It is a distinct pleasure to
address the Assembly with a distinguished son of Africa
and a veteran freedom fighter in the presidency. His
election to preside over this last session of the closing
millennium is a fitting tribute to his outstanding qualities.
I congratulate him warmly and assure him of the total
support and cooperation of my delegation.
We also thank His Excellency Mr. Opertti for the
excellent manner in which he presided over the work of the
fifty-third session. The Secretary-General, Mr. Kofi Annan,
whose strong commitment to the cause of the United
Nations needs hardly be emphasized, has continued to lead
the Organization with vision, vigour and great dedication.
Mauritius welcomes very warmly the admission of the
Kingdom of Tonga, the Republic of Kiribati and the
Republic of Nauru to the United Nations.
The curtain will soon fall on our eventful twentieth
century, a century of tremendous achievements by mankind.
The wide world has been reduced to a global village
through progress in the field of science and technology
during this century. The political map of the world has
undergone tremendous transformation. It is hardly
recognizable from what it used to be at this century's outset.
Today, our world is made of independent nations, with
peoples themselves in charge of their destinies. On the
other hand, we did experience the horrors of wars in the
first half of the century but decided never to let it happen
again. We created the United Nations in the aftermath of
the Second World War as a forum for all nations to carry
forward together a common pledge for lasting world peace
and promote development and progress for all humanity.
During this century man has paradoxically also
created weapons of mass destruction that threaten his very
existence. Disarmament, including nuclear disarmament,
remains a major preoccupation for all of us as we step
into the new millennium. The United Nations,
representing the collective conscience of nations, has
endeavoured to serve humanity and the cause of peace
and development. The United Nations is the sole
mechanism through which universal peace can be secured.
We unanimously agree also that reforms to the Charter of
the United Nations are necessary — indeed, overdue —
as in its present form it does not reflect the tremendous
changes the world has undergone since the Organization
was founded half a century ago.
It is now almost six years since the General
Assembly established the Open-ended Working Group on
the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase
in the Membership of the Security Council and Other
Matters Related to the Security Council. Progress has
been slow and has taken place on a limited set of issues
only.
What is lacking for the process to move forward is
political will on the part of some members. The fact is
that the Security Council in its present form is neither
adequately representative nor sufficiently transparent in its
work for its decisions to be universally accepted.
Mauritius supports the proposals of the Non-Aligned
Movement and of the Organization of African Unity
(OAU) on the reform of the Security Council. We appeal
to all Members of the United Nations to work together
constructively and advance the much needed reform
process expeditiously.
While the international community has largely been
successful in averting global wars, armed conflicts have
continued to endanger national, regional and international
peace. In particular, the African continent has continued
to be afflicted with conflicts, the worst being the crisis in
the Democratic Republic of Congo and the continued civil
war in Angola.
However, the international community should take
comfort in the fact that the leaders on the African
continent have spared no efforts to find solutions and
restore peace in the countries and areas in question.
Through tireless and extensive efforts of African leaders,
the OAU and the United Nations, and all the parties
concerned in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of
Congo, have signed the Lusaka Agreement in order to
8

restore peace and stability in the country. One of the
fundamental aspects of the Agreement is the deployment of
a United Nations peacekeeping force, with the task of
ensuring that all parties respect the terms of the Lusaka
Agreement. We deplore the fact that the United Nations
peacekeeping force has still not assumed its crucial
responsibility in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. We
call upon the Security Council to give due priority to this
matter so that a peacekeeping force is dispatched
expeditiously, as delay to do so may imperil the
implementation of the Agreement.
The rebellion in Angola continues because of arms
supplies from outside to the forces of destabilization. The
Security Council is fully apprised of this and confident that
those guilty of breaking the embargo on arms supply to
UNITA will be identified and held responsible. The people
of Angola have indeed suffered too long. We therefore
appeal to all nations to take necessary steps to ensure that
unscrupulous elements do not channel weapons to the
forces of rebellion in Angola out of their greed of monetary
windfalls. The international community needs to intensify
its efforts to end the rebellion in Angola.
The armed conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea ended
with the signing recently of an agreement with the help of
the OAU and several African leaders and friendly countries.
We hope that the spirit in which the two countries have
agreed to end their differences will continue and that lasting
peace will return to the region. We are also heartened by
the fact that an agreement has been signed between the
parties concerned to end the internal strife in Sierra Leone.
We are confident that peace and stability will now return to
Sierra Leone.
In the Comoros, forces of destabilization have
continued to thwart the return to normalcy. Through tireless
efforts by the OAU and countries of the region, a
conference of all the Comoros parties concerned was held
earlier this year in Madagascar with a view to reaching an
agreement under which peace and stability would return to
the Comoros and territorial integrity and sovereignty would
be maintained. Unfortunately, the military coup derailed the
whole process. We therefore call for the establishment of
democratic rule in the Comoros so that the agreement
reached at the Antananarivo conference can be fully
implemented.
The Kosovo conflict has distressed us all. We have
witnessed the horrors of ethnic cleansing, massive
disruption of the life of a people and terrible destruction
inflicted on a country. We must all remember many
messages from the events in Kosovo. Humanity will not
sit idly by when people are flagrantly subjected to
genocide for reason of ethnic bigotry or political
expediency. Quick-fix military action to resolve
deep-rooted problems is not necessarily the best option.
The United Nations remains the most appropriate
mechanism for addressing issues that relate to
maintenance of international peace and security.
Mauritius is deeply distressed by the violence in East
Timor, the loss of so many innocent lives and the terrible
sufferings inflicted on the Timorese people in the
aftermath of the recent referendum. We welcome the
action undertaken by the United Nations to send a
peacekeeping force to restore peace and security on the
island. The verdict of the referendum must be respected
by the Indonesian Government and all parties concerned.
In the Middle East, the determination shown by the
new Prime Minister of Israel, Mr. Ehud Barak, to move
the peace process forward, together with President Arafat,
is most encouraging not only to the parties concerned in
the region but also to the international community as a
whole. This moment of great optimism must be seized in
order to work out a comprehensive and just settlement
that will bring lasting peace and stability to the region.
In 1996 our delegation, led by the Prime Minister of
Mauritius, The Honourable Navinchandra Ramgoolam,
drew special attention to the situation in Fiji. We are
pleased that the new constitutional process under which
general elections were recently held has removed the
iniquities which were written into that nation's
Constitution before. We welcome this change and
congratulate the people of Fiji on their courage and
determination to bring the change in a democratic and
peaceful manner.
(spoke in French)
Conflicts and wars, even after they have ended,
invariably leave serious humanitarian situations behind
them. The humanitarian crises in Africa seem of little
interest to the cameras of international television
networks. There are more than 12 million people who
need urgent humanitarian assistance in Africa. The
humanitarian agencies have received only $352 million
although their needs for Africa in 1999 are in the order of
$796 million.
Peacemaking efforts must be supported by effective
humanitarian aid, especially for refugees. The host
9

countries, already faced with their own difficulties, cannot
take on this heavy burden. To give lasting peace a real
chance, it is also necessary to support the return of refugees
so as to make the stabilization of society possible. A special
financing effort on the part of the international community
is necessary to that end.
(spoke in English)
Respect for human rights is of primordial importance
for the prevention of conflicts and for the maintenance of
durable peace. We believe that all countries should make
strict adherence to the human rights instruments of the
United Nations a matter of national priority. We in
Mauritius always place human rights high on our national
and international agenda. Mauritius was honoured to host
the First OAU ministerial conference on human rights, held
earlier this year in the context of the celebration of the
fiftieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. The conference reviewed the human rights situation
in Africa and adopted a declaration and plan of action
which aim at strengthening the promotion and protection of
human rights.
We have witnessed gross violations of human rights,
particularly under military regimes. In this regard, the
decision at the recent OAU summit in Algiers to exclude
from that organization those leaders who assume power in
the continent through military coups is an important step
that will help the cause of democracy and human rights.

Mauritius has welcomed the International Criminal
Court and was amongst the first to ratify the Statute
establishing it. We look forward to an early conclusion of
the work of our experts who are currently engaged in
finalizing the rules to enable the International Criminal
Court to commence its work.
The easy availability of light and small-calibre
weapons has given rise to numerous conflicts, particularly
in Africa. These small arms, besides exacerbating conflicts,
give rise to social disruption, insecurity, instability, violence
and crime. In view of the magnitude of the problem, the
OAU summit in Algiers last July decided to convene a
regional conference to address the issue fully. We urge the
international community to take measures to control the
flow of small arms.
Disarmament is essential for international peace. It
is regrettable that the threat of nuclear holocaust will
accompany humanity into the new millennium because of
the international community's failure to work out a regime
for the total elimination of nuclear weapons. Under the
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and
the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty we have
taken important steps on the issue of nuclear
disarmament, but these alone cannot eliminate the threat
of nuclear weapons. Mauritius continues to be firmly of
the belief that the best way for the international
community to address the nuclear disarmament issue
effectively is to establish a clear timetable for nuclear-
weapon Powers to commit themselves to dismantle all
nuclear weapons and for all nations to commit themselves
to not develop such weapons in the future. So far we
have adopted half-way measures only; it is time for a
bold step to be taken that would eliminate nuclear
weapons once and for all.
Chemical weapons, as weapons of mass destruction,
can inflict untold miseries on their victims. The
Convention on Chemical Weapons — a very significant
achievement — must be adhered to by all nations,
particularly countries that have chemical weapons in their
possession.
The lives of many people around the world, in
Africa in particular, continue to be affected by landmines.
We believe it is the responsibility of all nations to address
this problem collectively. We appeal to those countries
that have not yet acceded to the Ottawa Convention on
anti-personnel mines to do so and also to contribute
financially to the efforts to remove all landmines.
Peace, security and development are indivisible and
mutually reinforcing. As we stand at the threshold of the
twenty-first century we have a historic opportunity to
create a long-term visionary strategy for the sustainable
development of all countries of the world, in particular
African States, and thus promote international peace and
security. This is extremely important if we really want to
avoid the marginalization in the wake of the irreversible
process of globalization and unbridled liberalization. It is
increasingly being realized that market forces alone
cannot resolve the problems of poverty, deprivation and
marginalization, particularly in Africa, which comprises
the largest number of least-developed countries. The
United Nations system, in our view, has an important role
to play in this respect as there is a crying need for
coherence in the formulation and implementation of
policies in the trade, finance and social sectors.
10

It is true that globalization brings both challenges and
opportunities, but to many developing countries the
challenges are proving overwhelming. But there does not
seem to be any alternative, in a world characterized by the
“pensée unique”, to making the necessary adjustments to
join a fast globalizing world economy. Higher levels of
investment; technology transfer; and institutional, human
resource and infrastructure capacity-building, will be
required especially for African countries, if they are to
make the necessary transition.
The developed world and the major financial and
trading organizations must be not only cognizant of the
situation but also responsive to the constraints on and needs
of the developing world in general and the least-developed
countries and vulnerable small island developing States in
particular.
The heavy debt burden, the declining level of official
development assistance — which currently stands at 0.22
per cent of gross domestic product compared to the target
of 0.7 per cent — and insignificant private investment
flows into Africa do not allow many African countries to
implement successfully the necessary adjustment
programmes to compete effectively in the world market.
Only decisive action to resolve the debt problem can
provide the necessary impetus.
Although we recognize that the Cologne Summit
initiative represents an improvement over the original
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Debt Initiative, we
believe that the unsustainable debt of Africa — which
contains 33 of the 41 HIPC countries — should be written
off, for only then can those countries embark on the path of
sustainable growth and development.
In that connection, we welcome the recently
announced plan to cancel $27 billion of debt owed by the
poorest countries to allow them to use those resources to
finance education and health, which are important in
dealing with the problem of poverty.
We also commend the World Bank for establishing the
$400 million Infrastructure Investment Fund, whose
advisory board will be headed by Mr. Nelson Mandela,
former President of South Africa.
Capacity-building in all sectors of the economy is
important if developing countries are to benefit from the
opportunities arising from globalization and trade
liberalization. But in view of the lack of a level playing
field and the inherent obstacles facing African, Caribbean
and Pacific countries, it is imperative for them to continue
to benefit from trade preferences in the European Union
under the successor to the fourth ACP-CEE Convention
of Lomé for a sufficiently long transitional period before
they implement any alternative trade arrangement.
The euphoria created following the signing of the
Marrakesh agreement in 1994 after the conclusion of the
Uruguay Round has been short-lived; many developing
countries today recognize that they are overburdened with
World Trade Organization (WTO) commitments and
obligations. There is indeed a growing recognition that
implementation of these commitments is simply beyond
their capacity, or rather that there is a limit to trade
liberalization and deregulation.
It is, therefore, important to allow developing
countries flexibility within the world trading system to
implement policies in harmony with their sustainable
development needs. The provisions on special and
differential treatment in all areas covered by WTO
agreements should be fully and effectively implemented.
In this regard, it is also crucial that the multilateral
trading system should facilitate the process of regional
integration, because for many countries regional
integration is an important step towards their integration
into the global economy.
We welcome and support the recent OAU decision
to accelerate implementation of the 1991 Abuja Treaty for
the establishment of an African Economic Community.
This process could be facilitated by effective
implementation of the United States of America-Africa
Blueprint adopted in March 1999 and more importantly,
of the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act. We urge the
United States to ensure early passage of this long-standing
Bill with its original provisions on textiles and clothing.
Two days ago, I had the opportunity in my address
to the recent Assembly special session to highlight both
the inherent constraints on small island developing
countries and their development needs. The special
session gave us an opportunity to review the
implementation of the Barbados Declaration and
Programme of Action for the sustainable development of
small island developing States (SIDS): we must take the
process further to embrace other issues, such as
concessional loans and trade preferences for SIDS.
I reiterate my appeal to the international community
to give special attention to the plight of SIDS, in terms
both of providing financial resources, and of encouraging

foreign direct investment, and also in the context of the
negotiations for the third WTO Ministerial Conference, in
Seattle. We must ensure that the Conference, which is to be
held later this year, addresses the marginalization of small
economies and the problems of developing countries that
are net importers of food by adopting specific and practical
measures. We must also see to it that the Seattle Round of
multilateral trade negotiations is a “development round” that
puts the issue of development firmly on the international
agenda. The WTO negotiations in Seattle should be broad-
based and should provide a balanced outcome from which
all countries will benefit.
In this connection, it should be emphasized that
agricultural trade is of vital importance to a number of
developing countries, in particular to small economies
including small and vulnerable island developing States. In
the agricultural trade negotiations we should give just as
much importance to non-trade issues such as food security,
environmental protection and the viability of rural
populations.
These are vital issues for Mauritius, and for many
other SIDS and small economics and small economies. And
that is why we are emphasizing the multifunctionality of
agriculture. Planting sugar cane, which is the only crop
suitable to our difficult terrains, and which is resistant to
adverse climatic conditions like cyclones and droughts, also
contributes to environmental protection by providing a
renewable source of energy. Sugar exports earnings assure
food security. Many small island developing countries are
in the same situation as Mauritius. We would therefore urge
that this important dimension be fully taken into account in
the WTO negotiations on agriculture.
Economic growth by itself does not bring about
sustainable socio-economic development. Social
development should continue to be given due consideration
by our Organization. We therefore welcome the follow-up
conferences on social development and on women, which
will be organized next year.
For the majority of small States, the United Nations
continues to be the main bulwark against infringements on
their sovereignty and territorial integrity. We have
consistently drawn the attention of the Assembly to the
issue of the Chagos Archipelago, which was detached from
Mauritius by the former colonial Power prior to our
independence in 1968, and also to the plight of over 2000
people who were forced to leave the land of their birth,
where they had lived for generations, for resettlement in
Mauritius. This was done in total disregard of the United
Nations declaration embodied in resolution 1514 (XV), of
14 December 1960, and resolution 2066 (XX), of 16
December 1965, which prohibit the dismemberment of
colonial Territories prior to independence.
Mauritius has repeatedly asked for the return of the
Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia, on which a
United States military base has been built, and thereby the
restoration of its territorial integrity. The over 2,000
displaced Ilois people have been facing tremendous
difficulties in adapting in mainland Mauritius, in spite of
all the efforts that Mauritius has made to assist them in
this process.
So far the issue has been discussed within the
framework of our friendly relations with the United
Kingdom, with a view to arriving at an acceptable
solution. Unfortunately, there has not been significant
progress. The United Kingdom has been maintaining that
the Chagos Archipelago will be returned to Mauritius
only when it is no longer required for defence purposes
by the West. While we continue the dialogue for an early
resolution of the issue on a bilateral basis, we urge the
United Kingdom in the meantime to allow the displaced
inhabitants to return to the Chagos Archipelago. At the
dawn of the new millennium, when we so strongly uphold
universal recognition of and respect for fundamental
human rights, the inhabitants of Chagos should not
continue to be denied the right to return to the Chagos
Archipelago.
The restoration of the territorial integrity of the State
of Mauritius will not be complete without the return of
Tromelin. We therefore call upon France to resume
constructive discussions with us on the question of
Tromelin.
This is the last session of the General Assembly for
this century. When we meet next year it will be a new
millennium. The question that comes to our minds is
whether we want to come back next year and discuss the
same issues and the same problems. Should we not,
rather, make a pledge here and now that by the time we
meet next year we will have taken the necessary measures
that will put an end to regional and ethnic problems and
to the abuse of human rights, and will instead create the
necessary environment to enable the human race to enjoy
basic freedom and basic rights in peace and prosperity?
Mauritius is ready to make such a pledge.
12


I wish first to
congratulate you warmly, Sir, on your election to the
presidency of the General Assembly at its fifty-fourth
session. This does honour to your country, Namibia, and
is a source of joy and satisfaction to all of Africa, and
particularly to my country, Mali. You may count on the
full support of my delegation, on behalf of which it is my
honour to address the General Assembly today. I am
convinced that with your talent and your experience as an
estimable diplomat you will guide the work of the
Assembly to a successful conclusion.
I wish also to take this opportunity to convey to
your predecessor, His Excellency Mr. Didier Opertti, our
satisfaction at the commitment and skill with which he
guided the work of the Assembly at its fifty-third session.
Let me also reaffirm the gratitude of the Government
of Mali to the Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Kofi
Annan, for the determination and wisdom he has shown
in the quest for solutions to the central concerns of the
international community.
The fifty-fourth session of the General Assembly is
taking place at the dawn of the third millennium, at a
time when the gap between the developed and the
developing worlds is growing ever larger. Imbalances in
9

the world economy, the unequal distribution of wealth,
poverty, grave and massive violations of human rights,
massacres and conflicts of every kind pose a serious threat
to international stability.
Despite significant progress in many areas, the United
Nations continues to face daunting challenges. It must
formulate a collective approach with shared responsibility
and greater, more effective solidarity to bring about the
economic cooperation that is indispensable for lasting peace
and security for all. In that context, many and varied
challenges face Mali, Africa, the world at large, and the
United Nations at the end of the twentieth century, such as
debt, development financing, security including
disarmament and international terrorism, democracy, human
rights, international migration and United Nations reform.
Last year we spoke out from this rostrum against a
globalization dominated by market forces and a financial
approach, and in favour of a globalization based on
sustainable human development. That is the real challenge,
and our growing conviction is that we can resolve all
present imbalances if, through renewed, responsible and
candid political dialogue, we tackle them with a global and
unified vision, with commitment to genuine partnership, and
with a sense of shared, equal responsibility in the building
of a better world, a world for mankind. That is the
approach we must take to addressing the problems of
developing countries: indebtedness, their integration as real
actors in the world economy, and development financing.
The problem of developing-country indebtedness must
continue to be a focus of the attention of the international
community with a view to finding a lasting solution that
will be acceptable to all. To be sure, the Heavily Indebted
Poor Countries Debt (HIPC) Initiative and the initiative
adopted at the Cologne summit of the Group of Seven in
June 1999 were important steps. But, because it absorbs
more than a third of the export income of developing
countries and because debt-servicing costs imperil the
future of generations to come, debt is an insurmountable
obstacle to any development effort. The debt burden must
not merely be lightened; debts must be cancelled. Without
playing down any responsibility here, debt cancellation has
become necessary in order to enable the efforts and
sacrifices made by developing countries to yield their full
benefits for their peoples. Debt cancellation, along with a
new, more rational debt policy based on the productive
capacities of these countries, would lay the foundations for
true, sustainable development financing.
Long seen as an act of generosity by the rich
towards the poor, development assistance is now viewed
as a tangible expression of a solidarity that is
indispensable. It has significantly declined in recent years,
and we must do everything possible to reverse that trend
in order to better meet the financing needs of developing
countries. My country, Mali — which has already enacted
significant political, economic and structural reforms —
hopes that special attention will be given to the situation
of African countries in any consideration of this matter.
I appeal to developed countries completely to fulfil their
commitment to increase official development assistance,
to build up our economic capacities in the areas of
processing and marketing our commodities, and to pay
proper prices for our products and facilitate market
access.
The current state of affairs demands a new
partnership based on an acknowledgement that
development financing is a shared responsibility, which
should be reflected in more equitable burden-sharing
among donors. Here, the high-level meeting on
development financing is of crucial importance. My
delegation believes that that meeting should be seen in the
two-fold context of follow-up to the major summits and
international conferences of the 1990s and of the General
Assembly’s Agenda for Development.
More than half a century after the creation of the
United Nations, there is no further need to prove its
relevance and contribution to the disarmament agenda and
to building international peace and security. Here I stress
the particular importance that Mali attaches to
disarmament in general and to micro-disarmament in
particular. The establishment of nuclear-weapon-free
zones on the basis of arrangements freely entered into
among the States of the region concerned, and the
extension of such zones to all regions of the world, will
make a significant contribution to international peace and
security. In that connection, I would recall that Mali has
ratified the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty —
the Pelindaba Treaty — to manifest its support for the
initiative to make Africa a nuclear-weapon-free zone.
However, let us make no mistake about it, what
today seriously threatens peace, the security of women,
men and children in Africa are small arms and anti-
personnel mines.
As we take stock of the progress made in combating
the proliferation of small arms since the fifty-third
session, while we appreciate the efforts of the United
10

Nations Panel of Governmental Experts, we totally support
the appeal for action adopted by the International
Conference on Sustainable Disarmament for Sustainable
Development, held in Brussels on 12 and 13 October 1998.
We should welcome the historic decision of the member
countries of the Economic Community of West African
States (ECOWAS), on the initiative of Mali, to declare a
moratorium on the export, import and production of small
arms starting on 1 November 1998 and lasting for three
years, a moratorium that is supported by a code of conduct.
The meeting of the ECOWAS Ministers for Foreign Affairs
that was held in Bamako in March 1999, defined the
modalities for the implementation of the programme of
coordination and assistance for security and development,
and adopted a plan of action in nine priority areas to make
the moratorium operational. These efforts deserve support
from the international community so that there will be more
overall cooperation to stem the proliferation of small arms
and mitigate their devastating effects.
Also, it is essential to support and extend this
moratorium, to apply more strictly the laws and rules in
force on arms transfers, to improve them and strengthen
them at all levels and to back them up with codes of
conduct. We also need to strengthen the capacity of States
and increase coordination to deal with this phenomenon.
But we also need to work on a progressive and effective
international normative mechanism to control the circulation
of small arms. We support very strongly the decision of the
Assembly to convene an international conference on this
question.
Similarly, we must continue our work to free the
world of the scourge of anti-personnel mines, and in
particular we need to rid Africa of them, for they continue
to sow death and mayhem even after conflicts end. We will
achieve this by working in the context of the Maputo
Declaration and seeing to it that everyone, without
exception, ratifies and implements the Convention on the
banning of anti-personnel mines. We ratified the
Convention very early on, and our country has destroyed its
meagre stock of these weapons, which we never in fact
used. Mali is now adopting the national legislation required
by the Convention on the banning of anti-personnel mines.
In the last 50 years, peacekeeping operations have
become an important tool for resolving conflicts by
peaceful means and for promoting international peace and
security. However, I would like to say that in and of
themselves, they are not a solution to conflicts, but only
special measures to prevent conflicts from getting worse
pending a peaceful solution.
Our constant quest for peace is reflected in our
effective participation in peacekeeping operations and our
total support for the Mechanism for Conflict Prevention,
Management and Resolution in Africa, to which the
international community should give special attention. We
ask the international community to mobilize quickly, in
good time and to a greater extent to support the
immediate implementation of hard-to-reach and always
precarious peace agreements, as well as peace-building
programmes.
Mali also supports any measures to help create a
climate allowing us to confront the causes of conflicts,
which now relate primarily to underdevelopment, poor
governance, deficiencies in democracy and bad
cooperation policies. We pin great hopes on the decision
of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) to make the
year 2000 a year of peace and security in Africa, and we
very much hope that the international community will
give strong support to our continent in its prevention and
peacekeeping efforts.
I cannot fail to mention here the close link between
security and development and the consequent need to
finance security as an integral part of development action.
Nor can I conclude without mentioning the ghastly,
appalling question of child soldiers.
President Konaré has said in this regard,
“we have an absolute responsibility for the sad lot of
child soldiers, which is not acceptable and cannot be
borne; we must put an end to it by unambiguously
condemning all those who use these children and
who instil in them a culture of violence, thus sowing
the seeds of the perpetuation of violence and
conflicts ... We must work for a real culture of
peace. The place of our children is in school; it is
our responsibility to put an end to this heinous
phenomenon by denouncing it and taking vigorous
steps against it, including international criminal
sanctions. Post-conflict programmes must include
among their priorities the reintegration through
education of child soldiers; and in a general way it
must make education the heart of the strategy for
building peace and sustainable development.”
The decision to hold a special session of the General
Assembly to follow-up to the World Summit for Children
in 2001 coincides with the commemoration of the tenth
anniversary of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
We must take that opportunity to hasten our attainment of

the objectives that we have set for ourselves with regard to
children.
We have a unique responsibility towards them. The
least we can do on the eve of the new millennium is to
provide all boys and girls better health, schools and
protection from wars and famines.
Mali is staunchly committed to democracy and human
rights. Observance of human, political, civil, economic,
social and cultural rights is an integral part of economic
prosperity, social equity and the promotion of peace and
security. In this context, a certain number of minimum
standards are necessary in any democracy based on law and
respect for human rights. I am referring to values that we
all deem to be fundamental and the observance of which
we are committed to: rule of law, respect for human rights,
a system of democratic government and the conditions for
necessary changes of government in a republican and
democratic system. In a democracy, this is the minimum
that we must all, each and every one of us, consolidate,
build and develop.
The situation in the Middle East remains a source of
concern, despite the revival of the peace process. I wish to
reaffirm here the unreserved support of Mali for the just
struggle of the Palestinian people as well as for a
comprehensive just and lasting solution based on the
relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the
principle of land for peace.
Turning now to the Lockerbie crisis, Mali, basing
itself on the progress made in dealing with this question,
appeals for the complete, immediate lifting of the sanctions
that have been unjustly imposed on the fraternal people of
the Libyan Arab Jamahirya, and I am pleased to renew to
them the support and solidarity of the people of Mali.
Likewise, we are still concerned at the humanitarian cost to
civilians in other countries that have been unjustly targeted
by sanctions.
Security and stability are facing new threats, including
the problem of drugs — which has become worse with
globalization — organized crime, international terrorism,
money-laundering and corruption. In the face of these
threats and their adverse effects of them, the international
community must step up its efforts to put in place the
mechanisms necessary to eradicate them and cooperate
better in order to combat them. In regard to international
terrorism, Mali signed the African convention in Algiers,
and we support the appeal of the OAU for the speedy
conclusion of an international convention in order better
to prevent terrorism and to combat it more effectively.
Today, when mankind is preparing for a new
millennium, it is essential to adapt the United Nations to
the needs of our time. The challenges that we will be
facing demand that we adopt appropriate measures now
so that the next century will enjoy more peace and more
justice in a new partnership based on solidarity among all
nations.
If the United Nations is to remain the gathering
place in which all countries can make their voices heard
to find solutions to problems that confront them, it must
not be marginalized. Therefore, it is necessary today more
than ever to review the functioning of the system of the
Organization in order to adapt it to present and future
circumstances.
My delegation is convinced of the need to
democratize further our Organization through a
comprehensive restructuring of its main organs,
particularly the Security Council, the composition of
which reflects the state of the world as it was 50 years
ago and which does not in any way reflect the political,
economic and social realities of today’s or tomorrow’s
world.
In addition, my delegation reaffirms Africa’s demand
for an equitable division among the two categories of
seats. We call upon Member States to reinforce the
prestige, the authority, the effectiveness and the
legitimacy of the Council.
This session gives the international community a
unique opportunity to demonstrate once again that the
United Nations is an active, dynamic institution, capable
of confronting the major concerns of the world. In order
to do this it must prove that, despite the sometimes
discouraging complexity of the issues involved and the
often divergent national interests of Member States, the
Organization is capable of working with determination,
creativity and effectiveness for the common good of all.
This is what we aspire to.


Mr.President, it is an honour to
address the General Assembly at this session, the last to be
held in the twentieth century.
May I begin by welcoming the Republic of Kiribati,
the Republic of Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga to the
family of the United Nations. We look forward to working
closely with the new Members.
The twentieth century has been described as the age of
extremes. In this century, human civilization made quantum
strides in progress and prosperity. We discovered the ocean
depths, travelled into the outer space and landed on the
moon. We have witnessed the technological and
information revolutions transforming the wide world into a
global village.
The twentieth century has also been a violent and
tragic century. Millions died in the two world wars and
hundreds of other conflicts. Millions perished as a result
of poverty and disease.
This session of the Assembly offers an opportunity
to identify the major global challenges which humankind
is likely to confront in the next century. The United
Nations should therefore devote the next year to evolving
ways and means to address these challenges and to
promoting an agreed approach next year at the
Millennium Assembly.
Peace remains the foremost challenge of our times.
The end of the cold war and the triumph of the principles
of democracy and free markets created hope for the dawn
of universal peace. This, unfortunately, turned out to be
elusive. Instead, conflicts have continued to ravage the
world.
Long-suppressed national aspirations, as well as
frustration with continuing inequity and deprivation, have
led to widespread violence and wars, between and within
States. The several conflicts afflicting Africa, the Balkans
and the Caucasus, as well as Palestine, Kashmir and
Afghanistan, are painful reminders of the ascendance of
war and the absence of peace.
The United Nations, under the wise leadership of
Secretary-General Kofi Annan, has endeavoured to cope
with these conflicts and crises. Unilateral approaches,
accompanying the centralization of global influence, have
not always ensured just and durable solutions to complex
problems rooted in history, religion, politics and
economics in various parts of the world.
In the final and decisive confrontation of the cold
war, 1.5 million Afghans were killed, a million were
maimed, and a whole country was destroyed. Ten years
after the foreign intervention ended, almost 3 million
Afghan refugees are still in Pakistan and Iran. With no
reconstruction and no development in that poor country,
the new generation knows nothing but war. Rehabilitation
and reconstruction are the right of the valiant Afghan
people. Economic development, accompanied by
education and modernization, is the best way to end
violence, promote human rights and improve social
conditions in Afghanistan.
Peace in Afghanistan is vital for Pakistan. Turmoil
in Afghanistan creates turbulence on our frontier. The
preservation of Afghanistan’s territorial integrity is pivotal
28

for peace and stability throughout Central Asia. Peace in
Afghanistan will open vast opportunities for commerce and
economic interaction between Central Asia and South Asia
and beyond.
Pakistan has persisted in promoting peace and
reconciliation in Afghanistan. We support the efforts of the
United Nations as well as the “six plus two” process.
Pakistan is constantly endeavouring to bring about an end
to the fighting and promote reconciliation and political
accommodation between the Taliban Government and the
Northern Alliance.
The world has welcomed the resumption of the peace
process in the Middle East. We earnestly hope that it will
proceed smoothly to culminate in the establishment of a just
and durable peace based on the fundamental rights of the
Palestinian people, including their right to their own State,
and the withdrawal of Israel from the Syrian Golan Heights
and southern Lebanon.
We are glad that the tension between morality and
legality has been overcome in Kosovo. We are happy the
Kosovar refugees have returned home. Yet Kosovo’s
travails are not over. Pakistan will continue to support the
efforts of the United Nations for peace in the Balkans.
In East Timor, we trust that the human tragedy has
ended, even as the United Nations peacekeepers arrive
there. I wish to pay tribute to Secretary-General Kofi
Annan and my compatriot, Ambassador Jamsheed Marker,
who were greatly challenged in the process of fostering
freedom in East Timor while safeguarding stability.
We have learned valuable lessons from Kosovo and
East Timor: a people’s aspiration for freedom cannot be
suppressed indefinitely; a free exercise of the right of
self-determination is indispensable for peace; self-
determination can be best exercised in an environment free
of fear and coercion; and the United Nations is best placed
to oversee the exercise of self-determination.
These conclusions were already accepted for Kashmir
50 years ago. The Security Council decided that the final
disposition of the disputed State of Kashmir should be
determined by its people, in a free and impartial plebiscite
held under United Nations auspices. India resiled from its
acceptance of this agreement and from its own pledge to
allow the Kashmiri people to decide their own future. On
one pretext or another, it refused to implement the
provisions of Security Council resolutions.
India's repression in Jammu and Kashmir has killed
thousands of Kashmiris, forced hundreds of thousands
into exile, led to three wars between Pakistan and India
and consigned the two countries to a relationship of
endemic conflict and mistrust. Pakistan and India can and
must overcome this unfortunate legacy.
To this end, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, soon after
assuming office two and a half years ago, proposed the
initiation of a comprehensive, structured and sustained
dialogue between Pakistan and India to address Kashmir,
peace and security and other outstanding issues. India
agreed, after one year, to a dialogue on Kashmir. To
provide political momentum to the bilateral dialogue,
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif invited Prime Minister
Vajpayee to visit Pakistan.
At the Lahore summit, India and Pakistan committed
themselves to intensify their efforts to resolve Kashmir,
build mutual confidence and peace and pave the way for
broader cooperation. In Lahore, the Pakistan Prime
Minister urged his Indian counterpart to ease the
repression in Kashmir. He cautioned that without progress
on Kashmir political dynamics could compromise the
good intentions reflected in the Lahore Declaration. But
India displayed no desire to genuinely address, let alone
resolve, the Kashmir issue. Its cruel repression of the
Kashmiri people continued unabated.
The Kargil crisis was a manifestation of the deeper
malaise spawned by the unresolved Kashmir problem and
India's escalating repression of the Kashmiri people. India
launched a massive military operation in Kargil and
threatened a wider conflict by mobilizing its armed forces
all along the Pakistan-India international border. Pakistan
acted with restraint. We believed that war between two
nuclear-armed neighbours must be avoided. We offered
immediate de-escalation and negotiations to address
problems along the Line of Control, including India's
violation of this Line and occupation of Chorbatla,
Siachen and Qamar. Pakistan's efforts led to the
disengagement by the Kashmiri freedom fighters from the
Kargil heights and offered a renewed opportunity for
negotiation and dialogue.
Pakistan is ready for the resumption of the Lahore
process with India. However, instead of reciprocating
Pakistan's willingness to pursue negotiations, India has
posed preconditions for resuming the talks. The Indian
military deliberately shot down an unarmed Pakistan
naval aircraft on a routine flight within our airspace,
killing 16 of our naval personnel — mostly young
29

trainees — in cold blood and without any warning. India is
also continuing hostilities along the Line of Control and has
repeatedly launched attacks across the Line in several
sectors.
Kashmir is not a dispute over land. It is about the
destiny of a people; it is about implementation of the
resolutions of the Security Council; it is about respect for
the fundamental rights of the Kashmiri people, especially
their right to self-determination. The complete boycott by
the Kashmiris of the sham elections in Kashmir organized
by India earlier this month is clear testimony of their total
alienation from India. No settlement can be durable if it is
contrary to their wishes.
The Kashmir issue cannot be frozen while its people
are determined to secure their freedom; while the blood of
Kashmiri martyrs is being shed by the bullets and bayonets
of the 700,000-strong Indian occupation force. Human
rights must be upheld not only in Kosovo and Timor, but
also in Kashmir. To make progress towards a settlement,
the world must demand that India take immediate steps to
halt its repression of the Kashmiri people.
For this purpose, India must: first, stop the cruel
crackdowns against Kashmiri villages and urban areas;
second, release the thousands of Kashmiris held in
detention centres and jails; third, remove military pickets
and troops stationed in Kashmiri towns and villages; fourth,
allow the presence of international human rights
organizations in Kashmir; fifth, agree to the stationing of
impartial human rights monitors in Jammu and Kashmir;
sixth, entrust the International Committee of the Red Cross
(ICRC) with a larger role in Kashmir, including the
provision of relief and help to the thousands of Kashmiri
widows and orphans; and, seventh, agree to a progressive
reduction of the 700,000 Indian troops deployed in
Kashmir.
The international community is increasingly conscious
of the imperative for a just resolution of the Jammu and
Kashmir dispute. The risk of a wider conflict cannot be
contemplated in a nuclear environment. Kashmir remains on
the Security Council's agenda. The Council's resolutions
remain to be implemented. The promise of self-
determination made by the United Nations to the Kashmiri
people remains to be fulfilled. Therefore, while we will,
hopefully, soon resume bilateral talks with India, Pakistan
would welcome the association of the genuine
representatives of the Kashmiri people with the negotiating
process to promote a solution consistent with the United
Nations Security Council resolutions.
India's ambitions threaten to further propel our
region towards a dangerous nuclear and conventional
arms race. For decades — even after India's first nuclear
explosion in 1974 — Pakistan sought to exclude nuclear
weapons from South Asia. Ironically, the advocates of
non-proliferation imposed discriminatory restrictions
against Pakistan while ignoring India's steady
development of nuclear and missile capabilities. Last May
India put the final nail in the coffin of South Asian non-
proliferation when it conducted five nuclear tests and
declared itself a nuclear-weapon State. Its leaders then
proceeded to threaten Pakistan. Confronted by an
aggressive nuclear India, Pakistan was obliged to
demonstrate its nuclear capability and thus restore nuclear
deterrence and strategic balance in South Asia. The
response of the major Powers, to penalize not only the
offender but also the victim, was patently unfair.
Even after our tests, Pakistan proposed nuclear
restraint to India, consistent with our conviction that
nuclear deterrence can and should be maintained between
Pakistan and India at the lowest possible level. In our
separate dialogues with the United States and India, we
proposed a strategic restraint regime outlining specific
measures for nuclear restraint and stabilization,
conventional arms balance and the resolution of
outstanding disputes. Hopes for restraint have been
shattered by the announcement of India's nuclear doctrine,
setting out plans to acquire and operationally deploy a
huge arsenal of land-, air- and sea-based nuclear weapons
and to further build up its conventional forces, almost all
of which are deployed against Pakistan. Even the Indian
offer of non-first use of nuclear weapons is designed to
gain it acceptance as a nuclear-weapon State and to
justify the acquisition of a massive nuclear arsenal as a
second-strike capability.
India's pursuit of this doctrine will destabilize South
Asia. Pakistan will be compelled to enhance its nuclear
and missile capabilities and operational readiness to
preserve deterrence. India must test again to develop
warheads for its missiles. This would subvert the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). India's
quest for its large nuclear arsenal could jeopardize
prospects for the conclusion of a fissile material cut-off
treaty. India's ambitions threaten peace and stability not
only in South Asia, but also in adjacent regions, including
the Gulf and the sea lanes of the Indian Ocean.
The international community must act — and it must
act immediately — if it is to avoid a hair-trigger security
environment in South Asia, with grave implications for
30

global peace, security and disarmament. To this end, the
Assembly should endorse the concept of strategic restraint
in South Asia.
For this purpose, it should urge India to do the
following.
First, India should disavow the proposed nuclear
doctrine. Secondly, it should refrain from any further
nuclear tests and adhere to the CTBT. For its part, Pakistan
remains committed to adhering to the CTBT in an
atmosphere free of coercion. Thirdly, it should undertake
not to operationally deploy nuclear weapons on land, air or
sea. Fourthly, it should open negotiations with Pakistan for
an agreement to achieve balance in fissile material stocks,
while both India and Pakistan participate in the fissile
material treaty negotiations, expected to commence early
next year in Geneva. Fifthly, India should eschew the
acquisition of anti-ballistic missile systems and any
military-related capabilities in space; and sixthly, cut back
drastically on its plans to purchase and develop various
advanced and destabilizing conventional weapons systems.
In this context, Pakistan appeals to those countries which
intend to supply these conventional weapons to India to
reconsider their policies.
Pakistan believes that it is now essential to convene a
conference, with the participation of all the permanent
members of the Security Council and other interested
Powers, as well as Pakistan and India, to promote the goals
of strategic restraint and stability in South Asia.
The threat of nuclear war does not emanate only from
South Asia. Although the strategic confrontation of the cold
war is over, the major nuclear Powers, even while pressing
for non-proliferation by others, have asserted their own
right to possess nuclear weapons indefinitely. The
implementation of strategic arms reduction agreements is
stalled. If the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty is
rescinded or revised, and missile defence plans are
implemented, the nuclear-arms race may well be revived
among the nuclear-weapon States. And heightened tensions
among them, over new or old disputes, could once again
move the nuclear doomsday clock closer to midnight.
Pakistan supports the endeavours to achieve nuclear
disarmament and the early elimination of all nuclear
weapons. Multilateral negotiations can evolve agreed plans
to realize these vital objectives. We also support the call for
preserving the ABM Treaty and avoiding the development
and deployment of anti-ballistic missile systems.
Negotiations to prevent the further militarization of outer
space should be initiated forthwith in the Geneva
Conference on Disarmament.
In a globalized yet divided world, with modern
weaponry and communications available to almost
everyone, terrorism has emerged as a pervasive challenge
in many parts of the world. It is a complex phenomenon
with many manifestations, a lethal tool used by ruthless
individuals, groups and States.
Pakistan condemns terrorism in all its forms and
manifestations, wherever it occurs. For a decade, during
the Afghan war, Pakistan was the single largest target of
terrorism from across our borders. Even today, our
adversaries foment fear in Pakistani cities by sponsoring
and financing terrorist bomb blasts and random violence.
Our eastern neighbour has mastered the black art of state
terrorism in Kashmir, utilizing the tactics of crack-downs,
custodial killings, disappearances, arson, torture and rape,
as tools of repression against the Kashmiri people's
struggle for freedom and self-determination. It is with
good reason that the non-aligned countries have
denounced the repression of peoples under foreign
occupation as the worst form of terrorism.
Pakistan condemns the reprehensible tendency in
certain quarters to link manifestations of terrorism with
Islam. We welcome the resolution adopted earlier this
year by the Commission on Human Rights which
denounced attempts, including in the media, to defame
Islam and link it with terrorism.
Free markets and free political systems, accompanied
by breath-taking technological advances, are rapidly
integrating our world across frontiers and continents.
Unfortunately, most developing countries have been
bypassed by the benefits of globalization. Income
inequality has increased among and within countries. And,
as the Asian financial crisis showed, growth has often
been fragile.
Market forces alone will not yield an equitable
economic outcome for all peoples. At the tenth United
Nations Conference on Trade and Development
(UNCTAD X) and other international conferences, we
need to rethink current development strategies and
formulate new approaches for broad-based development,
guided by the need for economic equity for individuals
and nations.
Action is required in three main areas. First, in the
area of trade, we need a truly level playing field to
31

encourage greater balance in the benefits of a rules-based
multilateral trading system for the developing countries.
The World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial
Conference in Seattle can advance this goal by resolving
problems involved in the implementation of the Uruguay
Round agreements on textiles and agriculture and
addressing priority issues for developing countries in future
negotiations — not by insisting on premature liberalization
in sectors where they are unable to compete. In Seattle, we
must also oppose the forces of protectionism disguised as
movements to promote environmental and social standards.
Secondly, in the financial area, we need a more stable
financial order which can control the volatility of capital
flows, make available adequate liquidity, especially for the
developing countries, alleviate their debt burden, and ensure
coherence between global financial and trade policies. The
high level “event” on financing for development could help
to build agreement on these issues.
Thirdly, technology: in an increasingly knowledge-
based global economy, the technology and knowledge gap
between the developed and developing countries must be
rapidly narrowed. To this end, it would be useful to evolve
global principles and guidelines for access to and transfer
of technology.
In our globalizing yet fractured world, marked by stark
contrasts between prosperity and poverty, between
tranquillity and turbulence, the hopes of hundreds of
millions of people lie in the United Nations, the most
universal global institution. The United Nations must play
its role, as prescribed in the Charter, as the centre for the
harmonization of the policies of Member States and as the
central instrument for collective security. The Security
Council's procedures must be made more transparent and
democratic, to reflect the collective will and views of all
States Members of the United Nations.
The Assembly must also agree on the objectives and
principles and the approaches and instruments which will
enable the international community to respond to the
emerging challenges posed by conflicts, arms proliferation
and unequal globalization. It is here, at the United Nations,
that we must seek consistent respect for the principles and
purposes of the United Nations Charter, and respect for its
binding decisions. Only thus can we realize the vision of
peace and prosperity for all peoples in a global environment
of freedom and democracy.


I would like
first of all to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the
presidency of the fifty-fourth session of the General
Assembly. It attests to the esteem in which the
international community holds you and your country. I
would like to include in this tribute the Secretary-
General, who bears the weighty responsibility of
promoting the universality of the Organization and the
effectiveness of its action. Lastly, I wish to congratulate
the three new Members of the United Nations. The great
and fine ideal that the United Nations embodies is very
much alive — of this I am firmly convinced.
The United Nations is undertaking a grand civilizing
endeavour, a task that is constantly being challenged but
ever necessary. To unite peoples to work together for
peace and development, to affirm a body of legal rules
framing relations among States and to achieve common
standards: that is the goal of the United Nations — a
civilizing goal.
That goal is achieved first of all through the peaceful
settlement of conflicts. The role of the Security Council
in this mission is more vital than ever, a pre-eminence it
derives from the Charter. France will recall this
fundamental rule as often as necessary. To be sure, there
have been circumstances when an urgent humanitarian
situation dictated we should act immediately, but such an
26

approach must remain an exception. We must take care, as
in the case of Kosovo, to reintegrate this action into the
context of the Charter. Our fundamental rule is that it is for
the Security Council to resolve crisis situations. For that
reason, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s new
strategic concept recalls that the Washington Treaty
recognizes the primary responsibility of the Security
Council in the maintenance of peace.
Indeed, the universal nature of the Organization is
intangible. The United Nations must strive to respond to
crises, wherever they may occur. While we have not
hesitated to do precisely that in recent years and on several
continents, I would like to express regret at the relative
timidity of the Organization where Africa is concerned. The
extent of the tragedies on that continent requires us to take
more resolute action.
Universality is compatible with complementarity in
action. In the interests of efficiency, the United Nations
must encourage, in every part of the world, regional
arrangements among States capable of handling crises in
the first instance. Such is the spirit of Chapter VIII of the
Charter. Tasks should be realistically shared between the
regional organizations and the Security Council without
weakening the latter’s authority. For instance, my country
has, through the RECAMP programme, along with others,
strengthened African peacekeeping capabilities through
assistance provided under United Nations auspices in
cooperation with the Organization of African Unity.
International security also demands continued
disarmament in the context of multilateral and verifiable
agreements. This is an ongoing objective for France, which
hopes that the work of the Conference on Disarmament will
be relaunched in the months prior to the Review
Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. France would like to see
the prompt entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-
Test-Ban Treaty, the start of negotiations on banning the
production of fissile materials for nuclear-weapon use, and
the conclusion of a verification protocol to the Biological
Weapons Convention. We would not support any
development that might bring the Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty into question and upset strategic balances.
The United Nations mission is not limited to the
settlement of conflicts between States. With humankind’s
growing aspirations for greater freedom and responsibility,
this mission extends to the safeguarding of human dignity,
within each State and, when necessary — as the Charter
allows — against States. State-instigated violence has
spawned serious humanitarian crises over the past few
years. Civilians have been targeted, whole populations
have been forcibly displaced, and refugee camps are not
longer secure. This is unacceptable. Consequently, we
must uphold the principle of international intervention,
under United Nations auspices, to assist the victims.
Every crisis recalls the need for the founding
principle of working for peace and for respect for the law
and the human person. A case in point is the conflict in
Kosovo. Security Council resolution 1244 (1999), which
laid down the foundations of the settlement, illustrates
these principles and this resolve.
We have set ourselves ambitious objectives: ensuring
security for all, organizing reconstruction, ensuring
coexistence between communities, transferring authority
to local leaders, and promoting democracy and pluralism.
The Secretary-General’s Special Representative and the
KFOR Commander have done remarkable work. Much,
however, remains to be done. The atrocities must be
stopped, the exodus stemmed and housing built before
winter. On the political front, preparations must be made
for the future, which will require establishing dialogue
between the communities. Elections will, I hope, be held
in the year 2000. France has made resolute efforts in this
respect, alongside its partners in the European Union,
which is providing half the international financing agreed
upon by the conference of donors for Kosovo.
In East Timor, another people is asking that its
rights be recognized. Overwhelmingly, it chose
independence through a referendum. Some have tried to
oppose that choice with violence. I therefore welcome the
adoption, on 15 September, of Security Council resolution
1264 (1999). It paves the way for the restoration of peace
and should enable the democratic process to be
successfully concluded. France is participating in the
international force established by decision of the Security
Council.
Our Organization therefore remains true to the
values we celebrated last year, on its fiftieth anniversary.
But much effort is still needed for these values to be
respected everywhere. To achieve this, it is essential to
strengthen international criminal law. France actively
supports the work of the international criminal tribunals
of The Hague and Arusha. The establishment of the
International Criminal Court will be a new and decisive
step in the progress of law. France hopes that it will be
set up quickly; to that end, it has already amended its
own Constitution.
27

To carry out its mission, the United Nations needs
assured means. In order to deal with financial difficulties
and prevent these from becoming a pretext for inaction, all
Member States must meet their financial obligations
vis-à-vis the Organization. France does so completely and
unreservedly. A responsible attitude on the part of
contributing States would advance the necessary reform of
the Organization, including that of its Security Council.
I should like to share with the Assembly my second
firm conviction: that the United Nations is admirably suited
to meeting the challenges of our new world. Indeed, its
mission is strengthened by globalization.
Initially, the idea of organizing relations between
States at the world level may have seemed utopian to some.
It was merely before its time. Indeed, I consider the United
Nations to be modern for the following reasons. Our global
and unstable world needs organization and the goal of the
United Nations has always been to seek a better
organization of the world. The United Nations is in step
with a networked world. It is itself a network, a rich and
unique panoply of specialized but independent and
coordinated agencies. In half a century, the United Nations
has made a tool for action which can be adapted to our
world. The United Nations has not aged; it has grown with
the world. It must allow us to face the new challenges
emerging in today’s world.
A contradictory state of affairs has replaced the
euphoric illusion which followed the end of the
confrontation between blocs 10 years ago. Globalization is
not monolithic. While it is unifying, it also divides. While
it generates remarkable progress, it also leads to
unacceptable inequalities. While it opens societies to one
another, it carries with it the threat of creating uniformity.
While it frees up energy, it also releases negative forces
that must be brought under control. The movement of
populations and the clash of cultures are therefore
accompanied by rising fears as to identity, by religious
intolerance and by xenophobia. France, which has a
presence on five continents and is itself a land of
immigration, has had experience of such confrontations in
its history. It knows the risks they entail and the wealth
they bring. We will give our full support to the world
conference on racism, to be held in 2001. Preventing the
emergence of prejudice, which too often has deadly
consequences, will prepare the way for peace for future
generations.
The fruits of globalization are not shared equally. The
opening of economies, the increase in trade and the
acceleration of technological progress all fuel growth. But
inequalities are growing between countries and within
each economy. Nearly one in four human beings lives in
great poverty. We cannot leave matters as they stand. The
rapid expansion of communications networks does not
benefit everyone. Yet the multiplication of sources of
information, the increased circulation of ideas and the
profusion of new inventions are full of promise. Lower
communications costs made possible by the Internet can
be an asset for businesses in countries in the South. But
inequalities in education hinder access to these
technologies. These impressive instruments for furthering
knowledge may become formidable factors in inequality.
Communication is also a right. It is essential that this
right not be threatened by the concentration in just a few
hands of sources of information and the means of
production and distribution. France will staunchly defend
cultural diversity.
Globalization must encourage all of us to take
account of the fragility of our world — our Earth and our
commonweal. Our environment is not a product, a simple
stock of raw materials on which we can draw without
giving thought to future generations. True development is
sustainable development. Since the Rio Summit in 1992
this realization has been behind the adoption of important
commitments with regard to the climate, biodiversity and
desertification. The Kyoto Protocol on climate change and
the current negotiations on a protocol on biosafety attest
to the importance of the achievements. But the uncertain
future of climates and the recurrence of natural
catastrophes urge us to make further efforts.
The Earth is fragile, but so, too, is the human
species. The spread of new epidemics endangers the
health of entire populations. Inequalities in development
exacerbate those scourges. Some 40 million people live
with the AIDS virus today, the majority of them in
developing countries. The spread of the pandemic in
Africa is a matter of major concern for us. I shall come
back to that issue.
Globalization is changing the nature of organized
crime, an area in which there has been a real explosion.
The much greater fluidity in movement allows criminal
networks to exploit the inconsistencies between one
national law and another and the weaknesses of some of
them so as to hide from justice. My country is ready to
make every effort to combat this scourge. The President
of the French Republic made that clear last year at the
special session of the General Assembly devoted to that
issue. The United Nations has long been engaged in the
28

fight against international drug-trafficking, building up
expertise, establishing specialized services and drafting a
body of doctrine and a legal framework. These must be
strengthened. But, above all, States must be more
committed to action. In January negotiations began in
Vienna on a convention against transnational organized
crime. We must bring this to a satisfactory conclusion in
the year 2000.
Faced with globalization, we have a choice to make.
We can either go along with the supposedly universal
economic laws, and in so doing abdicate our political
responsibilities, or we can seek to impose order on
globalization and thereby achieve control of our collective
future. For my part, I believe that global problems call for
global responses and that an unstable world needs to be
regulated, requiring what our Anglo-Saxon friends might
call “rules and regulations”. This world needs rules. It
needs the United Nations.
This choice is also a matter of sovereignty. As the
Secretary-General pointed out on 8 December last year in
Paris, the first words of our Charter, “We the Peoples of
the United Nations”, make it an expression of popular
sovereignty. But in order for the sovereignty of peoples to
be affirmed they must find the means to acquire the
mechanisms, the means of control and the benefits of
globalization. That is my third conviction. The more the
world becomes globalized, the more it needs rules. Faced
with the temptation of unilateralism, it is more necessary
than ever to base our action on multilateral rules respected
by all. First of all, these concern the economy. We must
define the rules of the game so that everyone can benefit
from globalization. We must define the rules of the game
between the industrial and developing countries and
between the major economic actors, small and medium-
sized business and the citizens of our countries who work
and produce.
In the financial sphere, we have to strengthen the
stability of the monetary and financial system by ensuring
the political legitimacy of the International Monetary Fund
(IMF), involving the developing countries more closely in
the adoption of common rules and making private financial
operators liable for the consequences of their decisions for
countries in crisis. Real progress has been made since the
crises of 1997 and 1998. France contributed to this by its
proposals, especially in regard to hedge funds and fiscal
havens. It will continue to work to this end, as much
remains to be done.
These rules of the game have to be based on better
coordination among international institutions. Since 1945,
international cooperation has respected the principle of
specialization of institutions. In the future, the task is to
make them more complementary. Economic and trade
rules cannot disregard the most elementary social and
environmental norms. Accordingly, France supported the
adoption by the International Labour Conference a year
ago of a declaration on the fundamental principles and
rights involved in labour. The International Labour
Organization (ILO) is an irreplaceable forum for dialogue
between government and social partners and for the
formulation of minimal standards. It is desirable that it
establish close relations with other organizations, such as
the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the World
Bank.
For these rules of the game to be better respected,
appropriate cooperation has to be established with the
poorest countries. Their debt burden continues to be the
primary obstacle to development. At their meeting in
Cologne, the G-7 countries pledged to grant further debt
relief. France contributed to this. Three principles will be
applied: solidarity, which calls for us to grant the poorest
countries the most favourable debt treatment; fairness,
which requires the rich countries to share the financial
effort in a balanced way; and responsibility, whereby the
countries benefiting from this aid undertake policies
directed towards sustainable development and the fight
against poverty. For these countries, official development
assistance remains indispensable. France will continue to
advocate greater effort on the part of the richest countries.
Our action should be increasingly inspired by the
affirmation of common values and rules. Human rights
are central to this approach. I am referring in particular to
the weakest children. The ILO Convention which outlaws
the worst forms of child labour is a new case in point.
The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child must be supplemented as soon as possible by the
two protocols now being negotiated, one against the
recruitment of children in armed conflicts, the other
against the sale of children and child prostitution and
pornography.
To affirm the rights of women is to recognize their
decisive role in education, in the production of wealth and
in development. But it is also to combat the
discrimination and violence which they suffer. France has
made equality between women and men one of the
cornerstones in the renewal of its public life. The
additional protocol to the Convention on the Elimination
29

of All Forms Discrimination against Women, submitted to
the General Assembly for approval, offers women the
possibility to assert their rights in an individual capacity.
That is a major step forward. The special session of the
General Assembly in June 2000 will highlight the progress
that has been achieved since the 1995 Conference in
Beijing.
Reaffirming the right of all human beings to health
means combating pandemics everywhere. In December
1997, in Abidjan, France proposed the establishment of a
“therapeutic solidarity fund” to mobilize the international
community to care for and treat AIDS sufferers. The
countries of the South and associations involved in
combating the disease welcomed the proposal warmly. But
the impact of AIDS on development remains dramatic. We
must intensify our efforts to reduce this plague. Only the
United Nations can give these efforts the necessary breadth.
The principle of precaution has to be the basis for our
action regarding the environment and health safety. The
Montreal Protocol for the protection of the ozone layer,
based on the principle of differentiated commitments
between the North and South, is an example of well-
conceived international action. These efforts must be
continued. We will do so by advocating, with our European
Union partners, a world convention on forests and by
redoubling efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the
atmosphere. Precaution must also be the guiding principle
in monitoring food safety. The combination of concern for
sustainable agriculture, the quality of products and the
preservation of food traditions in each country explain the
intensity of recent reactions. France therefore intends to see
these demands taken into account at the forthcoming WTO
negotiations.
In order to address and overcome the world’s
problems, to derive the best from globalization, we need
nations to be aware of their responsibilities, and we need
also to have “more” of the United Nations. Through an
Organization strengthened by a renewed sense of mission,
supported by sovereign States and regional organizations,
we will be able to further respect for human rights, promote
democracy, work for sustainable development and help all
to achieve their potential.


Allow me first of all to associate myself with previous
speakers in expressing to you, Sir, and to the members of
the Bureau, my delegation's warm congratulations on your
election to lead us in the General Assembly at this
session. You can count on our total support for the
accomplishment of your difficult task.
I would also like to express my appreciation to your
predecessor, Mr. Didier Opertti, for the skill and
competence he exhibited during his mandate.
I would also like to take this opportunity to
congratulate the Republic of Kiribati, the Republic of
Nauru and the Kingdom of Tonga on having joined the
great family of the United Nations.
Finally, allow me to pay tribute to the work of Mr.
Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of our Organization,
for his ceaseless efforts in favour of international peace
and security. My country, Burundi, fully appreciates his
valuable contribution to the search for a negotiated
political solution to the crisis it has suffered since October
1993.
As the work of the current session of the General
Assembly is taking place, my country is striving to turn
a new page in its history. Burundis have decidedly chosen
dialogue and negotiation to put an end to the armed
conflict that has lasted for almost six years. The Arusha
peace talks that began in June 1998 under the aegis of the
former President of the sisterly country of Tanzania,
Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, are being actively pursued and
are now at a crucial stage.
The sixth round of the Arusha peace talks, which
ended a few days ago, was preceded by fruitful
consultations held in Dar-Es-Salaam among the six
principal negotiators aimed at reaching a compromise
23

based on the drafts submitted by the negotiating parties or
groups of parties. These consultations, which represent the
keystone of the peace process, should resume on 4 October.
We hope that this time they will have tangible results that
could serve as a basis for the final Arusha agreement.
Let me briefly recall the specific context in which the
Arusha process was initiated in June 1998: five years of
relentless fratricidal war between the rebels and the
Government, in which the principal victims had been, as
they continue to be, hundreds of thousands of innocent
children, women and elderly people, for the most part
unarmed. More than 30 years of massacres and killings
have torn asunder the very fabric of society and resulted in
entrenched hatred and extreme mistrust among the various
ethnic and political groups. Repeated crises have resulted in
massive flows of refugees and a major diaspora.
Furthermore, economic development plans have been
consistently hamstrung by recurring political instability.
It was in that context that the Government objectively
and deliberately decided to abandon the logic of war and to
choose political dialogue in which all the people of Burundi
could participate without exception, regardless of the
manner — peaceful or armed — in which they previously
had chosen to make their political demands. The armed
groups were a particular focus of this dialogue, and it was
mainly because of them that the negotiations were held
outside the country.
The goal is to reach a comprehensive peace agreement
and ultimately achieve full national reconciliation among
the entire population of Burundi, without exception.
Several obstacles continue to stand in the way of that
lofty goal, which will not be attained if timely efforts are
not made to overcome those challenges.
The first obstacle is the failure of the armed rebel
factions to participate in the negotiations. Differences of
opinion within those movements, where the armed groups
no longer recognize the authority of the political leaders
who are participating in the Arusha negotiations and thus
reject the outcome ahead of time, have resulted in a
situation in which the validity and viability of any peace
agreement reached without those parties would be in doubt.
The Government of Burundi believes that it is
imperative to set aside the formalities advocated by the
mediators and to invite the armed factions to participate
fully in the peace process. The Government of Burundi is
willing to consider any form of negotiation with them,
within or outside the process.
Mediation should take place immediately, because
we are working against the clock in this fragile peace
process, which could be jeopardized or brought to a halt
by events. If, after being invited, the armed factions or
other parties to the negotiations refuse to participate in the
peace process, we would agree with the mediators that
Burundi, in close and steadfast cooperation with its
neighbours, must isolate and neutralize the rebels or other
parties that are unwilling to participate in the negotiations.
The second obstacle is the continuing violence. In
other crisis situations, political dialogue for conflict
settlement is preceded by a ceasefire or a suspension of
hostilities. In the case of Burundi, however, that necessary
condition for negotiation has been neglected since the
beginning, as if it were optional. The Government draws
to the attention of the subregion and of the international
community the serious and continuing acts of violence
committed by the rebels despite the ongoing peace
negotiations. These unrestrained and cowardly acts of
violence, whose main target is unarmed civilians, have no
moral or political justification. No one even claims
responsibility; it is pure terrorism.
If the rebels were eventually to use as a pretext the
fact that they had wished to participate in the
negotiations, it would have no validity because, as I have
just stated, the Government is open to any initiative that
might lead to the cessation of the hostilities, which have
gone on for far too long. The situation is serious, and the
Government of Burundi requests the international and
regional communities to help it in the following ways.
First, through effective cooperation with
neighbouring countries in the area of security, including
with the Republic of Tanzania, with which cooperation
decisions were taken at the ministerial level on two
occasions, in February and August 1999; those decisions
have not been implemented. There is no doubt that if
those decisions were translated into joint action on the
ground, both external and internal rebel activities would
soon cease.
Secondly, it is necessary to disarm and neutralize
those Burundi rebels who are active in the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, where they are able to obtain a
ready supply of arms and ammunition for their bases in
Tanzania, as they have not been able to re-establish those
24

they lost in South Kivu in 1997 after the first war in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Thirdly, the countries of the region must wage a
common struggle against transnational rebel movements,
arms trafficking and genocidal ideology. Those movements
have created alliances without borders. Among the rebels
who operate in Burundi are the Interahamwe, the former
Rwandan armed forces and Ugandan rebels, among others.
The Burundi rebellion has become regional in scope and
must be combated from that perspective. Intensified activity
has been noted on the part of the factions in the Democratic
Republic of the Congo since the Lusaka agreement, which
provided for their disarmament. The conflict is thus being
regionalized, with Burundi and/or Tanzania as its epicentre.
Prevention is better than cure. There is a real risk of
another regional conflagration resulting from the countries
concerned taking measures to protect themselves against
these widespread rebellions. In any case, the Government
will find it difficult to sign the peace agreement if it is not
preceded by an effective halt to the violence on the ground.
The population, parts of which are still being massacred,
would simply reject it.
The third — although not the least significant —
obstacle to the peace process is the extreme poverty that
threatens the people of Burundi with social and economic
annihilation. That poverty is not the result of a reduction in
agricultural production, which has continued somehow
thanks to the hard-working nature of our countryfolk. Nor
is it the result of the embargo imposed by the countries of
the region, since economic and financial cooperation with
those countries was and still is very limited. It results above
all from the freezing of bilateral and multilateral
cooperation by certain partners, countries and financial
institutions in line with the economic sanctions imposed by
the subregion. Those regional sanctions were suspended on
23 January this year, and Burundi expected that, mutatis
mutandis, our international partners would resume their
cooperation in conformity with the subregional action. That
has not yet happened, and some financial institutions, which
anticipate no practical problems, are blocked by their
shareholders at the political level. It is said that we will
have to wait for the signing, or even the implementation, of
the Arusha Agreement.
Peace and national reconciliation in Burundi will not
be restored through revolution. It is a process that will be
consolidated over time. Nothing spectacular will happen the
day the peace agreement is signed. It is progressive reform
activities, taking place as a result of courageous and
determined political will, that will stabilize the country
over the months and years following the signing of the
agreement. All the parties involved in the negotiations
agrees that peace will be not an event, but a process.
Furthermore, the rate at which negotiations proceed will
not be subject to the Government’s control; it will be
linked to the procedures followed by the mediators and to
the willingness of the 17 other parties to the negotiations
to place the national interest above all else, to distinguish
between what is essential and what is of secondary
importance, and to realize that the true road to peace will
begin after the signing of the Arusha Agreement, among
the citizens of Burundi themselves.
The Government of Burundi calls on its partners to
reassess the situation and consider the realities on the
ground as a matter of great urgency. The extreme stress
under which the population has been suffering for six
years is pushing it towards a popular uprising. The
responsibility lies with the international community,
which is committed in this respect. The Government has
provided all it can: proof of its irreversible political will
to negotiate until a peace agreement is reached.
The Great Lakes region has become a real powder
keg because of the persistence of insecurity. With regard
to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Burundi
welcomes the signing in July of the Lusaka Peace
Agreement. We call on all the parties to that conflict to
continue to make efforts to restore a climate of dialogue,
trust and reconciliation, so that energy can be
concentrated on actions aimed at economic recovery and
development.
Burundi is not a belligerent in the war that is pitting
the Democratic Republic of the Congo against some of its
neighbours. The Government of Burundi has already had
the opportunity to explain that fact to the international
community on several occasions in various forums,
including from this lofty rostrum last year; in Lusaka,
where it participated in all the meetings as an observer
and as one of the countries neighbouring the Democratic
Republic of the Congo that were concerned about the
security of their common border; and in meetings of the
Organization of African Unity.
Listening to the statement made in this Assembly by
the Chairman of the delegation of the Democratic
Republic of the Congo on 29 September, I was astonished
by his confusion and the degree of malice he expressed
towards my country, Burundi. I should like to respond by
making several comments.
25

First, Burundi is not at war with the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, either individually or in alliance
with any other party.
Second, Burundi has no reason to be at war with the
Democratic Republic of the Congo. It is true that it is poor
and that the Democratic Republic of the Congo is rich. But
Burundi has never wanted, does not want, and will never
want to live off the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It
will develop a policy of normal cooperation with that
country, as has always been the case, in particular within
the Economic Community of the Great Lakes Countries.
Furthermore, the trading arrangements that exist between
the border towns and border provinces do not cause
Burundi any problems and should continue.
Third, Burundi has no political ambitions in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, at either the central or
the provincial level.
Fourth, Burundi had just signed an agreement for
cooperation on border security when war broke out.
Fifth, Burundi has adopted an attitude of strict
neutrality with regard to the conflict, and has no interest in
it.
Sixth, several months after war broke out Burundi was
informed of the presence among the Congolese troops of
the armed Burundi rebel movement, the FDD. Burundi’s
assessment was that the FDD had a threefold objective:
first, to obtain arms and munitions to strengthen their bases
in Tanzania; secondly, to cross Lake Tanganyika and
recover the bases they had lost in south Kivu facing the
capital, Bujumbura, and the provinces of Bubanza and
Cibitoke, where the civil war broke out in 1994; and,
thirdly, to obstruct trade on Lake Tanganyika to and from
Burundi through the port of Mpulungu in Zambia, which is
the only import-export corridor remaining following the
economic blockade imposed by the region in an attempt to
suffocate the country.
Seventh, Burundi had to defend itself, and decided to
adopt necessary border defence and security measures on
land and on Lake Tanganyika in order to counter-attack the
FDD rebels. It was a question of life or death. Those
measures will remain in place as long as the threat of
insecurity caused by the FDD, and coming from the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, remains.
That is the absolute truth. The allegations made by the
delegation of the Democratic Republic of the Congo that
Burundi is acting aggressively towards their country, are
groundless and based on invention and misinformation.
Burundi is ready to do all it can to help to resolve the
conflict. It welcomes in particular the fact that two
military observers were sent to Burundi in the framework
of the pre-deployment exercise decided upon by the
United Nations.
Burundi cannot fail to welcome the prospects for a
final resolution of the crisis in the Democratic Republic
of the Congo, which would immediately remove the threat
of insecurity at the common border and, we hope, involve
the FDD rebels in the peace process in Burundi.
At this final General Assembly session of the
millennium, my delegation hails the giant steps taken by
mankind in science and technology, information and
communication, democracy and development —
especially during the twentieth century, which is now
drawing to a close. At the same time, we deplore the
scourges that have marked this century, such as all
manner of wars and conflicts and a range of evils and
natural or man-made catastrophes. Our greatest wish is
that the new millennium will bolster our achievements
and add new triumphs for the well-being of the whole of
mankind. We want to see in the next millennium a world
in which peace will prevail over conflict, justice over
injustice and impunity, freedom over oppression and
generosity over selfishness.
We seek the creation of a world in which the gap
between rich countries and poor countries will be bridged;
a world in which all men and all women will live decent
lives, work in peace and eat their fill; a world in which
the concepts of freedom, democracy, brotherhood and
development can have true meaning in every corner of the
earth.
For all peoples and all nations to set about attaining
these purposes, the United Nations must play the role of
vanguard and catalyst to generate and maximize all the
necessary energy. The key to such success is, first and
foremost, peace. The peace that we desire for Africa we
also want to see benefitting all mankind everywhere on
earth.