to them.
Globalization has caused the monetary crisis in Asia,
increasing the poverty and marginalization of the
developing countries. The United Nations should find
ways to meet this new challenge. It should play its
rightful role in strongly promoting the spirit of collective
self-reliance of the developing countries and urging the
implementation of official development assistance by the
developed countries.
The delegation of the Democratic People’s Republic
of Korea appreciates the efforts of the countries of Asia,
Africa and Latin America to develop regional and
subregional cooperation in the spirit of collective selfreliance. We also support Syria and other Arab countries
33

in their just struggle to seek a fair and comprehensive
solution to the Middle East problem and appreciate the
efforts of the countries of Africa to promote peace, security
and development there.
I take this opportunity to express our gratitude to the
Governments, organizations and individuals of various
countries, as well as the United Nations and governmental
and non-governmental international organizations, for their
humanitarian assistance with the damage caused by several
consecutive years of natural disaster in my country.
The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is an
independent peace-loving State and its Government
consistently adheres to the fundamental ideal of
independence, peace and friendship in its foreign policy.
The Government of our Republic will develop relations of
friendship and cooperation with all countries respecting its
sovereignty and continue to make every effort to ensure
peace on the Korean peninsula and to safeguard peace and
security in North-East Asia, in conformity with the
purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter.
My delegation will contribute to the best of its ability
to the successful deliberation of all items on the agenda of
the current session.


The election of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Uruguay
as President of the General Assembly at its fifty-third
session is a source of pride for Latin America and the
Caribbean. I am personally familiar with the talent,
experience and diplomatic skill of Minister Opertti and I
am convinced that these qualities will help to guide,
motivate and strengthen our work.
My delegation would also like to express its
appreciation to Hennadiy Udovenko for the outstanding
work that he accomplished as President at the session that
just closed.
Last July, we had the honour of welcoming our
Secretary-General to Mexico. On that occasion we
observed anew his firm and resolute commitment to
strengthen the United Nations, adapting it to confront the
challenges of the end of the century. We recognize in
Kofi Annan a man with a clear vision of the future of the
Organization, and we are confident that he will know how
to guide it in this transition stage towards a new
millennium.
Mexico is a country with a profound multilateral
calling. Our desire to seek international agreement finds
fertile ground for development in this forum. It is for this
reason that we are convinced of the urgent need to
strengthen it and to seek within it shared answers to the
challenges that the new global agenda presents.
Mexicoâs commitment to the United Nations does
not consist of words alone. A week ago, the Government
of President Ernesto Zedillo reconfirmed this by sending
the International Convention on the Protection of the
Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their
Families to the Mexican Senate for approval. From the
very beginning of negotiations on that Convention, over
which Mexico had the honour of presiding, we insisted on
the importance of having legal instruments to ensure
respect for and protection of the rights of migrant
workers. By taking that step, Mexico is showing its
unswerving commitment to the norms of international law
and is making progress in consolidating itself as a State
of law.
Convinced of the need to strengthen the international
system that makes it possible for us to have the will and
the necessary instruments to confront together the
challenges of the end of the century, President Zedillo
promoted the convening of the special session of the
General Assembly devoted to the problem of drugs. As of
that meeting, principles of responsibility shared among
States and of strict respect for sovereignty, territorial
integrity and non-interference in the internal affairs of
States replaced the scenario of mutual recrimination and
unilateral evaluations. We now have the bases for a global
consensus regarding the policies that must be adopted by
8

States in order to consolidate an unprecedented effort at
cooperation based on this new global, integral and balanced
strategy. Mexico will not regress in its efforts to implement
the commitments that we adopted last June.
The international agenda today, as reflected in the
agenda of the General Assembly, is very broad and
complex. I would like to refer on this occasion to only
three questions which I consider to be of particular
relevance: disarmament, which has been a constant issue in
Mexicoâs foreign policy; the reform of our Organization,
which will help to shape the community of nations in the
next century; and the international financial crisis, which
greatly jeopardizes the efforts of our countries to attain full
development, as well as our ability to advance towards the
future.
As far as the subject of disarmament is concerned,
there is no doubt that the existence of nuclear arsenals
remains one of the central problems in international
relations. The threat of an atomic conflagration cannot be
disregarded, and we must reiterate our commitment to
fashioning a world which is free of nuclear weapons. For
Mexico, the objective of eliminating these instruments of
mass destruction is realistic and viable. It is time to set
aside arguments that, for strategic reasons, have served to
conceal the efforts of those who either do not want to give
up their present nuclear capacity or else want to join the
group of countries that possess this destructive ability. One
can contribute to nuclear disarmament only by eliminating
nuclear weapons. This is why we seek to broaden and
strengthen international commitments in this respect. Our
political conviction is that we must achieve new agreements
that remove this scourge from humankind.
Mexico condemns all nuclear testing from principle
and out of conviction. We affirmed this recently in the light
of the tests conducted by India and Pakistan. Far from
contributing to stability and regional balance, such actions
promote the proliferation of uncertainty and fear. They also
contribute to a climate conducive to the nuclear arms race.
I would like on this occasion to reiterate Mexicoâs
conviction that dialogue and negotiation are and will remain
the irreplaceable means of resolving disputes. It was in that
spirit that last 9 July we supported a ministerial statement
that sought to define a new agenda for the elimination of
weapons of mass destruction. We co-sponsors of that
declaration introduced a draft resolution that we hope will
receive the resolute support of Member States so that we
can in that way demonstrate the resolve of the community
of nations to move towards a world free of nuclear
weapons.
We are also committed to a new, integral approach
to the subject of disarmament and the prohibition of
weapons of mass destruction or weapons with excessively
cruel and inhuman effects. There has been progress
recently in the Conference on Disarmament related to
security guarantees and the prohibition on the production
of fissionable materials destined to be used for such
weapons.
We are likewise pleased at the growing support
being given to the treaties on anti-personnel landmines
and on chemical and bacteriological weapons. In
particular, we are gratified at the entry into force on
1 March 1999 of the Convention on the Prohibition of the
Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-
personnel Mines and on Their Destruction. Once again we
urge the countries that have not yet done so to ratify as
soon as possible these conventions that seek to eliminate
such weapons from the face of the Earth.
The proliferation of small arms and its link with
criminal organizations and drug-trafficking constitute a
significant challenge to the majority of nations.
Combating this is a priority of the Government of
Mexico. The Inter-American Convention against the Illicit
Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms,
Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials,
which was the result of a Mexican initiative, is of crucial
importance and should therefore be taken into account in
further negotiations on transnational crime.
In the present situation, which demands that we
clearly define the framework for international relations
and adapt it in a timely way, the initiatives for reforming
our Organization presented by the Secretary-General
acquire special significance. The United Nations must
reform itself if it is to remain a central force in our
collective lives.
We must recognize that traditional mechanisms for
harmonization and negotiation are showing clear signs of
exhaustion. We must rethink these strategies in order to
deal with old and new problems. The consolidation of a
structure which is truly democratic, transparent and well
balanced, and which is consistent with the purpose and
principles of the San Francisco Charter must be our
common goal.
9

In this context, I wish to stress the importance of
achieving a better balance between the principal organs of
the United Nations. The Security Council needs to be
reformed in order to strengthen its legitimacy,
representativeness, effectiveness, democracy and
transparency. In considering its structure, we must correct
the deficiencies in its present composition. It is not a matter
of size; rather, the problem is the lack of balance in its
representativeness. The Security Council must reflect the
plurality and diversity of the membership of the United
Nations, taking into account the profound changes in
political geography experienced in the last decade.
Likewise, we must avoid repeating or even broadening
existing inequalities. For this reason, Mexico is against
increasing the number of permanent members. Let us not
fall into the fallacy of believing that the Councilâs
effectiveness resides in the right of veto. All rights bear
responsibilities and these must not be abused. Otherwise,
the necessary legitimacy which makes the Security Council
efficient and effective is eroded. This is why I wish to
reiterate our appeal to the permanent members to join in an
open-minded way in designing a system to regulate the
sphere of application of that privilege.
Nonetheless, we recognize that structural reform of the
Security Council will not in itself guarantee its
effectiveness. Hence, we insist on the need to progress
towards a thorough revision of its working methods and of
the decision-making process. The community of nations has
given that organ the high responsibility of ensuring
international peace and security. Under paragraph 1 of
Article 24 of the Charter, the members of the Organization
recognize that the Council acts in our name in carrying out
these functions.
It is therefore clear that the Security Councilâs attitude
must be profoundly democratic and one of respect towards
the General Assembly, in accordance with paragraph 3 of
the same Article. Anything else would be a violation of the
letter and spirit of the Charter, and would mean an erosion
of the Councilâs legitimacy and its capacity to fulfil the
responsibilities that we have entrusted to it. We must break
this vicious circle and make serious progress in the design
and implementation of the needed reforms.
My country will continue to participate actively in the
Working Group charged with reform of the Security
Council. We hope to be able to submit to the Assembly
recommendations that can receive widespread support,
genuinely reflecting the collective aspirations of all the
members of the United Nations.
Our concerns about international security and the
capacity of our multilateral forums to respond effectively
to new challenges are compounded today by the
uncertainty caused by the international financial crisis.
It is obvious that the Bretton Woods system has
shown its inability to respond adequately to the challenges
of the current international financial crisis. We are
undoubtedly faced with a situation of high risk which
threatens to erode the important development attainments
of our emerging economies. Given the vicissitudes of the
international financial situation, we, the countries of Latin
America, have endeavoured to maintain our economic
strength through profound and sometimes difficult
processes of structural reform. We reaffirm our
commitment to continue to manage in a responsible way
the economic policy mechanisms that ensure our stability
and growth.
It is clear that this is not enough and that concerted
action is needed on the part of all countries and
international financial organs. Heads of State and
Government of the Rio Group meeting in Panama on
4-5 September urged the countries in which the financial
crisis originated to adopt the measures needed to correct
their imbalances. They made an appeal to the countries of
the Group of 7 to immediately take the necessary
measures to restore stability to financial markets and to
ensure the growth of the world economy. The Rio Group
also appealed to international financial institutions to be
involved more quickly and effectively in finding solutions
to the international financial crisis.
Overcoming the present situation must be our
priority. We must be creative in order to find formulas
that make it possible for us to avoid recurring financial
crises and banish the spectre of global recession. Just as
the community of nations has recognized the wisdom of
preventive action to protect international peace and
security, it is now necessary to take that same course in
order to prevent cracks in the fabric of the world
economy.
We must consider ways of implementing an early
warning system that will allow us to detect financial
crises in time and thus avoid their harmful effects. In the
recent past, there have been warning signs which in
isolation were not identified as a prelude to more serious
problems. We must collect such experiences, learn from
them and prepare ourselves better for the future.
10

No country is free from responsibilities, just as no
country is free of the effects of international financial
imbalances. It is therefore up to us together and with a
clear sense of direction to seek the proper mechanisms to
respond early to signs that larger problems are imminent. In
this universal forum, I reiterate our conviction that we must
act resolutely in the short term. We need to define an
agenda for international economic stability. We appeal to
the Secretary-General so that, under his leadership and
guidance, we can share experiences and proposals that will
help us work toward global financial security.
By attaining that goal of preventive diplomacy, we
will be contributing to the development and well-being of
millions of persons who are victims of the financial
uncertainty that today afflicts all economies, particularly
those of a relatively lower level of development, and
endangers the stability of all nations.
In the face of an uncertain political and economic
panorama, the role of the United Nations takes on new
relevance. Recent changes on the international scene yield
unprecedented opportunities but at the same time present
challenges for which there are no easy answers. We must
act together in order to encourage the necessary consensus
as that will allow us to take advantage of the benefits of
globalization and confront its challenges.
We must fortify our individual and collective capacity
in order to take advantage of the positive trends towards
peace, stability, development and respect for law. Likewise,
we must strengthen our ability to banish confrontation,
violence, terror and inequality.
The United Nations is the necessary forum for facing
international problems and finding solutions to them. As we
reaffirm our commitment to the purposes of the San
Francisco Charter, we shall continue to promote the
participation of the United Nations in the definition of the
parameters of international coexistence.