Please accept my sincere congratulations, Sir, on your election to the presidency of the forty-fifth session of the General Assembly. I wish you success and express my conviction that your able guidance will contribute significantly to the successful outcome of our work.
I should also like to thank Mr. Joseph Garba, President of the last session for his personal contribution to its efficient and fruitful work.
I take this opportunity to extend my greetings to the Secretary-General Mr. Peres de Cuellar, and to express our appreciation of, and high esteem for his efforts aimed at the achievement of tangible results from United Nations activities for the enhancement of its international prestige.
On behalf of my country, I should like whole-heartedly to welcome to the family of nations the Republic of Namibia and the Principality of Liechtenstein, whose accession to membership in the United Nations is yet another step towards the consolidation of our Organisation's universal character.
It is both an honour and a pleasure for me to address this forum as the freely elected President of new and democratic Bulgaria, an honour because this event, at this historic moment, marks the return, well overdue, of a small and long-suffering nation to the community of free nations and sovereign democracies.
The current forty-fifth session is taking place in conditions of radical change in the world. We are witnessing a transition towards a new state of international relations. Rivalry and confrontation are giving way to dialogue and co-operation, to mutual understanding and reasonable compromise. There have been numerous manifestations of this trend lately. Noteworthy among the, is the growing frequency of the summit meetings between the United States and the Soviet Union, the recent declarations of the countries of the Warsaw Treaty and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), the constructive spirit of the all-European process in all its dimensions and the positive results of the efforts to resolve regional conflicts.
What 1990 will be remembered for are the democratic revolutions in Eastern European this has indeed been the year of Eastern Europe. Hungary, East Germany, and Czechoslovakia abandoned their Communist system and entered on the road of democracy. My own country, too, has a place in this process. Albeit slower than others, Bulgaria is also undergoing deep democratic changes which irreversibly break it away from communism.
There does however appear to exist a prejudiced view that changes in Bulgaria are sporadic or at least not as thorough as in some other States. I should, therefore, like to outline to this prestigious international forum my nation's struggle for freedom and democracy.
The fight against the communist system started during the regime of Todor Zhivkov. Two years before the dictator's fall from power there emerged independent associations championing human rights, ecological issues, associations of intellectuals and so forth. The regime's attempts to quell or discredit them proved futile. These independent associations were the first forms of organised opposition against the totalitarian Communist system.
Todor Zhivkov's fall from power on 10 November 1989 brought about the start of a new stage in the development of the democratic opposition in Bulgaria and of the democratic process in general. The Union of Democratic Forces, which now unites 15 political parties and organisations, was established only a month later. I should like to emphasise, though, that many former members of the Communist Party have also joined the Union of Democratic Forces. The establishment of the Union of Democratic Forces uniting the main opposition parties and organisations has turned the opposition into a major political force which the ruling party had to reckon with. The scores of mass anti-Communist rallies organised by the Union of Democratic Forces in towns and villages during the winter and spring of 1990 broke the ice of fear. The people raised their voice demanding, "Down with communism”. After taking over the country's streets and squares, the opposition forced the Communist Parliament to revoke article 1 of the Constitution which had guaranteed the Communist Party's leading role.
As a result of the popular pressure, the opposition forced the authorities to agree to hold the round-table negotiations on some of the most important aspects of the country's political system. These negotiations went on for nearly three months. They were broadcast live on radio and television and ultimately served as a true political school for the nation. Ordinary people, particularly those living outside the capital, saw for the first time that there was nothing dangerous in criticising and condemning the community Party deified by the totalitarian regime. They saw that those responsible for the crisis could be brought to justice and that the Party could be urged to step down.
The successful development of the democratic process caused a deep crisis in the Bulgarian Communist Party. Within it emerged forces aware of the need for internal reform. That Party changed its name from Communist to Socialist and took some steps to democratise its structures. I should note, however, that the course of the democratisation in Bulgaria will continue to depend upon the complicated and contradictory processes currently under way in the Bulgarian Socialist Party. There can be no doubt that parliamentary democracy in the country will be strengthened if that Party manages to transfer, into a modern leftist Western style party.
In the round-table negotiations, the opposition forced the holding of elections for a Grand national Assembly, a constituent parliament called upon to adopt a democratic constitution and to pass legislation guaranteeing the success of the reforms in the political and economic spheres.
Last June, the opposition carried 37 per cent of the vote at the first multi-party elections in Bulgaria in the last 50 years. Together with the Bulgarian Agrarian Party, a smaller opposition organisation, it now controls 40 per cent of the seats in Parliament.
Many believe that the distribution of seats in the National Assembly does not reflect the actual balance of the political forces in the country. The fact that the young people, the intellectuals and the people in the big cities, including the capital, voted for the opposition indicates that it is backed by the most active part of the population. A Provisional Municipal Councils Act bas bean passed recently aimed at dismantling the totalitarian structures at the level of municipalities and guaranteeing the participation of all political forces in local self-government. Thus, the forthcoming local government elections will be hold under equal conditions for all participants.
Currently a bill is being debated on the de-politicisation of the army, police, security agencies, the courts of law, the state prosecutor's offices and the Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Under the provisions of the bill, people employed by those institutions would not be allowed membership in political parties and would be prohibited from organising political activity in favour of any party. This law would be of extreme importance for the complete dismantling of the Communist totalitarian system since it would destroy its backbone, which is the merger of the Communist Party apparatus with that of the State.
The Bulgarian Parliament is also expected to pass a privatisation act; a land law that would return to its owners the land forcibly taken from then during the Stalinist collectivisation drive; laws on property, banking and trade; and numerous other laws, mere limited in scope, that should provide the legal basis for our society's transition from a centralized State-run economy to a genuine market economy.
The first, and immediate, step on the road to economic reform will be the dismantling of the State monopoly in all spheres of economic life, without which privatization and agrarian reform would be quite impossible. The guarantees for the implementation of this far-reaching programmes are: first, the awakening of a nation that desires to live in the conditions of democracy and of a market economy that releases people's energy and individual initiative; and secondly, the will and energy of the democratic opposition in Parliament, which is fuelling the democratic process and is putting forward initiatives to prevent this process from being halted.
In this brief sketch of my country, I must again emphasise that Bulgaria now has a multiparty system; a democratically elected Parliament; an opposition that controls 40 per cent of parliamentary seats and has won the political initiative; free press, radio and television; and political pluralism in the spiritual sphere. In other words, we have an awakening civil society that is eagerly moving towards democracy.
This gives me sufficient grounds for concluding that Bulgaria is no longer a Communist or totalitarian State. But neither is it a fully democratic country, inasmuch as it still has not adopted a new Constitution and has not been able to base its economy on free-market principles. Bulgaria is currently in a state of transition from totalitarian rule to democracy - that peculiar transitional state that some refer to as post-totalitarian. The processes, however, are irreversible, and the building of a fully democratic State, with a democratic Constitution, democratic institutions and a market economy, is only a matter of time.
The deep democratic changes that have taken place in less than a year - changes that I mentioned earlier - could not fail to leave their imprint on Bulgaria's foreign policy, could not but lead to changes in its principles, aims and priorities.
We have categorically rejected the doctrine of limited sovereignty, known as the Brezhnev doctrine, since it infringes our national independence and violates the Bulgarian's national dignity and national pride. We have also discarded the so-called principle of socialist internationalism, which is nothing but an ill-concealed means of subjugating our foreign policy to that of other States. We have abandoned the principle by which the country's entire foreign policy was designed to serve the interests and ideology of a single party enjoying a monopoly of power.
In place of the principles that have been rejected, we have adopted new ones that meet the interests of a democratic State. Thus Bulgaria has restored the principle of full national independence and unrestricted sovereignty, which enables us to direct our own foreign policy. The interests of the State and the nation as a whole have taken the place of the principle of one-party domination. No party can now place its own interests above those of the nation.
The principle of realism and pragmatism has become an important one in our new foreign policy. Pragmatism, naturally, does not imply egotism with respect to other States, nor does it imply gaining advantage for one's own nation at the expense of others. On the contrary, we are well aware that political pragmatism is feasible only in strict compliance with established international norms, only if the interests of other countries and peoples, no matter how close or remote they must respected and protected.
That is why Bulgaria has so firmly supported the resolutions of the Security Council in connection with Iraq's aggression against Kuwait and is strictly observing the embargo imposed against the aggressor. Bulgaria is probably the European country hardest hit by the Gulf crisis. The blow is made even more painful, having occurred at a time when the country is undergoing far-reaching economic reforms. Production is drooping, and there is an acute shortage of goods, raw materials and energy. These factors are accelerating inflationary processes and increasing unemployment.
Regardless of the wants and hardships that the Bulgarian people are forced to bear, we shall continue to condemn the Iraqi aggression. We shall continue to demand the return of Kuwait's legitimate Government and shall continue strictly to observe the embargo. We are doing this in accordance with our own convictions, not because we are forced to. I believe that Bulgaria's reaction to the Persian Gulf crisis has demonstrated in practical terms ay country's return to the international community as a civilised member.
The unanimity with which the United Nations condemned the aggression against a small and defenceless nation is truly moving. It is indeed encouraging to see countries such as the United States, the Soviet Union, France, the United Kingdom, Germany, and others, joining together against the aggressor. In the conduct of the world Organisation with respect to this crisis we see the archetype of future global guarantees for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all small States, as well as the return of the United Nations to its main objectives and its fundamental role.
However, so long as all this is still in the future - while it has yet to become reality - my country is compelled to seek guarantees for its national independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty. This problem in assuming particular importance now, at a time when the old system of military alliances and imperial relations is disintegrating and a new system has not yet been built, at present the guarantees for Bulgaria's territorial integrity stem from the Warsaw Treaty and our bilateral agreement with the Soviet Union. But things are changing fast.
Given that all political realities are in a process of rapid change, our only reliable security for the future lies in faithful adherence to the principles of our foreign policy, whose new priorities ate, directly from those principles.
First among these priorities is the desire to maintain good - if possible, friendly - relations with our neighbours, relations based on mutual respect for each other's interests, recognition of the territorial integrity of all countries in the region, and the promotion of economic and cultural ties with each of those countries on the basis of mutual advantage.
I should like to emphasise in particular my country's readiness to contribute to the improvement of the situation in the Balkans. We are firmly committed to putting an end to the crisis in Bulgarian-Turkish relations. I am convinced that the time has come to terminate this last cold war in Europe. At the seats time, I should I like to underline that our willingness to reach mutual understanding with Turkey does not mean that we have any intention of abandoning the increasing closeness developing between us and other Balkan neighbours. In other words, let us Europeanise the Balkans, rather than Balkanising Europe.
A second priority in Bulgaria's foreign policy is its opening-up to the world by eliminating all economic and political barriers inherited from the old regime. Without this opening-up we should be unable to obtain the new and modern technologies and the investment that are seeded from the successful transition from a centrally planned economy to a market economy.
A priority for Bulgaria is membership of the united Europe of the future and the comprehensive development of our relations with the United States and all other industrialised nations. This means broad participation by my country in the global integration processes. In this respect we are intensifying our ties with all international organisations and are taking an ever-more-active part in their work.
Initially, we are trying to be more active and flexible within the framework of the Helsinki process with a view to its institutionalisation as an international mechanism for consultation and co-operation.
A fourth priority is the reassessment of our country's performance at the United Nations, an organisation that we will continue to support. It is our view that the Organisation can further enhance its role in our world both in protecting the national interests of its Member States and in safeguarding world peace in general.
As a fifth priority, I should like to point out the adaptation of our national legislation and new Constitution to the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to mention only a few.
Bulgaria has already undertaken important steps to guarantee the rights and freedoms o£ all Bulgarian citizens regardless of their religious and ethnic affiliation, to bring our legislation into line with international standards in this sphere in the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Significant amendments have been made to the Foreign Travel Passports Act, the Law on Bulgarian Citizenship and the Law on Foreign Nationals Stay in the People's Republic of Bulgaria.
As of tomorrow, Germany will again be a united State. From this important rostrum and on behalf of the Bulgarian nation I extend our warmest and sincere congratulations to the German nation, with which we have maintained close ties throughout our history. I en convinced that a united, democratic and prospering Germany will promote stability and international co-operation in Europe and the world.
Finally, I wish once again to reiterate that I believe the world should know about Bulgaria; my country has embarked irreversibly upon the road to modem democracy and a market-oriented economy. I express the hope of all Bulgarians that the new Bulgaria will earn its place in the community of nations united by the values of freedom, democracy and peace.


Mr. President, I wish to thank you on behalf of the German Government for your congratulatory words. The establishment of German unity and the agreements connected with it are, as you have rightly remarked, historic events.
In his speech during the general debate Foreign Minister Genscher said that in this hour Germany is conscious of its European and global responsibility and that it will reader its contribution to peace and freedom in Europe and in the world. Developments in Germany are part of the immense transformation taking place in Europe, which gives us a chance to overcome the division of the old continent.
When the Federal Republic of Germany was admitted to the United Nations 17 years ago, our then Foreign Minister, Halter School, stated in the General Assembly that it continued to be our political objective
"to work for a state of peace in Europe in which the German nation will recover its unity in free self-determination". Foreign Minister Genscher reaffirmed that position in many speeches in this Assembly.
We are happy that we have now achieved that goal, and we are grateful. German unity is the result of a peaceful democratic process in which the entire German nation has exercised its right of free self-determination.
The united Germany has no territorial claims against any other country, nor will it have any such claim in the future. It will confirm the existing frontier with Poland in a treaty binding under international law. This will be a major contribution to the peaceful order in Europe now being established.
After unification the Federal Republic of Germany will remain integrated into the European Community and the Atlantic Alliance. The Federal Republic's renunciation of the manufacture and possession of, as well as control over, nuclear, biological and chemical weapons loses none of its validity.

The recovery of our unity and full sovereignty will not alter our active commitment to the work of the United Nations. We shall do everything in our power to neat the great challenge· of our time: safeguarding peace and human rights, promoting economic development and social justice in all parts of the world and protecting mankind's natural resources.
As a developed industrial country, the Federal Republic of Germany is conscious of its responsibility towards the less developed nations. In his message on the occasion of German unity Chancellor Kohl emphasised that we shall not invest in German unity at the expense of the third world. On the contrary, we shall step up our efforts to combat poverty and underdevelopment and to protect the environment.
In this historic hour we commemorate the victims of the Second World War, of tyranny and of the Holocaust. We remember all those who suffered injustice. We are aware of our responsibility.
To the Germans 3 October is a day of joy, of deep emotion and of reflection. We thank all those who have supported the legitimate rights of the German people and placed their trust in us.


I should like to join other representatives in presenting my warm congratulations to Mr. Guido de Marco of Malta on his unanimous election as President of the forty-fifth session of the General Assembly.
I wish also to express our appreciation to the outgoing President,
Mr. Joseph H. Garba, and to the Secretary-General for providing us with leadership which has inspired confidence throughout the past year. At the same time Brunei Darussalam welcomes as members of this Organisation the Principality of Liechtenstein and the Republic of Namibia.
Today is a special day for the world community. Brunei Darussalam would therefore like to take this early opportunity to extend its heartfelt congratulations to the German people on the momentous occasion of the unification of their homeland. We similarly congratulate the Republic of Yemen and the Yemeni people on their peaceful unification earlier this year. These events are the high points of a year in which a number of encouraging prospects have seemed to indicate that the political situation in the world is improving.
At this Assembly last year we noted several of these positive signs. Since then w. have seen relations between the super-Powers become much less tense. This, in turn has led to a number of constructive meetings between previously hostile parties. At these meetings the broad principle o£ negotiation rather than confrontation has appeared to dominate. To this extent detente has been seen in action.
As a result we have observed several pleasing initiatives. In our own region, we commend the continuing efforts of the five permanent members of the Security Council and the other countries that are seeking a solution to the Cambodian problem. The level of accord reached thus far by the Cambodian parties over the framework document has been encouraging. Final agreement will be a considerable achievement, and we urge all concerned to bring this about.
In the Korean peninsula, we have witnessed signs of reconciliation between two adversaries. This could lay the foundation for lasting peace between North and South. Following this, we hope that the application of either or both of them for membership of the United Nations will receive favourable consideration.
We have noted moves towards the resolution of the Afghan conflict. These may encourage the Afghans to settle their disputes and start rebuilding their homeland.
Finally, the independence of Namibia was an occasion of great joy to us all. It came about as the result of much hard work by the United Nations, and showed that this Organisation can be a powerful, active force for peace.
These are positive examples of progress. They serve to convince us that the trend towards reconciliation and co-operation between the major Powers can assist us all. Above all, such progress can help to bring about control over the flow of arms, a reduction in the excessive level of weaponry, and regulation of the transfer of arms technology. It may thus permit us to look forward realistically to a time when the arms race has been halted throughout the world. Nevertheless, at present, there appears to be only moral force to protect us against violations of the United Nations Charter. Therefore our hopes for the future are linked to the belief that it is crucial that the role of the United Nations in the resolution of international disputes be enhanced.
In that way, Brunei Darussalam believes, members of the international community can contribute to a détente that is world-wide by encouraging regional organisations to co-operate with one another in support of the principles and Charter of the United Nations. Regional organisations may thus begin to emerge as significant forces for the protection of global peace and security. It is by engaging in such new roles that the major Powers may place their own hard-won détente at the service of world-wide peace.
It is important, however, to recognise that detente is not to be judged solely from the perspective of Europe. Peace and stability is the concern of all regions. Therefore, while acknowledging a number of positive moves towards the creation of a safer world, we detect grave tendencies that threaten world-wide peace.
In particular, we observe contradictory trends. These reveal that traditional security, which in European countries may have begun to assume a less dominant character, is still a matter of considerable concern to the rest of the world. At a time when developed nations are more free to concentrate on welfare and even more development we face the disturbing fact that less developed countries are engaged in an arms race of their own.
The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait is a demonstration of how vulnerable small nations can be in the face of such contradiction. It also reminds us how fragile the newly emerging global order is. Thus, in urging the international community to reject and condemn such acts, and in expressing its own condemnation of all such violations of the United Nations Charter, Brunei Darussalam not only notes current events but also recognises their deep-seated causes.
Hence, we draw the attention of the Members of this Organisation once more to specific regional matters. These, we believe, are often the deep-seated cause of wider conflict.
In this respect, we refer to the core problem of Palestine. Brunei Darussalam reiterates its total condemnation of Israeli policy in that country with regard both to the actions of the Israeli army and to policy relating to the immigration of Soviet Jews. We therefore wish to record again our support for the convening of an international conference on the Middle East, involving the permanent members of the Security Council and all the parties concerned, including the Palestine Liberation Organisation as the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
We refer to South Africa, where the complete and irreversible dismantling of apartheid has yet to be brought about.
We refer similarly to matters of great global importance, such as damage to the environment, the problem of debt, international drug-trafficking and underdevelopment. These are no less threatening to peace than arc acts of open hostility. Although initiatives taken in these areas have afforded us cautious optimism, other problems remain unsolved and must be addressed with even greater urgency. Only when that is done can we hope to see the emergence of a world that all nations, regardless of their size, geographic location or level of economic development, regard as prosperous and stable.
Today I have stressed that an era of peace, stability and prosperity cannot be fashioned solely from the viewpoint of one region of the world, no matter how powerful that region may be. This means that we cannot be complacent. The global peace and stability that we all seek is certainly promoted by the climate of East-West detente that has developed during the past year. However, it will not emerge for the benefit of all unless we strive together to prevent new problems and to solve the many long-standing ones that have been shown to threaten the very existence of many nations and their people.


I am pleased, Sir, to congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly. I am certain that under your able leadership the Assembly will be most efficient in its important deliberations. The Republic of Malta has shown the international community that a small country can make an effective contribution to international co-operation.
I wish also to convey my sincere appreciation to your predecessor.
Ambassador Joseph Garba, former Permanent Representative of Nigeria to the United Nations. We led our deliberations skilfully during the forty-fourth session of the General Assembly.
Let me pay a special tribute to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Peres de Cuellar, whose devotion and outstanding service have made a significant contribution to the new esteem the United Nations enjoys and to the growing role of multilateral diplomacy. These advances are particularly important in the light of the regional crises and world-wide challenges we face today.
We take great pleasure in welcoming Namibia for the first time to a regular session of the General Assembly.
We also a warmly welcome to the Assembly the Principality of Liechtenstein, with which Austria has bonds of deep and intense friendship deriving from the fact that we are neighbours, that we are both neutral countries, and that we share a common history.
The past year has been marked by significant progress in the reduction of international antagonisms, the development of new forms of co-operation and the strengthening of international peace at the regional and the world levels. These developments have been particularly spectacular in Europe, but peace efforts have finally borne fruit, after long and often painful years, in some other regions as well. But the new conflict in the Middle East reminds us again that it is illusory to believe in the advent of everlasting peace.
In Europe, we honour all those whose courage has made dreams come true. I want to pay a tribute to the many silent heroes of change: to the suffering of all those who have been arrested, beaten, persecuted or exiled; to the writers of underground literature – admiration to the believers; to the intellectuals; to the farmers; to the workers. They are a source of inspiration and optimism for us all. Their steadfast perseverance has brought about a new awareness of the dignity of the human race and the inalienable value of human rights.
Only one year has passed since I stood with the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Hungary and symbolically cut the barbed war along our common border. For decades that barbed war had symbolised the division of Europe. That era is coming to a close; the gradual unification of the continent of Europe based on a lasting system of security and co-operation is under way.
For the first time in this century, European peoples are rallying round common values of human rights, pluralist: democracy, the rule of law, a market economy with a social and ecological dimension. Those are the foundations on which the new Europe is being built. The forthcoming Paris summit of Heads of State or government of states participant in the conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) will mark the end of the post-war era and will set in place important guideline for a future European "architecture", encompassing pan-European structures and institutions.
Next week's New York meeting of CSCE Foreign Ministers will assess the scope of the preparatory work being carried out in Vienna and will take note of the treaty on a final settlement concerning Germany, which governs the external aspects of Gorman unity.
Austria, located in the centre of Europe, has been participating actively in the various processes shaping new focus of regional and subregional co-operation. We are convinced that neutral Austria, having applied for membership of the European Community and thanks to its historical experience and its relations with neighbours in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, can make a special contribution to the building of a new Europe.
An example of the new dynamism of subregional international co-operation is the Initiative of the Pentagonal, which comprises Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Italy, Yugoslavia and Austria. This Initiative provides for technical co-operation in areas such as the environment, energy, transport, science and technology, culture and tourism. Such co-operation, which is developing so naturally, proves that even after four decades of separation, centuries-old abilities to communicate remain.
The Pentagonal Initiative has also provided a platform for the exchange of views among those five countries and for the definition of common positions on regional issues. Enriched in their culture by more than 25 different nationalities and national minorities. The Pentagonal countries took an important common initiative on the protection of national minorities at the Copenhagen Meeting on the Hunan Dimension of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe. In it the participating States agreed to adopt, where necessary, special measures for safeguarding the rights of minorities without discrimination and in full equality before the law. The identity of these minorities is to be safeguarded and preserved.
Austria is therefore particularly pleased to mention, in this contest, the substantial progress achieved in the implementation of the Austro-Italian Agreement on South Tyrol of 6 September 1946.
As I have already been able to report, during the forty-fourth session of the General Assembly, relations between Italy and Austria have reached an excellent level. However, in order that Austria may declare this conflict - which has been before the United Nations for 30 years - settled, three of the 137 measures agreed upon with Italy in 1969 have yet to be implemented, and a further six questions which arose at a later date and which concern the consensual practice and effectiveness of the Agreement of 6 September 1946 still remain to be resolved.
This statement of figures requires some remarks on the quality of the actual situation. Italy has shown increasing understanding for the concerns of the South Tyrolean people. This can be seen both in the implementation of the first part of those measures aimed at establishing equal standing for the Italian and German languages and in the considerable financial allocations for autonomy. Even more significant, however, is the confidence that Italy places in the South Tyrolean minority in general and in its frontier-straddling activities in particular. Italy has thus made it possible for the South Tyroleans to exercise faithfully the noblest task that could be assigned to that minority, that of serving as a cultural, social and economic bridge between Italy and Austria.
This positive attitude on the part of the Italian Government shows once more that minorities must be considered a dynamic and enriching element, not a burden. This is an opportunity, both to settle the conflict concerning South Tyrol and to arrest such developments as we nay observe in Eastern European countries today, where old nationality conflicts threaten to reappear once ideological coercion has collapsed.
Italy's settling in the near future of the last outstanding questions mentioned not only would resolve a long conflict within the framework of the United Nations but could also provide a positive example to other States with similar problems through the specific provisions agreed to and, even more so, through the experience gained.
We must admit that there is a risk that our joy over the tumbling of economic and political wells in Europe may distract our attention from other regional affairs and from the growing complex web of mutual interdependence that today characterises our multipolar world. European unification has, however, never been seen as a substitute for global partnership. On the contrary, peace, stability and co-operation in any region are the prerequisites for tackling those global issues which will inevitably be on the long-term agenda of the community of nations.
Iraq's aggression and illegal annexation of the sovereign State of Kuwait provide a formidable challenge to the new global partnership that is emerging after the end of the East-Heat cleavage. The way the entire world has been reacting to this action proves that the overcoming of East-West antagonisms has not only benefited Europe but strengthened a far-reaching sense of solidarity. As far as Austria is concerned, this crisis has clearly shown that the status of permanent neutrality does not prevent us from participating in actions of international solidarity.
Since the beginning of the crisis Austria has taken a firm stand, guided also by our own bitter historical memories. We have denounced the illegal occupation and annexation of Kuwait, a sovereign and independent country with which Austria maintains friendly relations.
We have condemned the unlawful measures taken by Iraq against foreign citizens and diplomats, and we have fully supported all the sanctions against Iraq as decided upon by the Security Council in resolution 661 (1990). Furthermore, in the spirit of solidarity, neutral Austria has granted over-flight rights over its territory for aircraft carrying reinforcements and food supplies to the troops stationed in Saudi Arabia. In the same spirit of solidarity, we immediately released funds for the benefit of those countries most severely affected economically by the crisis, that is to say, Egypt and Jordan, funds we are determined to increase substantially.
Austria also condemns every violation of the privileges and immunities of diplomatic liaisons and representatives as an aggression against the essential foundations of peaceful relations between States. That is why Austria, together with other concerned countries, called for an urgent meeting of the Security Council on the subject.
Compliance with the embargo enacted by the Security Council in the relevant resolutions will be an important test of how truly united the nations of the world Organisation are in defiance of law and of the sovereignty and independence of its medium-sized and smaller Members. Austria welcomes the decisions taken by the Security Council in favour of Kuwait because they confirm the principle that small and medium-sized States have the same right to independence as larger countries. It is primarily those countries that are not major Powers that have a vital interest in full compliance with international law, which is so often trampled underfoot. Should Austria, which has submitted its candidacy for a non-permanent seat on the Council for the period 1991 to 1992, be elected, it will commit itself even more to the realisation of that principle.
We may be witnessing a qualitative change is international relations that entails the political relaxation of the noble concept that lies at the heart of the United Nations Charter, namely, collective security for all. This evolution, provided it persists, will most certainly have profound repercussions on concepts of sovereignty, independence and even neutrality. Although we stand ready, together with other States, to draw the necessary conclusions, we are at the same time determined to maintain the predictability and credibility of our policy of neutrality.
Only full implementation by Iraq of Security Council resolution 660 (1990) will lead to a peaceful settlement of that conflict. Austria therefore appeals again to Iraq to withdraw its forces immediately and unconditionally from Kuwait, to restore the legitimate authority, sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Kuwait and to release all foreign citizens.
In view of the highly explosive situation, which could easily lead to enormous bloodshed, we urge all States to explore all possibilities for a peaceful solution of this crisis. I should like to pledge Austria's support for the efforts initiated by the Secretary-General to reach a negotiated settlement with Iraq. There can be no doubt that the action taken by the Security Council has strengthened the authority of the United Nations and its organs, for the first time in its history the Security Council not only has adopted decisions but has also authorised enforcement measures for their implementation. At the sane tine, this determination to take action, far more manifest than in the past, also increases the significance of other Council resolutions, even when not accompanied by such enforcement measures.
Of course, as the President of France stressed before the Assembly a few days ago, law is indivisible. As we continue to strengthen the authority of the world Organisation and its resolutions with respect to the Gulf crisis - and here, as the President of the United States has pointed out, no other problem should be allowed to deter us - we must at the sane tine display our determination with regard to the implementation of other resolutions adopted by the Council. We accordingly support the proposal made by, inter alia, the President of the French Republic and the Foreign Minister of the USSS regarding the convening at an appropriate tine of an international conference on the Middle East, under the auspices of the United Nations.
The international efforts to find a peaceful political solution to the Cambodian problem have intensified since the last session of the General Assembly. The new co-operation between the five permanent members of the Security Council has yielded positive results in Cambodia as well. The document on a United Nations-monitored peace plan that was recently adopted signals that there is realistic hope of ending the civil war and thereby the long-lasting suffering of the Cambodian people and of establishing a truly legitimate and democratically elected Government. I hope that the Supreme National Council will facilitate the peace process and national reconciliation. As President of the International Conference on Kampuchea I am at the disposal of all the concerned parties to contribute to that process.
Unfortunately, hostilities in Afghanistan are continuing, although the differences on the principles of a political settlement have narrowed. We strongly support the endeavours of the Secretary-General to initiate a peaceful solution to that conflict. We hope that the aid programme carried out within the framework of "Operation Salaam" will be of benefit to all areas of the country as a supplement to those peace-making efforts.
History will show that the successful completion of the independence process in Namibia has been one of the most positive chapters in the annals of the United Nations. It will doubtless have an impact on the political options perceived by the people of South Africa in moving towards the abolition of apartheid. As a matter of fact the South African Government baa started in 1990 dismantling a major part of apartheid. It has finally realised several opposition leaders, in particular Mr. Nelson Mandela, and has entered into a dialogue with representatives of the black majority. We strongly hope that that Government will take the necessary steps as soon as possible to create the required conditions for genuine negotiations leading to a new, democratic Constitution based on the principle of political pluralism. We welcome the new consensus in South Africa to renounce violence, and to give a chance to negotiations. The international community can only support these developments.
The successful United Nations operation in Nicaragua augurs well for the broader issue of peace in Central America. Co-operation between the countries of the region concerned and the support given by the entire international community have proved to be effective elements in the resolution of conflicts. I welcome Nicaragua’s return to democracy and hope that the internal peace and well-being of the Nicaraguan people will thereby be assured.
Austria notes with satisfaction the fact that several regional conflicts appear to be moving towards solution. We have tried to contribute to this trend. Austrian battalions are participating in the United Nations peace-keeping forces in Cyprus and on the Golan Heights, and Austrian officers are among the United Nations military observers in Pakistan, in the Middle East, in Iran and in Iraq. The United Nations police force in Namibia has included Austrians, and Austrians have served as election observers in Nicaragua. These activities reflect our firm commitment to the cause of this international Organization and its sustained efforts for peace.
The progress that has been made in the resolution of regional conflicts in Asia, Africa and Latin America, and in regard to co-operation and integration in Europe, will release resources and, we hope, focus attention on the ever-more-pressing global issues of human survival that must be addressed. In this contest, we entirely support the endeavours of the Soviet Union and of the United States to reduce their nuclear-weapon arsenals, and hope that all categories of nuclear weapons will be dealt with in the near future.
As regards conventional disarmament, considerable progress has been made in the talks on conventional forces in Europe. We hope that soon an initial agreement will be signed at the summit meeting of the CSCE countries, which would open the way to negotiations on further, more far-reaching disarmament measures.
The international community looks forward to finalisation, in the course of nest year, of a treaty on chemical weapons. Let see recall, in this respect, that Austria has submitted its candidacy to be the host country for the future organisation for the prohibition of chemical weapons.
The economic imbalances between industrialised countries and developing countries have been only partly reduced over the years, despite the growing disparity in standards of living in many cases. As certain United Nations reports have underscored, the "lost 1980e" have tended to worsen the situation for developing countries and for those sectors of developing societies that have not been able to free themselves from the vicious circle of poverty, underdevelopment, indebtedness, environmental destruction and pressing population growth.
Although, in some countries, the debt problem has been alleviated to a certain extent, for many - in particular the least developed countries - it is still a major obstacle to their regaining development momentum. I hope that the principles recently adopted in the final document of the Paris Conference on the least-Developed Countries will give impetus to the search for solutions to the serious problems of those countries.
The strengthening of private initiative and entrepreneurial skills offers hope for a return by some countries to sustained development. Structural adjustment and the adjustment of economic policies have been necessary in many cases. However, the social cost of these policies must be kept within certain limits.
Let us take note of the fact that the developing countries have themselves played an active role in this process of reorientation. The African Priority Programme for Economic Recovery and the Final Act of UNCTAD VII reflect the changes in perception of, and the criteria used by, the leaders of these countries.
The unleashing of internal market forces presupposes favourable external relations. To this end, new financial resources and the opening up of the markets of the industrialised countries are as necessary as the creation of regional markets by means of regional integration. The success of the current GATT negotiations will have a positive influence on external conditions in that it will make them conducive to more dynamic development.
"The State of the World Environment" - a report of the United Nations Environment Programme - provides shocking reading about the staggering tragedy of a resource base that is dwindling owing to deforestation, soil erosion, reduced soil fertility, desertification, the loss of bio-diversity, the contamination of rivers, lakes and oceans, reduced ozone-layer protection, and climatic change - to name but a few factors.
Although our planet's environmental tragedies are sometimes more visible in third-world countries, the industrialised countries must be aware of their special responsibility in this field.
With respect to population growth, two factors - responsible behaviour by parents, and the economic and social situation of the countries concerned - must be taken into account to ensure sustainable development for those countries. We know that sustainable development is not only an issue of value structures and behaviour patterns in our society; it is, above all, a challenge to resource allocation.
A major issue in attaining sustainable development is, however, related to the use of energy resources. Studies undertaken at the Vienna-based International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis sketch some eerie scenarios in respect of climatic changes. One of the most urgent priority measures - one to be undertaken in the immediate future - is reduction of carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases. Energy policy has become so important for our societies, developing and industrialised alike, that it is high time for political leaders of the world to take a closer look at our options.
The year 1991 will mark the tenth anniversary of the United Nations Conference on Kew and Renewable Sources of Energy. The Programme of Action adopted in Nairobi and its institutional follow-up have led to pertinent conclusions and to improved co-ordination within the United Nations system.
The potential of new and renewable sources of energy is known to be enormous. Under different circumstances, renewable sources of energy could already be contributing to the world's energy supply to a much greater extent. The still abundant supply of conventional energy should not blind us to the fact that we are wasting irreplaceable resources.
A number of nongovernmental organisations, such as BUSO-SOLAB, are increasingly demanding that the issue of the development and more appropriate use of renewable sources of energy should find expression within a high, institutional framework within the United Nations system.
The development and dissemination of new technologies have not yet received adequate attention. Indeed, in some countries, funds dedicated to research and development in this field have suffered substantial cutbacks. This is deplorable and short-sighted. I would propose, therefore, that we should listen more attentively to the warnings of scientists. This would lead us to look for means by which Governments could jointly review their energy policies, in particular, in the light of the threats to our environment. The global aspects of conventional energy supplies require close international co-operation in order to adjust national energy policies to the new environmental challenges.
At its fifth session, the Intergovernmental Committee on the Development and Utilisation of New and Renewable Sources of Energy decided to convene, in 1991, a group of experts to assess the implementation process of the Nairobi Plan of Action. We welcome this initiative, as well as the efforts made to prepare a significant contribution to the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. We hope that this will lead to a strengthening of the efficiency of the existing institutional framework.
A special conference as part of the follow up to the United Nations Conference on environment and Developing could lead to a strengthening of inter-State co-operation in order to meet the new energy and environment challenge. This conference could also reconsider the role of the United Nations in this field.
In my view, the task of the United Nations would be to supplement and support all developments stemming from private initiatives, which could be carried out under free market conditions, they are all required to encourage the efforts made to assure the reliability of new methods of energy production and to attain higher levels of efficiency in the use of the energy currently at our disposal. My delegation has prepared a memorandum on international energy policy which will be conveyed to the other delegations. We would be grateful for comments and observations.
The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, to be held in 1992, could be the most important diplomatic event for the international community before the year 2000, its effects reaching far beyond this date. This Conference will be instrument in expediting progress in respect of global environmental problems and will result in a new global strategy for achieving sustainable development, and, beyond that, in a new form of economic and social thinking: the output of the free market economy must meet social requirements and environmental needs. Only such a concept of the market economy is consistent with human dignity.
In the future environmental diplomacy will become ever more important and difficult. We must acknowledge that the demands on environmental resources and the requirement to conserve then will both continue to increase. As a result, conflicts over the development and use of resources could become more frequent, and could even threaten international peace.
Last year, I proposed to the Assembly that a corps of “Green Helmets” should be established, that is, a system to deal with the prevention and settlement of environmental disputes. On the basis of the covenants received, we have developed a more specific set of ideas, which have been submitted to the second special session of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Program· (UKBP) and to the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, which at in Nairobi in August this year. I hope this initiative will contribute to the efforts being undertaken to address this new, complex challenge to international peace and co-operation.
The current session of the General Assembly will have to take crucial decisions with regard to international co-operation against the illicit production, supply, trafficking and distribution of drugs and psychotropic substances and against the demand for then. Any decision taken with respect to a new United Nations drug structure should reflect the fact that the social aspects of drug abuse, therapies, rehabilitation and reintegration programmes, as well as the interdependence between drug abuse and crime, require cross-sectoral activities within institutions dealing with drugs and social policies.
Full enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by all are a prerequisite for a life in dignity and the wall-being of every individual. Austria regards the promotion and protection of human rights as corner-stones of its constitution and foreign policy. The full realisation of human rights set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Sights and other important international instruments is a permanent obligation accepted by the global community. As a member of the Commission on Hunan Rights, Austria will support every effort to prevent human rights abuses and will contribute to constructive and effective work by the Commission.
In view of the contemporary world as we see it, Austria expresses its satisfaction at the resonance of the Charter of San Francisco. Indeed, nowadays the human conditions of the peoples of the United Nations is no different from the concept its authors had in mind: war, injustice and poverty are still the scourges of mankind. The United Nations, we all, are constantly called to fight then.
Without respect for those fundamental principles I have just referred to and without determination to implement them, we will not have a chance to achieve success in the pursuit of these most noble goals.


In addressing these words to the General Assembly upon the inauguration of its forty-fifth session, I bring a message of friendship and cordiality from the Mexican people. The report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organisation for the past year tells of the new will and spirit of its Members, as well as the grave risks that still exist. I should like to underscore the praiseworthy efforts of Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar, who has successfully used his talent for conciliation in resolving difficulties and in promoting a veritable rebirth of the United Nations. In Javier Peres de Cuellar, Mexico recognizes a conscientious emissary of peace.
I should also like to congratulate Ambassador Guido de Marco, who, as President of the General Assembly, will undoubtedly guide the work of this historic session to the successful conclusion our present circumstances require.
We welcome the Principality of Liechtenstein as a Member of our Organization. Mexico has always defended the principle of the universality of the United Nations; consequently, we hope that we shall soon be celebrating the entry of those States that still remain outside the system.
This is, in a sense, the house of the nations, a house built to foster the secure, civilized coexistence of all peoples. Today the life of the United Nations is attuned to the pulse of the world. I arrive here at a time of great readjustments and unaccustomed hopes. I come with the firm belief that peace and co-operation in the world ere possible because they are indispensable. I come, moreover, with the experience of the changes occurring in my country, which stem from our circumstances and our determination but are closely bound up with the wind· of world change.
Today we are experiencing an unexpected shift in history. It is a time of clashes between the past and the present, between what is global and what is local, between power and law. It is a time of imminent risks and also of opportunities that had not been expected in this century. Institutional structures, global balances and our very beliefs have changed. Over and above beliefs, geography and levels of development, there is a new general awareness that economies must be restructured and political practices must be modified in keeping with the new context of interdependence among nations. Today its most positive expression lies in a new attitude and new language used in dealing with what were once believed to be unalterable necessities. These final years of the century are marked not only by man's mastering of nature without harming it but also by the lifting of his spirit. Historic opportunities for building a future which must be common to all but which can also be more civilised and prosperous are opening for our generation.
This is not a time for complacency. Today, in the political sphere, we are witnessing the end of the cold war and we celebrate with great hope the active talks between the super-Powers. I recognize the courage and imagination their leaders have shown in escaping from the supposed inevitability that held the world trapped in folly and madness. For the United Nations, the new times have signalled the end of the Security Council's paralysis and the necessary strengthening of effective multilateral action.
At the same time, we see with distress that détente, and even co-operation, between Powers which follow different but convergent courses, does not guarantee the end of regional conflicts, nor encourage development in the countries of the South. Enormous amounts of resources formerly devoted to confrontation in Europe have no military purpose today. Will they remain mired in the routine established during the era of cold-war mentality? Will the great Powers be capable of redirecting their concerns and their resources towards the shaping of a world in which international law is the only barrier to the rule of force? Recent events have abruptly reminded us how illusory optimism can be unless we correct major imbalances, unless we have the will to abide by recognised law. Let us hope that the present day, when total war is being abandoned, does not prove also to be a time for the aggravation of inequalities between North and South and for the escalation of local conflicts.
The economic sphere is dominated by new trends that are permeating cultures throughout the world. The interdependence of economies has accentuated global financial and trade links. We are witnessing an aggressive battle over quality, price and promptness in the exchange of goods and services. The imperative of competition is redefining the terms of production, social relations, and even family life. Never before has there been such great potential for development. But, as has happened on a number of occasions, there are also the lengthening shadows of unilateral actions, the danger of recession end the devastating impact of outside events on the best efforts and the roost heartfelt desires of the developing nations.
The formation of economic blocs is shaping a new multipolar order. Those blocs could give a major impetus to global economic activity if they were to remain open to trade, with high levels of savings for foreign investment and lower world-wide interest rates. That scenario would support the programmes of adjustment and structural change of many countries. Such blocs may, however, look first and foremost to their own interests and raise new protectionist barriers, thereby increasing the imbalances in the international economy. Much depends on reaching a favourable conclusion at the Uruguay Round.
Faced with these facts and trends, the world today has realised that a nation cannot promote its independence by erecting walls or by isolating itself, whether for reasons of fear or reasons of nostalgia. Insularity in today's world is a very costly fantasy. To be late in entering global competition means delaying responses to social demands and putting the viability of nations at risk. But to weaken a people's awareness of its identity and throw into disarray its desire to govern its own affairs is even worse. Defending sovereignty in today's world demands deliberate direction of the internal changes that occur in a country if its people are not to suffer involuntarily the effects of world-wide change.
Change affects everyone. We share the joy of the German people which will soon live in a unified country. We admire the diligent efforts of the leaders who have demolished the wall of Misunderstanding that divided families and split a single history into two branches, The unification of Germany, the other nations involved in the autumn revolution of 1969 and the new democracies in Latin America represent perhaps the most spectacular changes. But industrialised nations too are hastening to carry out changes that will enable them to retain their competitive edge, reduce deficits, streamline bureaucracies, expend their political rights and freedoms and gain access to new technologies. No country is so strong £hat it can ignore change, nor is any country so weak that it cannot represent an element of risk to the world.
We in Mexico recognise this new situation in the world. The prospect of population growth and the new context of international competition are the major challenges that Mexico faces. Our population now numbers 82 million, and over 1.5 million Mexicans are added every year. Historic deficiencies and grinding poverty exists side by side with a modern, diverse and demanding society. It has therefore been essential to ensure sustained and stable economic growth.
At the same time, we are adapting our political practices to provide e more sound basis for participation in the world that is currently taking shape. Mexicans will define their own role in the international context.
For several years the Mexican economy has been undergoing a process of adjustment aimed at achieving price stability and improving the efficiency of the production apparatus. The consistency of our economic programme has produced very encouraging results. We Mexicans have learnt lessons that we can never forget.
We consider it an absolute priority to maintain strict fiscal discipline, as the size of the public deficit defines the margins for action to stabilise the economy and carry out structural reforms. Mexico once had one of the world's most closed economies; now it has one of the most open. The transition to stability seeks rapid trade liberalisation and effective deregulation essential if we are to boost the efficiency of the production apparatus, bring domestic prices into line with those of other countries and stimulate technological change.
Mexico took the opportunity to negotiate a reduction in the servicing of its foreign debt, and this has made the country's prospects more secure. We also privatised non-strategic enterprises - doing so in stages - to maximise public revenues end secure the State's ability to meet its prime responsibilities. Mexico promotes foreign investment by permitting access to broader areas of the economy and by providing the essential legal security. Today new forms of association between Government and exporters are making it possible to penetrate and hold markets.
In our circumstances this path has led to a stronger economy and to a new, more productive and co-operative spirit in our society. The changes we have made have reached into all areas of our national life. Mexico is undertaking an in-depth reform of the State. Mexicans are changing their institutions and democratic practices. We have a more vigorous and competitive political-party system. Agreement between parties has produced new electoral legislation. We have created a better system to protect human rights and to combat drug trafficking and prevent offenders from escaping punishment. Rights are exercised freely every day. But the most important measure has been to channel a new social energy into the raising of living standards, mainly for those Mexicans who have the least even though they are making the greatest efforts.
Mexico seeks to participate actively in all the economic blocs and to establish agreements that will enable us to secure new markets end attract new investment. At this very moment, my country is involved in talks with the United States on the signing of a free-trade agreement that will respond to the liberalisation of our economy, facilitate access of our products to markets abroad, and settle any trade disputes between our countries in an objective manner. The inclusion of Canada in the agreement would result in the formation of the world's largest market. To the south, we are seeking to strengthen economic relations with the rest of Latin America and to lay the foundations for freer trade. Our new links with Europe and with Japan and the other nations of the Pacific should serve to increase our exports and attract investment and technology. This effort also makes us a bridge between the two oceans.
Mexico believes that the economic cohesion of blocs should not stem from a desire to protection against real competition. They are born of geography and culture, and their members should interact through increased trade and a greater knowledge of each other. Mexico therefore seeks to renew the cultural world of Latin America. Although shaped by Western tradition, we know that we are different because of the other cultures that have gone into moulding the Latin Americas identity. Our aim is to remove the barriers that impede not only the movement of goods and people but also the spread of the idea of achieving unity while maintaining each country's sovereignty.
The Americas astonished the world almost 500 years ago with the greatness of their native civilisations, the wealth of their resources and the creativity of their peoples. Today in Latin America there is a renewed spirit - a democratic and productive spirit, a spirit of justice and solidarity - that one day will again astonish the world. Mexico is committed to that future. There was a time, not long ago, when the language that prevailed at this Assembly was that of the crisis of multilateralism. All the wrongs of the world were recapitulated and, above all, stress was placed on the deficiencies of the mechanisms that existed and the weaknesses of the international community in righting them. This attitude always met with a deaf ear from some, angry reactions from others and impatience from everyone. That was an effect of the cold war.
Since the earliest days of when United Nations, and for more than a century before that, Mexico consistently expressed its support for respect for the right of nations to self-determination and non-intervention from abroad, for the legal equality of States and the peaceful settlement of conflicts as principles for civilised coexistence among nations: it has been a crusade in favour of international law. On occasion, our appeals - the only recourse available to a peace-loving nation - went unnoticed by those who adhered to power politics and rejected what they considered the naive politics of law. Today, we feel that the change in the world is proving us right. In the name of international law and its world-wide application, the cold war is disappearing and the community of nations is responding to the challenge of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
The Security Council has condemned the use of force, has taken measures to impose sanctions on the aggressor and to dissuade him, and has indicated ways to make those sanctions effective. Mexico has endorsed the resolutions of the Security Council and has already adopted, within its own sphere, the pertinent decisions for their implementation. We call for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the Iraqi troops currently in Kuwait, the immediate release of the hostages detained by arbitrary force, and full respect for the Vienna conventions on diplomatic and consular immunities for individuals and precincts. If the force of human rights is the most powerful idea of the modern era, invasion is the most consummate form of violating it. International diplomacy is here feeing a new challenge.
The world has changed, and Mexico has changed as well; but the value of transformation lies in preserving gains which must not be relinquished. If reason, tolerance, co-operation and a sense of justice are regained through change, then change will have direction and depth. Since its founding, that has been the watchword of the United Nations the abiding rule of law as opposed to the arbitrary will of the powerful; negotiation and reconciliation of interests instead of the use of force; consultation, concerted agreement and co-operation as means of settling differences, of mitigating conflicts and banishing war. The United Nations was an act of legal and political creativity, of culture and civilisation against irrationality and barbarism. Change has shown us that we can be responsible to ourselves, to past generations and to those yet to come in a way the world has never yet known. We should not let this historic opportunity pass us by.
This is a representative forum or, to be more precise, it is the premier forum of world public opinion. Today, the General Assembly san also be the conduit of the new era of exchanges based on the principle of sovereign equality and in keeping with the norms of international law. Thus, it is painful to recall how many times in the past adopted resolutions have been ignored, and heartening today to see the norms respected. I come to this General Assembly persuaded that all Member States are committed to strengthening the process of recovery of the United Nations which has now begun. There is a historic mission to carry out, and today we are closer than ever before to accomplishing it.
We embark upon the decade of the 1990s beset by international uncertainties, but knowing that we have it in us to resolve them. The fundamental tasks of international law are those concerned with world stability, with the agendas of war and peace, of development and social justice in the world. The far-reaching changes have given a global character to potential responses to these major threats to the desire for productive and peaceful coexistence. The world-wide effort to eliminate the origins of conflicts again finds its firmest resolve in the establishment of law.
To a large extent, the danger represented by the regional conflicts that we are experiencing today derives from the arms race. Commitments in the field of arms reduction, particularly the reduction of nuclear and chemical weapons, and agreements for reducing trafficking in armaments, are key issues for peace in the decade of the 1990s.
There are encouraging signs. The Treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, and the understanding reached on a SO per cent reduction in their strategic long-range nuclear arsenals are very positive factors. These have helped to create a favourable atmosphere for the European negotiations on the reduction of conventional arsenals, and have contributed favourably to an enhanced climate of detente. Respect for others, both within each nation and between States, is the political basis for negotiation and the underlying principle of international law. We call on all nations in our hemisphere and throughout the world to subscribe to treaties such as those of Tlatelolco and Rarotonga. Let us reduce the levels of conventional weapons and military budgets, and may the savings achieved thereby be directed towards development and not towards destruction.
The search for peace has led us to recognise concerted regional agreement as one of the most suitable ways of creating favourable conditions for negotiations. Central America, the pain-wracked isthmus of our continent, has been assailed by armed conflict and a draining of its economies for more than a decade. With respect for all concerned, Mexico has worked, first bilaterally, then multilaterally and subsequently through its present efforts within the Group of Eight and under the San Jose Accord, to bring the conflict to an end and to initiate a stage in which there will be development. Achieving peace in the region depends, first of all, on the tenacious efforts of the countries in the zone; the Esquipulas agreements are among the best examples of these. The Central American Governments are on the road to reconciliation and peace. They demand and deserve international support for their efforts. Just as resources were delivered to the warring parties during the time of conflict, they should now be provided to the Governments responsible for the development of the region. That is not occurring, and is alarming because the population dynamics and the age-old deficiencies of the region mean that there can be so lasting peace unless it is based on economic improvement.
Regional peace-seeking groups are irreplaceable. Efforts to solve the Cambodian conflict involve the resolute participation of the members of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and other countries in the region. Progress in solving the problems of southern Africa have been based largely on the efforts of the front-line countries: the regional agreement is a gaga of the processes leading towards peace. We expect the invaluable co-operation of the Arab League in finding a prompt solution to the problems in the Persian Gulf,
Another war of global dimensions is being waged against drug trafficking and terrorism, increasingly united in their criminal conspiracy against humanity. Here again, a new concept has been accepted that recognises the true international nature of the problem and eliminates any pretext for not acting. It is a chain of terror that includes production, distribution and consumption as different parts of one and the same threat.
Simultaneous measures must be taken to provide production options in places where drug crops are planted, to fight drug traffickers and to educate and rehabilitate those who consume drugs. The 1988 Vienna Convention against illicit traffic in narcotic drugs and the preparation of a world plan of action are highly encouraging efforts. We trust that the new structure of United Nations agencies will effectively assist in multilaterally approaching this scourge.
In Mexico's case, drug trafficking not only threatens the health of our young people but also undermines national security and the strength of our institutions. In the course of my administration, Mexico has lost more than 100 people in this war, has arrested over 20,000 drug traffickers and has prevented 7 billion doses of marijuana and 3 billion doses of cocaine and heroin from reaching the youth of the world by confiscating drugs with a street value of $120 billion. Such is the depth of Mexico's commitment to the war on drug trafficking. It must not be forgotten, however, that the rule of law prevails in its fight at all times. We cannot allow rights to be violated when we wage this war, much less permit the sovereignty of States to be violated for such a purpose. Unswerving determination and full and respectful collaboration are the civilized solution, as they are in all questions of war and peace.
Lack of development and of social progress holds the same potential for disrupting global stability as have conflict and war. The highest hopes for this new age of multipolarity, an age characterized by respect and co-operation, will mean little if the promotion of growth and productive employment to reduce poverty is nullified by protectionist barriers, negative terms of trade and the net transfer of the South's resources to the industrialized world. The grievous and widening gap between rich and poor countries is a source of concern to all.
World-wide environmental deterioration and pollution jeopardise social development and undermine the productive endeavours of our nations. This problem, whose origin and consequences extend across national frontiers, demands a multilateral solution.
Development and environmental protection are compatible if all of us accept our responsibility for the environment and if the necessary resources and technologies are channelled to the developing countries to enable them to offer their inhabitants options that do not despoil the environment. Horns of coexistence that did not include the developing nations in the building of prosperity would ignore the international community's reason for existence and waste the benefits of peace. The 1992 world Conference on Environment and Development should be a turning-point in the firm commitment of the community of nations to alleviate the harmful effects o£ environmental deterioration.
Mexico is doing its part and is seeking to balance its industrialisation with a healthy environment. We are protecting whales, dolphins and a dozen of the world's remaining 14 species of sea turtles that lay their eggs on our beaches. We are providing more protection for our tropical forests and are actively participating in the world strategy for preventing changes in the global climate. We seek more co-operation, especially financial and technological co-operation, in attacking the problems of pollution in Mexico City. This is a struggle in behalf of civilisation, the civilisation that will come after us, which we cannot abandon without rejecting our own nature.
In the midst of the immense chaos that the French Revolution caused in Europe two centuries ago, in a world suddenly left without points of reference and threatened by new forms of despotism, a philosopher of that age and of all ages enthusiastically but cautiously distinguished between universal law, the promise of everlasting peace among nations and respect for the freedom of all. Today, when the end of the cold war is changing the world's geopolitics, when the people of Eastern Europe are once again finding the magnificence and the risks of freedom and when, at the same time, the danger of a war with unprecedented consequences is emerging and new problems are gaining priority, we must return to the principles of that centuries-old perception.
What should the future of our Organisation be? The circumstances that favour the strengthening of the United Nations demand responsibility. The momentum of these times bears with it the risk of tempting us to act in haste, to create functions for the United Nations that go beyond the provisions of its Charter, functions that not all of its Member States are willing to undertake. Let us, therefore, reflect on our present condition, so that we can envisage a future that, while not free from problems, will have common rules for resolving them.
What cannot be put off is the implementation of the fundamental principles set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, which are Mexico's principles as well. The interdependence of the modern world and the conviction that there are global problems whose solution can be attained only through international action have led some to cast doubt on the validity of those principles. That is an erroneous view; the most progressive forms of international organisation that have emerged in recent times have had as their point of departure the twin rights of territorial integrity and political sovereignty. That is where the ultimate legitimacy of the Organisation resides, and that is what offers the possibility of achieving agreements aimed at constructive and effective international action. States are the arena of self-determination, and only through respect for them is international determination possible.

The challenge of our times is to recognize that the trend towards globalization demands the effective application of international law to establish the rules governing co-operative efforts in the face of problems that, by their very nature, are international. But this should never mean a weakening of the sovereignty of States on the pretext of a supposed world community of individuals. Let us not repeat the mistake of establishing a universal rationale aimed at wiping away the history of peoples.
It is possible for us to view the world as an entity only because we hold a point of view, our own, that of each nation. That is why our attachment to values, to history, to culture, which is the cement of societies, persists and indeed is growing stronger. Sovereignty and democracy are essential in a world of interdependence. Only thus will self-government serve to make commitments, forge links and be open to the community of nations. Only a real detente can lead to genuine changes.
The lawful defence and promotion of the sovereign interrelationship of nations does not conflict with the certainty of national identity but rather requires it. The scale of the world's great problems can no longer be used as a pretext for practising new forms of interventionist and hegemonism. To each citizen, each family and each society, forming part of a political community is something of decisive value. Only those that are sovereign agents respected by the international community can be participants in international affairs. In the words of Mexican internationalist Genaro Estradas "No country should ask for something which the sovereignty of its own people gives it the right to receive."

Uncertainty can cause fear, but it can also give rise to unexplored opportunities. More than ever before, the current situation offers unique conditions for constructive encounters between nations. In order to take advantage of this, we must cast aside our fear of the unknown. The effective protection of nations requires giving free rein to their capabilities, not limiting them. It means interacting and reaching agreement, not responding unilaterally. It means having confidence in ourselves so that we may take an active part in shaping world history, which is one and the same and belongs to all. Are we prepared to give politics and diplomacy a chance to work, despite their limitations, their slow results, their unavoidable but indispensable commitments?
In this regard the universal democratic idea is the great legacy of these last years of the century. Fragile though it is, it is being built throughout the world in the face of waning but still dangerous resistance. The democratic idea reflects the complexity of present-day societies agreement between different men and women who wish to live as a productive community under democracy; respect for their dignity and for their basic rights; the sum of talents that are free and capable of facing global challenges. In a sense a new utopia, richer than any that preceded it, is emerging, born of a true confrontation between doctrinaire principles and historical facts. If the twentieth century wore to leave us only this legacy, it would be making its full contribution to mankind. For all nations, however, there is still a long way to go, and the ideal is still far from becoming α reality.
World justice must become the heritage for the twenty-first century. Our passion for democracy must take into account the need to bring into being the conditions that make it possible to exercise political and civil rights, enabling them to flourish and make men brothers in spirit. Beyond any doubt, the initial effort must be internal, national and continuous. But it also calls for the participation of the international community, through its institutions, in support of the hardships suffered by entire peoples in their efforts to achieve more prosperous lives.
International law will thus become all the more relevant, because the interrelationship of interests and the globalization of political values will necessarily lead to the joint solutions of common problems. The unquestionable link between development and peace makes it necessary to pursue dialogue and to act in accordance with the law.
Mexico has maintained and will always maintain a firm commitment to a policy of principles. We believe in law as the foundation of a culture of respect among nations. We believe in democracy as a measure of peoples' own will. We seek a more deeply rooted justice, both within our country and among nations. It cannot be otherwise, because it is our conviction, rooted in our history and our geography, that the international principles of Mexico and the United Nations do indeed constitute a framework for action that better promotes our interests. Law ultimately constitutes an objective barrier - although unfortunately not an insurmountable one - to the arbitrary exercise of power.
The United Nations is the most nearly perfect form of political organization for the sovereign interrelationships of States. As the interdependence among States increases, so too will the need to move forward to more effective levels of organization. May the task of the United Nations for the twenty-first century be to establish democratic justice in the world.
The most important events in history have always been the result of achieving something previously regarded as impossible. It would be futile to attempt to place limits on the progress of free men, but it would be even more futile to try to place constraints on the effects of the commitment to act with goodwill. Today in the United Nations we have a world Organization that gives full priority to respect for international law and the principles of its founding Charter, an Organization that guarantees the search for solutions to the global problems of our time and that upholds the indissoluble link between peace and development. In short, we have an Organization that promotes respect as one of the founding principles of democracy and of open, equitable co-operation to make international justice a reality. This is the only way to find hope for the world.