We are extremely happy to welcome the admission to membership of the United Nations at this forty-sixth session of the General Assembly the sister Democratic People's Republic of Korea, with which we share this moment of well-deserved jubilation; the Republics of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, to which we express again our desire to maintain our ties of friendship and collaboration with their emergence as independent countries; and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Republic of Korea, and the Federated States of Micronesia.
We congratulate Ambassador Samir Shihabi on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at this session and we assure him that our delegation will cooperate fully with him with a view to ensuring the success of his important work.
Today's world hardly resembles yesterday's world. The global imbalance of forces in favour of hegemonic that led to a unipolar world aroused the concern of many countries - and not only the small and underdeveloped ones. There has been a rather fat file in the past few years on the use of force as a way of solving international conflicts. The so-called end of the cold war; the process of harmonization and cooperation between East and West; the collapse of socialism in Eastern and Central Europe; the structural crisis in the Soviet Union, which today is discussing what its future will look like; the fashioning of a single military super-Power, the United States - all this paints a very dangerous picture that greatly disturbs the poor and underdeveloped countries of the South. Yet we have to examine the complexities of this new reality in depth, without fear, realizing that over the long term there is no force in the world that can crush the desire for freedom and independence of any people, however small it may be. History is
made by the peoples; it is not simply written down on the maps at military headquarters.
It is true that the world has changed. But what has changed for the hundreds of millions of persons living in a state of dire poverty? In 1990 alone, 14 million children died of hunger, cold, and diseases that were curable. What has changed for the wretched economies of most of the countries of the third world, which are in debt and starving, living in a state of permanent crisis and subjected to the tortures of unequal terms of trade and the cruel pieties of the powerful?
We can be happy about the end of the East-West confrontation because it removes the danger of nuclear holocaust. But the East wants to become the North, and the South is still the South. The contradictions between the developed North and the underdeveloped South are increasing. Hence, we must ask ourselves: what can the poor people expect from this agreement between the powerful? That is the reality we must face.
At their recent Ministerial Conference held in Accra, the capital of Ghana, the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries reaffirmed their decision to continue the struggle to ensure the realization of their original principles, and they stated that the problems of underdevelopment and poverty are among the major factors that can threaten peace and security. They added that without peace it is impossible to struggle for development, and without the development of the peoples of the developing countries of the world it is impossible even to conceive of honourable and real peace - peace for everyone. That is the peace that our people want - a worthy, real, honourable peace that will enable us to work for our development.
The United Nations must prepare itself to carry out, in these new conditions of the world today, the role set for it by its founders. Thus, it must go through a process of democratisation in all of its bodies, particularly those which, under the powers conferred on them by virtue of the Charter, have a greater role to play in carrying out some of the purposes that led to the establishment of the Organisation. Such is the case with the Security Council, which is governed by the anachronistic and dangerous veto power, which is an obstacle to the supreme functions of the General Assembly and which thereby makes a mockery of the will of the majority of the international community.
This process should apply to the economic and social sectors of the United Nations, given the very important role that the Organization has to play in the restructuring and changing of the current system of international economic relations, replacing them by a just and fair system.
It is necessary to revitalize the Secretariat and the intergovernmental mechanisms in the economic and social spheres, so that they may really be able to contribute to the socio-economic development of the developing countries through international cooperation. They would thereby be carrying out one of the basic purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Moreover, we must work together to strengthen and revitalize the Economic and Social Council. A strengthened Council, with universal membership, would be better able to take up the new challenges that the pressing needs of the developing countries present, not only to the United Nations but to all of the bodies and agencies that are part of its system.
The United Nations must contribute in a definite way to the solution of several conflicts that are still weighing on the conscience of mankind.
The Palestinian people are still crying out for the right to exercise their Inalienable rights and to achieve an independent life as a sovereign State in Palestine. Cuba believes that the convening of an international peace conference on the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations, and with the participation of all parties concerned, including the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and Israel, is still the only real option that the international community has.
We welcome the progress made by the South African national liberation movement in its struggle to eradicate apartheid and achieve a majority government, a non-racial and democratic government, based on the principle of "one man, one vote".
Similarly, we support the talks which, through the good offices of the Secretary-General, have been going on between the FMLN and the Government of El Salvador to find a real, lasting, peaceful solution to the tragedy of that brother people, without any outside interference or pressure. The agreement recently concluded in New York was an example of what can be accomplished through such talks. We would urge that by the year 2000 the process of decolonization be completed. It was begun just after the Second World War, with the accession to independence of all non-self-governing countries, and we would now welcome the accession to self-determination and independence of all, including our sister island of Puerto Rico, which is Latin American and Caribbean.
We support the Secretary-General's efforts to implement the United Nations agreements aimed at achieving a final solution to the conflicts in Cambodia and Afghanistan and the effective decolonization of Western Sahara.
We are encouraged here by the growing awareness of the need for unity and integration among the peoples of the third world. One great example of this was the recently concluded first Ibero-American summit conference in Guadalajara, Mexico. That was the first meeting in the history of those peoples that was convened and held apart from the will of the United States.
We would like to repeat here before the General Assembly what we said in the Security Council to the effect that the people of Yugoslavia must themselves, without foreign interference, settle the differences that they have, and they must thereby achieve lasting peace, ensuring the united and non-aligned nature of their country.
He must condemn the latest military coup in Haiti, which is seeking to reverse the democratic process which, only seven months ago, brought Father Jean-Bertrand Aristide to the presidency. The people of Haiti, the first in Latin America and the Caribbean to achieve independence, will triumph over their enemies.
Traditionally, when we have spoken from this rostrum we have focused on analysing the international situation and we have often referred to the situation in my own country. On this occasion we wish to speak about Cuba, for recent international events and the continuation of the aggressive, hysterical campaign by the United States Administration against Cuba oblige us to do so.
The expectations after the initial euphoria that some felt over the collapse of the socialist model as it was applied in Eastern Europe are growing daily - in particular, the expectations about this small but gigantic bastion of socialism that is called Cuba. So now, what is going to happen to Cuba? Enemies and friends of the Cuban revolution are asking this question. To disabuse the former, and as the latter are well aware, let us say to the
Assembly that the Cuban revolution was not just the result of a little Christmas present. It did not come to Havana on a tank manned by foreigners: it came on war transportation which had been seized by our fighters from the enemies of the people. It was the culmination of a long process, 100 years of struggle, by our people for our freedom and independence.
The forty-sixth session of the General Assembly has on its agenda an item dealing with the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba, and so we feel it our duty to offer the Assembly some background information about that blockade and to describe to members some of its consequences.
The historical background of the blockade has to be sought in the promulgation on 17 May 1959 of the law on agrarian reform. That law helped 250,000 rural families, but it affected North American interests, who owned most of the land in our country. So immediately the United States Government began its policy of pressure, using its privileged economic relations to try to blackmail our people. February of 1962 the United States Government decided on a total trade embargo on Cuba, prohibiting the importing of products of Cuban origin and of all products from or through Cuba, and in 1964 it banned the supply of food and medicine, thus making it a total blockade. It has been estimated that the damage done to our economy over the 30 years of this blockade amounted to over $15 billion worth of resources.
Unfortunately - although no well-informed person would be surprised by this - the result is that after listening to many persons speak here, who for various reasons support an end to the blockade against Cuba, since they consider it to be an anachronism and immoral, the North Americans decreed - even after this forty-sixth session of the General Assembly had begun - new provisions which go so far they make its coercive action against Cuba almost irrational.
Arbitrary economic limits have been imposed, first of all on United States companies involved in procedures and transportation that make it possible for Cubans who live on United States territory to meet with family members who live in Cuba. In the last few years, Cuba has established systematic and unequivocal measures to facilitate such meetings, and the North American Administration has taken a very hypocritical stand regarding them and has unleashed the vilest calumny. Yet now it is the United States that is using fallacious arguments virtually to cancel such meetings. This is a totalitarian and abusive action of State intervention and simply does not take into account the damaging consequences that it will have from the humanitarian standpoint.
In his statement to the General Assembly in 1960, President Fidel Castro stated that at the beginning of this century:
"After two years of military occupation of our country, something unexpected occurred. Just when the Cuban people, through a Constituent Assembly, were drafting the basic law of the Republic, another act was passed by the United States Congress, an act proposed by Senator Piatt, of unhappy memory for Cuba, in which it was laid down that a rider was to be attached to the Cuban Constitution whereby the United States Government would be granted the right to intervene in Cuban political affairs and, in addition, the right to lease certain parts of Cuban territory for naval bases or coaling stations." (Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifteenth Session, Plenary Meetings, 872nd Meeting, para. $7).
Years later, after a long struggle by the Cuban people, the Piatt Amendment was repealed, but the naval base at Guantanamo, which resulted from it during the North American military occupation of Cuba, is still on our territory. It is an affront to the national dignity of the Cuban people, and we have repeatedly demanded that the land illegally occupied in Cuba be returned to it.
Cuba's name has been mentioned several times during the general debate at this forty-sixth session of the General Assembly. In his far from brilliant debut as the supreme leader of the fate and actions of all the peoples on Earth, the North American President, who had promised representatives a different kind of speech, indulged in his usual anti-Cuban litany. Once again, he assumed the role of interpreter of the feelings of the Cuban people, giving free rein to this sick obsession with us. Nevertheless, it must be
admitted that, despite all his raving, this setting is a little more appropriate than the golf courses from which he usually pronounces judgements on major international events.
In his verdict - whose content is closely akin to the intolerance and ridicule of a neo-McCarthyism that is as far-reaching as the Inquisition was - the President of the United States condemned my country's social system, insulted our Government and offended our entire people. This is the new imperial Olympians' view of the new era of harmony and concord they want us to enter.
It is incredible that in these times and here in the United Nations those who are directly responsible for the existence in the world today of the most inhuman system of exploitation and plunder, which has plunged almost 100 nations into conditions of abject poverty never before experienced by mankind, should dare to preach sermons and lecture to us on democracy and human and political rights. It is incredible that those who want to make a crusade out of democracy have for years based their policies on force, threats, pressure and blackmail, have destabilized so many nations and States, have imposed dirty wars on them, have tried to bring them to their knees by hunger or economic violence, or have simply invaded them.
It is incredible that they are trying to sell us violence, exploitation, brutality and crime as a model for society. Those that defend the so-called intrinsic good of the market-economy system forget that almost all the underdeveloped countries are using that model and that for most of their peoples this has meant infinite wretchedness, unemployment, lack of health care, hunger, illiteracy, marginalization and the most horrible social scourges. They forget also that within this opulent North American society more than 33 million human beings, most of them black and Hispanic, are living
in abject poverty; that millions of children are abandoned, abused or subjected to violence; that more and more old people are defenceless. They forget that this is the society with the highest crime rate in the world; that this is now the world centre for organizing that evil drug-trafficking chain which has become a virtual supra-national business; and that this is the major consular of cocaine, heroin, crack and marijuana in the world.
Perhaps it is because our people know these facts that they so solidly, strongly and resolutely support our political system, our Government and our revolution.
The aim is to deny our people the right to live and work under the social system they have chosen through free and sovereign decisions such as the referendum in which 98 per cent of the Cuban people voted by secret ballot when our socialist Constitution was submitted to our population.
Even under the conditions of underdevelopment from which we started, and even though for over 30 years we have been subjected to all kinds of aggression - the most brutal and inhuman form being the economic and trade blockade, which was designed to suffocate us - Cuba has had extraordinary success in the economic, political, social, scientific and cultural areas. Let me mention a few of our achievements: equality in a society in which all have equal rights and opportunities; safety; stability; social coexistence on a broad popular base; and forms of participatory democracy that are very strong and innovative. We can indeed say that ours is a society of solidarity and justice. Ethical and moral principles prevail and national dignity is an irreversible principle. Hence, we have a very deep spirit of internationalism, as is evident from the fact that we send thousands of doctors, technicians and teachers to work without pay in more than 30 countries of the third world.
In our country, the main social services, such as health, education and culture, are free. One hundred per cent of our people are entitled to social security. Income is distributed fairly and equitably and there is no exploitation or abuse. That is why we do not have children who are abandoned, who are beggars; we do not have old people who are defenceless; we do not have people who are marginalised. We have never encouraged consumerism. Our country has established an impressive social, health, education and production infrastructure. We can state that as a result of our revolution the people of Cuba have achieved a standard of living comparable to that of many developed countries - but in our country there are far fewer cases of violence, delinquency and crime and we do not produce, distribute or use drugs.
The United Nations Development Programme and such bodies as the World Health Organization and the United Nations Children's Fund which study the main social indicators at the international level have pointed out the indisputable fact that in these indicators Cuba is at a level similar to that of most developed countries, and on an even higher level than some of them. Some vital indicators, of transcendental social importance - such as infant mortality, mortality of children under the age of five, maternal mortality, life expectancy at birth, the number of people going to school, the number of people that stay in school, literacy, the number of doctors and teachers per capita, income distribution, caloric intake, and many others - are the result of the efforts made by a society whose primary objective is to ensure the well-being of its people.
We, of course, respect everyone's political beliefs and freedom of choice, but Cuba has not experienced such respect on the part of others. Until 1959 this system, which is so dogmatically being pushed today as the only possible formula, imposed on the Cuban people the most dreadful economic backwardness, a lack of basic individual and social rights and total neo-colonial dependency, poverty, illiteracy, ignorance and bloodthirsty tyranny - all of which enjoyed the consent and approval of the United States - in Cuba was synonymous with underdeveloped and dependent capitalism. And now we are being asked to return to that situation in the name of being up to date - just because the historical experiment in the old socialist States of Europe has failed - and in the same triumphant manner as the feudal lords returned to their old palaces after reinstatement.
The Cuban Revolution, which was won in spite of the blockade and the hostility against it, can no doubt be improved, as can any human undertaking. However, it is the closest we have come in our history towards achieving social justice and national dignity.
We will never abandon it. We will improve it ourselves. The overwhelming majority of Cubans will do so despite the cynical arrogance of the President of a country whose wealth is derived from plunder and oppression.
One of our dearest aspirations is to ensure greater popular and democratic participation in adopting all the vital decisions and in consolidating our social co-existence which is unprecedented in Cuba's history because it is founded on justice and equity. These aspirations reflect our true national consensus, which we would be able to achieve more speedily were it not for the 30 years of economic blockade, hostile actions, efforts made to isolate and condemn us unjustly before the international community and for all kinds of pressures and a permanent threat of military aggression.
There are other references to Cuba that can be ignored. Having already commented upon the point of view behind the American broadsides, I do not believe that I should take up the Assembly's time to exercise the right of reply to a statement, hastily and awkwardly translated into Spanish, based on the Yankee arguments against Cuba which, unfortunately, were read out in Spanish from this very rostrum.
My delegation, however, would like to state for the record that we have great respect, among other well-known statesmen and colleagues, for the President of Venezuela, Mr. Carlos Andres Perez, owing to his unquestioned courage and his consistent approach when in addressing the Assembly he spoke of his approach in the search for an end to the confrontation between the United States and Cuba.
It is no secret that, in addition to sharing views with Venezuela, there are also differing political views between us. But this does not prevent us from having a useful and constructive relationship with such an important country in our region.
We can distinguish between those who call for changes but merely want the example of Cuba to disappear and those who are genuinely concerned about the future of our country.
To the fraternal President of Venezuela, we say that Cuba is always willing to consider its differences with the United States without preconditions of any type, on the basis of equality and mutual respect, even apart from the fact that one cannot equate Cuba - a besieged, harassed and blockaded country that is being asked to change - with the United States, the most powerful country in the world.
As members know, the President of the Soviet Union recently stated unilaterally that he was willing to withdraw what he called the Soviet Armed Forces Training Brigade from our country.
Since our people chose the path to independence, in 1959, and decided to exercise its sovereign rights, we have suffered not only from threats but also from aggression of all kinds. Under those prevailing circumstances, when the then leaders of the Soviet Union suggested that missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads should be stationed in Cuba, our acceptance was motivated not only by the legitimate right to defend ourselves with arms equal to those of the countries that threatened us but also by the feeling that we would thus be contributing to strengthening the socialist camp and, in particular, the Soviet Union, at a time when the threat of imperialist aggression was becoming real and that that decision could have made it possible to avoid such an attack.
In the days of the October crisis, the Revolutionary Government, through the statement by its Prime Minister of 28 October 1962, set forth the five points that it deemed to be essential in order to guarantee genuine peace in Cuba:
"First, a halt to the economic blockade and all measures of trade and economic pressure applied by the United States in all parts of the world against our country;
Secondly, a halt to all subversive activities, the launch and landing of weapons and explosives by air and sea, the organization of invasions by mercenaries, the infiltration of spies and saboteurs - activities against us launched from the territory of the United States and of some collaborating countries; Thirdly, a halt to pirate-like attacks launched from existing bases in the United States and Puerto Rico;
Fourthly, a halt to all violations of our air and naval space by United States warships and aircraft;
Fifthly, withdrawal from the Guantanamo naval base, and the return of Cuban territory occupied by the United States."
As a result of that crisis, and after the unilateral decision taken by the Government of the Soviet Union to withdraw the missiles from Cuba, the Governments of Cuba and the Soviet Union decided to keep a Soviet military unit on Cuban territory. The unit was symbolic, for its forces were never strong enough to defend Cuba; however, it was an expression of friendship and solidarity, given the threats from the United States.
When in 1979, after a period of 17 years, the United States, as part of its vain attempts to prevent the convening in Cuba of the Sixth Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement, exposed the presence in Cuba of a Motorized Brigade of the Soviet Armed Forces, the then Soviet leadership, without prior consultation with our Government, yielded to American pressure and made statements that, with the acceptance of the American authorities, in theory transformed that combat unit, which was to be activated in case of invasion from the United States, into a supposedly harmless study centre.
The presence of the Soviet military contingent in Cuba, which continued to be a combat unit, retaining all its military means and missions, would not have been necessary had we secured genuine guarantees for a lasting peace, which could have been achieved if only the demands our Government made in 1962 in the "five points" I have referred to had been acceded to - and these points retain their validity to this day. If, at least, the case for withdrawal from
the Guantanamo naval base had been adequately made, there would be no American or Soviet troops in Cuba today.
The guarantees we called (or still do not exist.
The Government of Cuba would be prepared to accept the simultaneous withdrawal from our country of the Soviet and American military personnel. In the circumstances, this would be the only equitable, just and honourable way
out.
The United States has not discarded the option of a major attack against Cuba. While spokesmen of the Department of State and some officials of the Bush Administration assure us publicly and through the diplomatic channel that they have no aggressive intentions or plans vis-à-vis Cuba, the Pentagon thinks and acts quite differently.
We invite all those who believe the promises of the Bush Administration to ask their representatives what are the contingency plans behind the military exercises of the 101st Airborne Division that began on 16 December and, as scheduled by the Pentagon, will continue until 16 0ctober7
For 35 days, in Fort Chafee, Arkansas, the so-called Screeching Eagles will participate in a low-intensity-conflict scenario, which will gradually escalate to a medium-intensity level, in a place of dense vegetation, against an enemy that uses tactics similar to those of the Soviets. Where does the Pentagon think that such conditions might exist, if not in Cuba?
The peace that we want is real peace - a peace of dignity, a peace that will be for all States, large and small, weak and powerful.
Speaking from this rostrum 31 years ago. President Fidel Castro said: "When we small countries seek to be free, we know that we must become free by our own efforts and at our own risk. When a people is united and is defending a just cause, it can trust in its own strength. In Cuba we are not, as we have been alleged to be, a group of men governing a country. We are a people governing a country, an entire nation resolutely united in an unshakeable revolutionary spirit in defence of its rights. This is something that the enemies of the revolution and of Cuba should know for if they ignore it they are grievously mistaken." (Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifteenth Session, Plenary Meetings, 872nd meeting, para 132)
On that occasion President Castro said also:
"With all due respect to this Organization, I must say that our people, the people of Cuba, have learned much; they are, and I say this with pride, equal to the task they are undertaking, to the heroic struggle they are waging; they have learnt, a lesson from recent international events and they know that at the eleventh hour, when their rights have been denied, when the forces of aggression are marshalled against them, when their rights are not protected either in the Organization of American States or in the United Nations, there still remains to them the ultimate and heroic remedy of resistance." (ibid., para. 131) This has been our position of principle. It has been stated and it has been applied over the past 38 years. This traditional policy has been fully supported by our people. With their weapons in their hands, they are willing to defend our independence, our freedom, our right to have the social system that we want, the system that suits our needs and our interests.
The defence of our revolution has been based on the principle of the involvement of all the people. It has been based on the involvement of all our citizens in the defence of our country, on their being part of our armed forces, our people's militias, because they are absolutely convinced that any enemy daring to invade our country will not find an absence of resistance anywhere, will have not a moment without struggle, not a moment's respite, until the enemy has left our country. No enemy will ever be able to crush or corrupt us. Our people - the authors of the Cuban revolution - have proclaimed a thousand times that they will continue our work because they know that our battle is part of the struggle for true independence, freedom and development for all peoples. We shall hold high the flag of socialism, which our country defends. We shall defend our nationality. We shall continue to hold our socialist principles - socialism or death; our country or death - because we know that we shall triumph.


Mr. President, we congratulate you on your election to preside over the General Assembly at this forty-sixth session. Tour diplomatic skills and experience are well known, as is your commitment to the principles and ideals of the United Nations. We look forward to a productive session under your capable leadership and congratulate the Government and people of Saudi Arabia as well.
We also congratulate Sir Michael Somare, the Foreign Minister of Papua New Guinea; Mr. George Iacovou, the Foreign Minister of Cyprus; and Mr. Abdalla Saleh Al-Ashtal, the Permanent Representative of Yemen. Each has made his own unique contributions to world peace and understanding. Each has dignified and contributed to the strengthening of the international democratic process here at the United Nations.
We also congratulate your predecessor, Mr. Guido de Marco, the Foreign Minister of Malta. He proved to be well suited to the task of guiding our deliberations in this new era in international relations.
We join in commending the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar. He and other members of the Secretariat have laboured tirelessly on behalf of the international community in its search for justice and peace. It is therefore fitting and symbolic that near the end of the Secretary-General's tenure, seven new Members should be admitted to membership in the world body.
The simultaneous admission of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea bodes well for the future of the Korean people and enhances the prospects for lasting peace and reconciliation on the Korean peninsula. The restoration of the sovereignty of the Baltic Republics, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, closes a sad chapter in human history, and offers new hope to others who await the restoration of their own sovereignty.
The admission of our Pacific neighbours, the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, further attests to the universality of the United Nations and to the continued relevancy of the international community's focus on Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories. We congratulate all seven of the new Members. More importantly, we congratulate the United Nations on what each of these seven new Members symbolises, and on the qualities each brings to the Organisation.
On occasion, human history moves faster than the hands of those who would write that history. So much has transpired in recent months that the scribes of history have barely had time to allow the ink to dry before having to turn the page and begin anew. In some instances the scribes have not even had time to turn the page.
After a brief visit to Haiti, democracy has once again been "exiled" by those who have continually brutalized the people of that impoverished country. Only a few days after he stood at this very podium and articulated his people's plea for justice, Haiti's President and the dream of his people were driven into exile. However, it is our belief that this will be a short "exile" and that Haiti's people will soon restore their democracy and claim their future. He wonder how those who have assaulted Haiti's democracy expect to succeed in the face of the new expectations of Haiti's people and the broad international support which exists for that country's legitimately elected President.
Also freshly inscribed on the pages of history are a number of positive developments. Among them, are Guatemala's recognition of Belize and the establishment of diplomatic relations between these two Central American neighbours. The broad agreement between the President of El Salvador and the five leaders of the Farabundo Marti National Liberation front is another very positive development. This agreement could lead to a truce in that country's long civil war and eventually help bring economic and social justice to that country's beleaguered people.
Cambodia has also taken a huge step towards securing a brighter future for its people. The Supreme National Council of Cambodia has taken several initiatives that could lead to an era of peace and national reconciliation. The permanent members of the Security Council and the Paris International Conference on Cambodia have contributed significantly to this process. Hopefully, the Secretary-General's five-point plan on Afghanistan will inspire the parties to that conflict similarly to negotiate a framework for a comprehensive political Battlement.
The ink of history is not yet dry on other parts of the globe either. One year ago the United Nations was justifiably preoccupied with an effort to re-write history by turning the pages of history back to the era of "might make right". Fortunately the international community rose to the occasion and Kuwait is now free of foreign occupation. However, the people of that regime, particularly those of Kuwait and Iraq, paid a terrible price. Our hearts go out to them. Others also paid a terrible price. Our hearts go out to them as well.
As important a step as the liberation of Kuwait was, it will lose its moral and legal significance unless the international community consistently applies the same principles everywhere. We must always judge the act and not the actor. Should we fail to do so, we can rightfully be accused of having a double standard.
Principles which are selectively applied are not really principles but ere instead mere expedients. Therefore the United Nations should act in a comprehensive and consistent manner in circumstances similar to those which existed in Kuwait one year ago. Had the international community been consistent prior to the invasion of Kuwait, it is doubtful whether that invasion and the death and destruction it brought about would have occurred.
Years of inaction and the lack of resolve on the issue of Palestine and the occupied Arab territories are examples of the inconsistency that does little to enhance respect for the rule of law. The deafening silence on the question of East Timor by some who spoke so eloquently on the invasion of Kuwait is, to a country as small and vulnerable as Vanuatu, another frightening reminder of the inconsistency exhibited by some members of the international community.
The recent initiative taken towards the convening of an international conference on the Middle East enjoys broad support and may set in motion a process of negotiations that will lead to a comprehensive political settlement. He certainly hope such a chapter of history will soon be written.
With respect to East Timor, we are pleased that a delegation of Portuguese parliamentarians is about to make a visit to the Territory. He hope this visit will contribute to a settlement which will eventually allow East Timor's people to decide their own fate and write their own history.
We are encouraged by the prospect that Western Sahara's people will soon determine their own destiny and write their own page in the history of the United Nations. Equally encouraging is the positive and peaceful atmosphere that now exists in Lebanon.
The decolonisation process, particularly that under way in Mew Caledonia, continues to be a major concern of the countries of our region. The positive measures taken by France to assure tranquillity in the Territory and to promote the economic and social development of its colonised people are much appreciated. What will be even more appreciated will be the moment New Caledonia gains its independence and joins the community of nations, as did two neighbouring Pacific Island countries at this session of the General Assembly. That will certainly be a joyous moment of history.
Democratic winds of change are also sweeping across Africa, from North to South and East to West. While much of the attention of the international news media has been focused on Eastern Europe, Africa has also witnessed important new historic developments. The ruins have fallen silent In Angola, where a full-scale military conflict has given way to what will, hopefully, be a purely peaceful political contest. Liberia may still be troubled but, hopefully, it has now turned the corner and will soon leave its most difficult days behind, as will Ethiopia and a number of other African countries whose peoples have endured more than their share of hardship and suffering.
The institutional structure of apartheid continues to dissolve in the face of continued resistance by South Africa's people. The end of legalised apartheid will by no means end the problems of that country. Economic, political and social inequality are so deeply ingrained that it will take decades of concerted effort to remove the vestiges of the apartheid system. Hopefully, the international community will not abandon South Africa's people merely because those who currently govern that country now find themselves compelled to offer a series of reforms. Events are moving very fast in South Africa. New history is being written every day. However, as in other parts of the world, the past cannot be ignored in shaping the future.
With the danger of ideological conflict having receded in some parts of the world, there has been a tragic reversion to an older and more frightening type of conflict. On more than one occasion, the world has been warned of the dangers of inter-communal conflict and ethnic strife. For far too long those words of warning fell on deaf ears. Some insisted that this issue was strictly an internal affair of various countries. Others insisted that this was too sensitive an issue to discuss at international forums.
While fully respecting national sovereignty and recognising the domestic dimensions of inter-communal conflict and ethnic strife, we often wondered what it would take to make some members of the international community aware of the serious threat posed to all nations by such conflict and strife. Unfortunately, we now have the answer.
One need not single out any particular country or any particular region. Inter-communal conflict and ethnic strife are problems which plague the entire human race in every corner of the globe. Ho human being should ever be judged, or assigned a particular status, because of his or her race, religion language or culture. When hatred of this sort runs rampant, none of us is immune to the consequences.
Large countries and small countries can be victims of this hatred. Developed countries and developing countries can equally be victims. This hatred can be witnessed in parts of the world that are geographically remote from where we now sit. It can also be witnessed within a short distance of this very building.
One can examine our agenda and identify certain long-standing items that, in part, originated as inter-communal conflict or ethnic strife. History will indeed judge us harshly should we fail to address this issue and assert moral leadership on it, thus bequeathing our failure to future generations. It would certainly be ironic for history to record that the current generation dismantled physical walls or barriers but left standing other types of walls. Unfortunately, the latter type of barrier - that of ignorance, intolerance and ethnic hatred - is far more difficult to breach.
The rapidity with which history occasionally moves was recently illustrated in dramatic fashion. One week ago the President, of the United States announced a sweeping initiative which could for ever alter what had, since the dawn of the atomic age, been accepted as the normal rules of arms control. The announcement that the United States would unilaterally eliminate its land-based short-range nuclear weapons, withdraw its tactical nuclear arms from its ships, take its strategic bombers off alert, and cancel the development of the mobile MX missile represents another benchmark in the evolving relationship between the world's two foremost nuclear Powers. An equally dramatic response from Moscow is anticipated in the next few days.
One might legitimately wonder whether recent political events and technological developments had already made some of these weapons obsolete or superfluous. One might also ponder the costs and environmental consequences of eliminating these frightening weapons. None the less, President Bush's announcement just might give new impetus to efforts to rid the world of the threat posed by all types of nuclear weapons.
This initiative leads us to ask, once again, why nuclear weapons are being tested in the South Pacific despite the repeated objections of the countries of the region. The testing of these weapons in the South Pacific was always opposed on safety, moral and environmental grounds. Today there Is even less reason to understand the need for these tests. There are even more compelling reasons for our repeated appeals for their end to finally be heeded.
The international political climate is not the only climate that is changing. The climate that determines the sustainability of life on this planet, and the level of social and economic development achievable by human beings is also changing. This latter climate change has been occurring since the dawn of the industrial era, although at a somewhat slower, less perceptible pace than changes in the political climate. None the less, its impact will undoubtedly be greater than the impact of any political changes known to mankind.
The Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change is currently engaged in what could be considered the most important multilateral negotiations ever. The outcome of these negotiations might, in the long run, determine whether human life can continue to be sustained on this planet. The negotiations might also shape the manner in which mankind's economic activities are conducted. It is difficult to imagine more important subject-matter.
Every country in the world is participating in these negotiations. It is hoped that the negotiations will be successfully concluded in time for the convention to be opened for signature at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) at Rio de Janeiro in June of 1992.
All countries have a great deal at stake in the negotiations leading up to the Conference. Environmental issues and economic issues are interrelated and of equal importance. Small, island developing countries and low-lying coastal countries have another concern - survival. These are the countries most vulnerable to sea-level rise caused by global warming. As such, they are likely to be the first victims should the international community fail to agree on a collective response to mankind's most severe challenge.
Much remains to be done to ensure the successful completion of the negotiations for a climate-change convention. Even more remains to be done to ensure that the UHCED is meaningful and successful. Hopefully, the United Nations system and Member States will spare no effort in providing adequate support to ensure the success of these parallel processes. We shudder to think of the consequences of our failure to do so.
Much of the change taking place in the world today revolves around principles of democracy and the commitment to democratic ideals. Democracy and democratic ideals are not constants which once planted can be ignored or left to their own devices. Democracy and democratic ideals are, rather, like a garden in need of constant care and attention. They must be fed and nurtured or they can wither and die, or even be overgrown by weeds disguised as flowers. We know of no instance in history in which democracy was very easily established. Instead, the establishment of democracy took considerable effort and years of turmoil and unrest in even the oldest of democracies. It will take similar effort in today's evolving democracies. Ho nation in the world has a perfect democracy. No nation in the world has a monopoly on democratic ideals. Certainly, no nation has a history which allows it to lecture others on the subject: or hold itself up as a perfect model to be emulated in every respect.
From time to time, democracy and a nation's adherence to democratic ideals are tasted. This is as true of nations as large and powerful as the Soviet Union or the United States as it is of nations as small and removed from the centres of power as Vanuatu. We believe that eventually, in all such instances, democracy will triumph. History instructs us that people everywhere, and the evolution of the human experience, will accept nothing less.
The United Nations is today the highest form of international democracy. It is not yet a perfect international democracy. Its imperfections and shortcomings are known to all. What are sometimes forgotten, however, are its very positive attributes and its many accomplishments. In the history of mankind, there has never been any international or intergovernmental organisation as democratic or as successful as the United Nations.
Thus, as we undertake the work of the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly, and take one additional step towards the twenty-first century, let us feed and nurture our garden of international democracy. Let us reflect upon and recommit ourselves to the democratic ideals which have brought us together in search of justice, equality and peace.
In a symbolic sense, our seven new Members have entered the Organisation at the right moment in history. They can be an important new source of energy and nutrition for our garden of international democracy.
In conclusion, we recall the moving words of a Mozambican poet written 2C years ago during his country's struggle to free itself from colonialism. Although those words were written at a different time, in a different place, and under circumstances different from those which exist today, they still bear a certain symbolic relevancy to mankind's mutual undertakings of today.
We hope these words can be understood and appreciated in that context. They are simple words of compassion for fellow human beings. In their simplicity, they reveal many truths:
"So man; paths we have trodden already! So many people we have greeted liberate clothed fed taught
Along our march!
So many plains, mountains, rivers we have crossed! It is still far the day of independence, but each passing day it is nearer. ...
We advance-instruments of an ideal
loftier than ourselves
Released from our former solitude.
Sometimes we pause by the wayside Attracted by a child who bails us, a chance-born flower, a certain smile, a distant star.
We pause within ourselves; our steps continue and we meet again further on. He cannot be late. There, the enemy continues to enslave our people
To arms Comrades!"


I bring the Assembly most sincere greetings from the Government and the people of Saint Kitts and Nevis, and deem it an esteemed pleasure and a distinct honour to address this our forty-sixth session of the General Assembly.
I join in all sincerity with those who have preceded me in congratulating the former President, Guido de Marco of Malta, on his skilful handling of our past deliberations during a period of unprecedented challenges. Then I hasten to welcome our new President, Samir Shihabi of Saudi Arabia, whom I wish to assure of my country's firm support and continued cooperation. The very astute way in which you have been guiding this session, Mr. President, deserves our highest commendation and portends well for a successful and fruitful forty-sixth session.
Next, I wish to pay a special tribute to Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar, who continues to serve cur Organization with demonstrative dignity, elegance, and excellence, amidst difficult and trying times. His focus has always been International peace and security for the peoples of the world. His leadership has been masterful In a period of great upheaval and tremendous change.
Mr. Secretary-General, my Government, and people salute you; we stand In awe of your indefatigable commitment; and we pledge our support as you continue to serve the international community in the proficient and effective manner to which we have grown accustomed.
There have been times in the past when the relevance of the United Nations has been questioned, when the will of its Members to be resolute in defence of the weak has been in doubt. Not anymore. This assembly of nations has acted to ensure the restoration of sovereignty to one of its smaller Members, Kuwait, and the world looks on with appreciation. Most are supportive, some are still derisive, none remain indifferent. The United Nation system is experiencing its finest hour - still, it is a time of enormous challenge and opportunity.
The vibrancy of the Assembly is reflected in the plethora of new Members. Saint Kitts and Nevis was warmly received into this body, and today I deem it a pleasure and an honour to extend a warm welcome to the new Members. I welcome the Republic of Korea, our friends of long standing, and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. An is well known, my Government has consistently advocated the admission of both countries for several years. I welcome the Marshall Islands and Micronesia, as well 33 the Republics of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. I am pleased to assure the Governments and peoples of these new Members that my Government and people will extend to them most active cooperation in the cause of world peace and human development.
While democracy is breaking out all over the world, somehow the beleaguered people of Haiti continue to be denied the opportunity to breathe the pure air of freedom. My country, Saint. Kitts and Mavis, and indeed the entire Caribbean community, are deeply shocked by the action of the armed forces in Haiti in illegally sailing President Jean-Bertrand Aristide and members of his administration and usurping the authority of the duly constituted Government. This monstrous and outrageous action by the Haitian military is an unacceptable repudiation of the declared will of the people of Haiti, which was overwhelmingly and unambiguously manifested in the elections of December 1990.
Saint Kitts and Nevis, and indeed the entire Caribbean community, unreservedly condemn this flagrant assault on the unfolding democratic process in Haiti, and demand the restoration of constitutional order and of Father Aristide to the presidency of the Republic.
The Caribbean community has in the past called for concerted international assistance to consolidate democratic gains in Haiti. We repeat that call today. The Caribbean community is working within the Organization of American States to restore democracy to Haiti.
I call on this body, the United Nations, which has acted decisively in other areas of crisis, to move with urgency and purpose to ostracize the illegal regime in Haiti and to take all appropriate measures to restore democracy and the constitutionally elected Government in Haiti.
The people of Haiti cry out in anguish to the world community for deliverance. Let us not fail them this time. I wish to focus today on the subject of development through peace as the basis for the new international order.
East-West tension has abated; the Berlin Wall has fallen beneath the surge of freedom; Kuwait has been liberated; some challenges to democracy are being thwarted; and diplomacy and negotiation are more and more being accepted as alternatives to violence and bloodshed.
The Initiative taken by President Bush of the United States of America to implement a unilateral reduction of nuclear weapons Is timely and welcome. The response of President. Gorbachev of the Soviet Union is a further significant contribution to the reduction of International tensions. We must now seize the opportunity of the moment and work towards the total elimination of nuclear weapons.
However, world peace must not be viewed only In terms of the absence of world war, the elimination of East-West tension or the achievement of cease fires. The concept of world peace must be far more fundamental and pervasive. It must mean an acceptance of human equality and dignity, the achievement of social justice and the global preservation of Individual human rights. The world must work as assiduously at building the foundations of peace as it did at erecting the bastions of war.
The enhancement of education, the eradication of poverty, the reduction of unemployment, the maintenance of good health, the provision of affordable housing, the adapting of science and technology to socio-economic development - these must be the dividends that flow from diverting global financial resources away from the amassing of armaments, to be invested in human development. This is the challenge we face. This is the new battle we must join - and we must not fail.
The development of all our peoples through peace must be placed against the backdrop of the need for a comprehensive political settlement, of disputes, self determination through free and fair elections and full respect for national sovereignty, together with the repatriation and rehabilitation of displaced persons balanced against continuing violence, social unrest and grave civil strife in several regions.
Moreover, three specific global issues present themselves. I refer here firstly to the risk that certain development programmes may lead to great environmental damage. Secondly, I note that the drug menace is presenting a lasting threat to the welfare of the young people who constitute the productive sector of all nations. Finally, I add to these our ever-increasing ability to cause human and material destruction. I am worried most of all by the fact that we do not seem to have found a way to control the development and spread of such technology.
These issues represent security problems which are just as dangerous as any act of open hostility. They reflect a disturbing level of uncertainty. Despite positive global changes, they add up to a host of problems which no one country can solve alone. They are all likely to lead to disputes. The only way we can stop these turning into open war, I believe, is for us to act in unity. Therefore we need to identify security concerns in a global context. If that can be done, then we must work together to find solutions. I see those two needs as crucial.
As I have said, I do not overlook the positive developments we have seen in the post-cold-war period. They have offered signs that it is possible for us to move forward together. I think that the recent announcements made by the Presidents of the United States and the Soviet Union about reducing nuclear arms are most welcome initiatives. So are the encouraging responses given by other nuclear Powers. They indicate that a new process is under way. I believe that it may start to answer the repeated calls for action in this area which have been made by many United Nations Members.
The intransigence of Iraq continues to cause disquiet in the international community. We must maintain appropriate sanctions until the relevant resolutions of the Security Council have been implemented in full and until the people of Iraq, as well as their neighbours, can live without fear of intimidation from either conventional or nuclear armaments.
South Africa continues to be another area of grave concern to us. While we welcome the steps taken by the De Klerk Administration to dismantle the pillars of apartheid, we must keep in mind that apartheid is not ended. Until there is equality and respect for individual rights, regardless of race, our objective has not been achieved. The ultimate objective must continue to be the achievement of one person, one vote. We cannot accept one standard of freedom and democracy for people in Europe and the Americas, and a lesser standard of freedom and democracy for the people of South Africa.
The people of Saint Kitts and Nevis, and, indeed, the Caribbean community, will maintain our principled stand of continuing sanctions against the regime in South Africa, and we oppose the wholesale lifting of sanctions at this time. He consider the lifting of sanctions now to be premature, and caution that it could result in delaying the inevitable end of apartheid. I call on the international community not to retreat when the end is in sight. I call on the international community not to abandon the oppressed people of South Africa at this critical time, but to stand fast until justice, equality and freedom become realities for all.
Democracy and individual rights and freedoms are all part of our Caribbean way of life. We want nothing less for our African brothers and sisters.
It is cause for deep concern that peace and justice continue to elude the people of Cambodia. They, too have a right to aspire to the fruits of economic development. We call for all constructive efforts to continue until the reaching of a settlement which brings m and to conflict and ushers in an era of development.
My Government supports the new direction towards fundamental reform and democratisation in the Soviet Union. It has undoubtedly contributed to the removal of East-West tensions, r development that has been received with a global sigh of relief.
I have no doubt that there will be a major mobilization of financial, technical and material resources to assist with the economic transformation of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This is as it should be. However, the United Nations must be particularly vigilant to ensure that the socio-economic problems of developing countries, like mine, are not marginalized and relegated to the backwater of human development. There must be a redirection of resources, and a mobilization of additional resources, away from the economy of war to the economy of development.
The United Nations must be an instrument of peacemaking and enhancement of the quality of life. The Organization can thus direct and coordinate responses to the developmental needs of small States. We need an Organization that remains committed to the sustained growth and development of all of its Member States, in order to build and maintain a world partnership.
We must, therefore, commit ourselves to reinforcing the multilateral approach to the solution of our problems. It behoves us to strengthen the international system of which the United Nations forms the nucleus. The international community must rally around the system if it is to fulfil its obligation to restore and ensure international peace and security in order that economic and socio-cultural development may prosper, blows, and bear good fruit.
The issue of development and the environment is so fundamental to the achievement of a better quality of life that I must address it. It is axiomatic that all of us share a responsibility for protecting and preserving the environment. It seems, however, that in this regard some countries are more equal than others.
In 1966, a major airline manufacturer found it necessary to destroy 630 acres of lush forest to establish a factory complex. This was a case of development taking priority over environment. The significant development value of that decision is totally accepted and unquestioned today. On the other side of the ledger, however, we find the disturbing trend where environmental questions, sometimes real and sometimes imagined, are becoming major conditionalities attached to development assistance for poor countries. Are we to understand that development must take priority over environment in developed countries, but that the environment must take precedence over development in developing countries that are being strangled by a hostile world economic system?
The ensuring of environmental protection and development must not run counter to a country's strategies for socio-economic advancement. There must be a balance between environmental concerns and a country's overall
development so that environmental issues ought not to become a deterrent to development in the poorer countries.
Additionally, it must be appreciated that environmental concerns differ from country to country, and from region to region. In the developed world the accent is on issues like the ozone layer, acid rain and toxic waste. In Saint Kitts and Nevis, however, we need direct assistance in the areas of solid and liquid waste management, marine life protection, beach conservation, reef preservation, the prevention of coastal erosion, and the full integration of marine resources into the national development plans.

I must at this point make particular reference to the Caribbean, stretching from Belize to Guyana, and linked by small, island developing States from the Bahamas to Trinidad.
We are a string of pearls linking North and South America, beautiful but vulnerable. We are vulnerable to natural disasters, vulnerable to global economic developments over which we have no control. He are vulnerable to an international economic order that determines and sets at a low level the prices of the things we sell, and escalates the prices of the things we buy. We find ourselves consigned to a treadmill of poverty, debt, and underdevelopment.
However, because of our location close to the Americas, and the cross-fertilisation of cultures and values, fuelled by the revolution in electronics and communication, our people have developed high expectations. We have helped ourselves considerably through individual and regional effort, and international support.
While our location provides, on the one hand, opportunities for development, particularly in tourism which is important for all of us, it is also a source of great challenge and danger. We are also vulnerable to the narco-terrorists, the drug traffickers. Together we must continue to wage all-out war on these purveyors of death and destruction. We continue to need more assistance in reducing demand through education, health care, and rehabilitation, and we must intensify our combined efforts in the area of interdiction and enforcement.
At this time when the attention of the international community is taken up by events of monumental proportions throughout the world, I feel I must endeavour to keep the development concerns of island developing nations on the international agenda. There have also been positive developments in our region in relations between neighbours. I must commend the Governments of Belize and Guatemala on having reconciled their differences in the interest of good neighbourliness. The declaration that Guatemala recognizes Belize as an independent State not only allows Belize to participate fully in the Central American integration process but gives a tremendous boost to Caribbean-Central American relations. My Government looks with optimism to the prospect of both Governments' continuing negotiations so as to iron out remaining difficulties, in the interest of peaceful coexistence between the two countries.
In addition, my Government commends the United Nations and the Organisation of American States on the role they have played and will continue to play in providing avenues through which workable solutions can be found to territorial disputes.
At this time in our history we are seriously challenged to bring an end to conflicts and to stimulate a resurgence of human development. Within the parameters of this broad objective, there must be a place for special attention to be given to the welfare of our children. We gave that process special emphasis when we met here at the special Heads of State and Government Summit for Children. Let us commit and re-dedicate ourselves to rise to the challenge of making peace mean development for people everywhere, but let as make it specially meaningful for our children as we provide for their health, educational, recreational and psychological needs. In this we can have no nobler objective.


Let me begin by congratulating Ambassador Shihabi on his election to the office of President of the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly, which I hope will be crowned with success. I also take this opportunity to congratulate the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Peres de Cuellar, on his endeavours and his valuable contribution to the promotion of world peace and understanding among nations.
In this era of heightened expectations of freedom and of peace among nations, the threat of despotism has not yet disappeared from the world. This Assembly convenes in the aftermath of two crises that threatened human freedoms and that aroused profound concern throughout the enlightened international community. Future historians will undoubtedly cast more light on these two grim chapters in the closing years of this century from an appropriate perspective. But we, representatives of Governments, do not have the time to indulge in the luxury of observing events passively, as historians can do.
We are making history, not writing it, making history here and now. It is incumbent upon us as representatives of responsible Governments to mould current events in a spirit of respect for the values our democratic regimes represent, and aspiring to a world order based on universal freedoms.
We must draw the correct conclusions and apply the lessons of the crises of the past year and bequeath to all mankind a code of conduct, thus ensuring that our world will no longer be exposed to insane outbursts of tyranny. Our lesson from the two recent crises is that there is an unequivocal link between the nature of political regimes and the peace and stability of the world.
Democratic government is based on the recognition of civil liberties and on respect for the sovereignty of other nations. Democracy is the natural condition of a healthy society. It would be the preferred system for all mankind, were it free to choose. Man was born to freedom; it is part of his intrinsic nature. He was born to live, not to fight wars; to create, not to destroy. The spirit of freedom is embedded in the human intellect and the law of the jungle is alien to it. Therein lies the superiority of man over creatures that are devoid of the power of choice. "Live and let live" is the voice of human reason. "When one saves a human life it is as if one has saved all of humanity," runs an ancient Jewish saying.
These basic truisms have thrust themselves to the fore during recent years, when a new dawn has broken in the Soviet Union and in the countries of Eastern Europe. Seventy years of an oppressive regime could not suppress man's spirit of freedom. That spirit has arisen anew and broken its chains after three generations of independence denied. Now that the wind of freedom has been liberated no power on Earth can ever return it to captivity.
We saw this with our own eyes in the 70 hours of the abortive coup in the Soviet Union. We could have anticipated the end of that coup from the moment a small group of citizens first appeared in the streets of Moscow to face the approaching tanks. They stood against them unarmed, like a human banner, and the soldiers did not shoot. The army held its fire, faced as it was with the spirit of freedom that had taken root even among its own ranks. When the muse of freedom sang, the guns fell silent.
That is the lesson the world has drawn from the crisis of August 1991. Yet it learned another bitter and rapid lesson from the Persian Gulf crisis of August 1990. It learned how short-sighted it had been in supplying, over the years and without any controls, vast quantities of weapons to a dictatorial regime. It has learned just how terrifying can be the combination of military power and a lack of inhibition regarding its use. The chameleon that had bemused the entire enlightened world turned into a lethal python that wound itself around mankind's neck.
The billows of black smoke that rose from hundreds of oil wells across the Kuwaiti desert are a living and tangible illustration of the evil genie that had escaped from its bottle, throwing a huge pall over entire continents. Tyranny - and the tyrant - displayed an undreamed-of vitality.
Saddam Hussein has not been removed from the world scene. His defeated people have not rejected him. The Kurdish revolt has been brutally suppressed, leaving in its wake hundreds of thousands of homeless refugees. The scale of military strength that Saddam Hussein has retained is now revealed as a renewed and genuine threat to the region.
The Iraqi tyrant continues to scheme against and deceive the rest of the world. The United Nations inspection commissions have, one after the other, uncovered his lies and discovered the hidden stocks of non-conventional weapons he sought to conceal. Saddam Hussein is attempting to keep the world in ignorance of his revived military power, but the world, under the determined leadership of the United States, is not turning a blind eye to the facts, and will not permit the tyranny of Saddam Hussein to survive.
Last September, from this rostrum, I warned that Israel was about to become the target of attacks by Saddam Hussein in a war in which it was not involved, and to which it was not a party. And indeed Israel came under missile attack. It clenched its fists and gritted its teeth in refraining from any counter-attack, so as not to upset the international coalition. The international community has come to understand Israel's position as the bastion of genuine democracy in a dangerous and violent region. The events of the past year have made enlightened States world-wide re-evaluate the character of the Israeli-Arab conflict in the light of this correct political and historical perspective. Many countries realise today that the root causes of this bitter conflict, which has lasted decades, lie in the refusal of the Arab States - excluding Egypt - to recognise the existence of Israel and to accept its independence and sovereignty. It is this intransigence that has been the source of the wars imposed on Israel.
It has been clearly established that Israel is the only country in the world under a permanent tangible, physical threat to its very existence - a threat that has brought upon it six wars in the four decades of its existence. States that were themselves involved in the Gulf crisis have now come to understand, perhaps for the first time, the logic of Israel's insistence on a peace ensuring its security and the well-being of its inhabitants.
In January 1991 we presented a consolidated formula of five principles designed to promote the peace process: first, an end to the state of war between the Arab States and Israel, with a view to the signing of a peace treaty; secondly, reduction and control of the arms race; thirdly, direct negotiations, without preconditions, between Israel and its neighbours, with a view to the signing of peace agreements between Israel and each of the Arab States; fourthly, the simultaneous start of a resolution of the Palestinian problem, to be carried out in stages by us and the residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, in a joint framework with Jordan; and, fifthly, the drafting of joint programmes for regional development, with international aid, in areas such as water, the environment, electricity, solar energy, agriculture, health, transportation and the infrastructure. These principles have strengthened the foundations of the peace process in which we have been engaged since the cease-fire in the Gulf.
Since its establishment Israel has tirelessly sought to talk peace with its neighbours. In the aftermath of each of the ware that was forced upon us Israel has appealed to the Arab States to conduct direct talks with it, with no prior conditions, to attain a true and lasting peace. It seems that this appeal will now at last be answered. In a few weeks we shall, I hope, meet in face-to-face discussions with our neighbours in order to lay the foundations of a better future for our peoples and our coming generations. Israel is convinced that the sufferings of our war-torn region will be brought to an end, not as a result of any balance of terror, but of the benefits that peace will bring.
The bitter arms race in the Gulf and the Middle East has brought many tragedies to the peoples of the region. It is responsible for the poverty and misery of millions of human beings and for the wars which have broken out in our region over and over again in the latter half of this century. The arms race has drained the resources of the different States to the detriment of the welfare of their citizens. The potential means of destruction amassed by cruel dictators with limitless ambitions is a proven recipe for the outbreak of wars.
Our region has also known the use of chemical weapons, which Saddam Hussein used against his own people as well as against his Iranian enemy. The elimination of chemical weapons everywhere, and especially in the Middle East, is of supreme importance. This is why Israel has agreed to become a party to the convention to eliminate chemical weapons, while maintaining the principle of universality. For the convention to be effective all States of the region must become party to it.
The term "weapons of mass destruction" is no mere technical phrase. Every type of weapon - including conventional - that entails a threat of the indiscriminate destruction of large numbers of people falls, in our view, into the category of "weapons of mass destruction". Arms control must therefore include conventional weaponry as well.
On the eve of the convening of a regional peace conference, I appeal from this rostrum to the leaders of the Arab States. I say "Stop the insane arms race in weapons of extermination. Abandon all destructive impulses. Put an end to blind hatred. Do not waste your resources. Do not give up the opportunity for progress and well-being for your own countries for the illusory dream of destroying Israel.
"Israel draws its strength from its historic and moral right to a safe existence in its own country. Set out with us on the path of peace. Think of your children, as we think of ours. For they were born not for war, to be killed, but to live."
The far-reaching changes that have occurred in the struggle between blocs in the world have also been accompanied by positive changes in Africa. Some internal wars have ended, and others we hope are about to end. The process of African States' attaining their independence has been completed. The apartheid regime in South Africa is nearing its end. A wind of democracy has blown through many African States, inspiring a progressive evolution.
But in many States of the third world, especially in Africa, hunger, disease and misery are still on the rise. The growing birth rate has led to a population explosion and has aggravated the shortage of essential foodstuffs. In extensive areas the desert has reclaimed arable land and pasture land. Hundreds of thousands of people are falling victim to starvation and epidemics. All this is happening at the end of the twentieth century, a century that has seen unprecedented scientific, technological and medical achievements. In an era in which borderlines between East and West are becoming blurred, the developed countries must seek to bridge the huge gaps between the living standards of the northern and southern hemispheres. We must lend an attentive ear, especially to the heart-rending appeals for help from the African continent.
Israel is a small country, poor in natural resources and material riches, but it has its faith. It faces the tremendous challenge of absorbing every year hundreds of thousands of new immigrants, who flock to it from many countries.
However, in the process of building a new society and developing its economy, Israel has, over the past 40 years, accumulated considerable knowledge and experience in agriculture, technology, medicine and science, as well as in organisation and management. Israel has for many years placed its knowledge at the disposal of developing countries. The result of this mission which we have taken upon ourselves has been decades of cooperation and assistance to 96 countries.
In Israel, for several generations we have witnessed a revival in the life of a nation which has brought to the world values of peace, liberty and justice. These principles are the essence of the law of the Jewish people and of its universal message.
The Jewish people is the only people ever to have been exiled again and again, with its faith in its return to its homeland remaining unshaken. Bach time, mankind has benefited from the spiritual assets and values of justice which have accompanied the revival of the Jewish people in its ancestral land. The return to Zion in our own times, which has been the objective of the Zionist movement, has resulted in a gathering in Israel of the Jewish people from all over the world. Wherever tyranny has raged and our people have been persecuted, assistance came from Israel, bringing them back to their national homeland in freedom and security. In the aftermath of the Second World War, Israel took in hundreds of thousands of our brethren who had survived in Europe as well as hundreds of thousands from Arab countries and elsewhere, escaping discrimination and persecution.
These very days we are witnessing a phenomenon stirring in its enormity - that of the return of Jews from the Soviet Union and from Ethiopia to their ancestral homeland. The Zionist movement is colour-blind. The distinction between colours is alien to Zionism. That is why it has been proven that Zionism is tolerant and liberal par excellence.
Last week, President Bush appealed to this Assembly to abrogate the cynical and deplorable resolution which equates Zionism with racism. The President aptly described the unique character of the Zionist movement and its spiritual and humanitarian values. More and more representatives of nations are joining his appeal, guided by this great historical truth. This appeal will continue to reverberate both within this Hall and outside it until the repeal, in the near future, of that resolution, which constitutes a calumny on this Organisation and a disgrace to it.
This session stands on the threshold of a new hope. People the world over aspire for an end to hardship and suffering and for the beginning, at last, of an era full of promise and hope. For us, the Jewish people, it is also the beginning of a new year, when we exchange the traditional blessing: "May the outgoing year sweep away its maledictions, and may the new year bring with it blessings for all mankind."