Allow me, first of all, to extend to
you. Sir, the warmest congratulations of the Greek Government on your election
to the presidency. Your personal qualities and diplomatic skill augur well
for progress on the work of this session. Moreover, we are especially pleased
to salute in your person the representative of a neighbouring country with
which Greece maintains long-standing relations of close friendship. I also
wish to pay tribute to your predecessor. Ambassador Shihabi, for the effective
manner in which he discharged his functions as President of the Assembly last
year.
Allow me also to point out how impressed the Greek Government is by the
way the Secretary-General of our Organization, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, has

been discharging his duties since he took office at the beginning of the
year. We are absolutely certain that he will continue his work with the same
dynamism and diplomatic dexterity, for the benefit of both the international
community and this Organization, which has grown since the General Assembly
last met a year ago.
Let me also join other representatives in welcoming the new Members that
have been admitted to the United Nations as independent States, namely
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, San Marino, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and
Uzbekistan.
The admission of these new Members is a renewed expression of the desire
of our Organization to welcome in its midst all those States that undertake
the commitment to adhere to the purposes and principles set out in the United
Nations Charter.
Earlier this week the Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom, in his
capacity as President of the Council of the European Community, delivered a
statement on behalf of its 12 Member States. My Government fully subscribes
to the contents of that statement.
Greece is firmly committed to, and fully supports, the process of
European integration. We believe that the economic and political union we
agreed on when we adopted the Maastricht Treaty last year will strengthen
progress and enhance prosperity not only on the European continent, but also
in all the countries the Community is trading with. Greece was among the
first European countries to ratify the Maastricht Treaty, and we are happy
that the French people as well ratified the Treaty at the referendum of last
Sunday. Allow me to note that the "yes" vote in the Greek Parliament was

overwhelming 286 positive votes out of a total of 300 deputies voting - and
is indicative of the extraordinary degree of unanimity of the Greek people
concerning the position of our country for a united Europe.

I have the honour to stand before this Assembly as the representative of
a nation that is now completing a year-long celebration marking 2,500 years
since our ancestors first invented a form of government called in Greek
demokratia. which in rough translation means "rule by the people": democracy,
which was destined to become one of the most outstanding contributions of
Greece to the collective heritage of mankind and a cornerstone of world
civilization. We Greeks felt happy and, allow me to say, proud a year ago, as
we saw democracy and its twin principle, freedom, gaining ground throughout
the world and consolidating its presence in countries where totalitarianism
had long held sway. In welcoming new members to the community of free
nations, the Greek Government expressed the hope that the post-cold-war world
would be based on the principles of democracy and freedom, on respect for
human rights and fundamental freedoms, and on the rule of law.
That hope was expressed a year ago. Can we now, a year later, ascertain
the extent to which it has been met? Admittedly, a year's time is too short
to allow a conclusive judgement, but the events of the last 12 months offer
some evidence of the direction in which the world is moving. And, I must say,
the evidence available is not as encouraging as our expectations were. In
fact, we have witnessed developments that threaten the fragile positive trends
we had begun to see. We have seen peoples that gained their freedom and
independence taking the path of nationalism. Signs abound that we are
entering a dangerous and unpredictable world situation, where conflicts,
extreme nationalism and tensions of a new nature are erupting, and where the
clash of interests could take the place of the ideological confrontations of
which we have had bitter experience in the past.
In spite of the comfort of being safe at last from the threat of nuclear
annihilation since the recent enormous strides in disarmament, in some areas

the world seems to be moving into a state of uncontrolled proliferation of
conventional arms and civil strife. In some cases, that civil strife seems to
be on the brink of spilling over and becoming a threat to regional and
international peace and security. To make matters worse, the weak economies
of many developing countries remain in the grip of a deepening crisis, while
growing poverty, and in certain cases even hunger, is becoming a menace to
recent gains in democracy. And the environment continues to deteriorate at an
alarming pace.
Faced with such a situation, the world community has to react
collectively. And as it is the United Nations that embodies the collegiality
of the world community, it is incumbent upon it to devise ways and means to
help humanity deal with the situation. In this respect, the nations and the
peoples of the world are fortunate in that, with the cold war behind us, the
paralysis that had for a long time plagued our Organization has now
disappeared. The United Nations is now indeed showing signs that it is
willing to live up to the expectations placed in it.
A series of actions is being undertaken to deal with the major problems
confronting humanity now. In this context, earlier this year, the United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the largest summit ever
held, met at Rio de Janeiro. Next year we will see the Second World
Conference on Human Rights. In 1994, population and development will be dealt
with. In 1995, the World Conference on Women will take place. Finally, a
world summit for social development has been proposed.
But the first in this series of actions was taken last January and
directly concerned international peace and security. The Greek Government
welcomed the convening of the Security Council at the summit level to reaffirm
the world community's devotion to the principle of collective security and to

the settlement of disputes in accordance with the principles of the United
Nations Charter, and to consider anew the means by which collective security
can be upheld through the Organization.
Greece has also welcomed the document entitled "An Agenda for Peace", on
preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping, issued by the
Secretary-General in response to a request made by the members of the Security
Council at their January summit meeting. I take this opportunity to express
our appreciation to the Secretary-General for a document of vision, lucidity
and challenging ideas. We in the Greek Government have studied it with great
interest and are looking forward to participating in the fruitful debates that
are bound to follow in the various bodies of our Organization.
We are pleased that the Secretary-General sees the concepts of preventive
diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping in their proper perspective within
the larger concept of peace and security that goes beyond the military sphere
and encompasses social and economic factors, primary among which is the
enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
We are also encouraged that the Secretary-General has not failed to
emphasize the importance of democracy not only within nations but also among
the family of nations.
The perception of selectivity in the application of the principles of the
Charter must be avoided if the moral authority of the United Nations is to be
maintained. This is particularly urgent now that the enforcement capability
of the Organization is being enhanced and put to use. Enforcement without
moral authority is coercion and tyranny. Smaller nations need to be reassured
that no Power will succeed in usurping the moral authority of the United
Nations and using it for the advancement of its own interests.

It is the fervent hope of the Greek Government that the current turbulent
situation will prove to be only a brief transition and will soon be replaced
by a spirit of international cooperation and solidarity. The deployment of
common efforts for the maintenance of international peace and security through
preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping are an indispensable
manifestation of such international solidarity. The other two foundations on
which this solidarity must be based are respect for human rights and
fundamental freedoms and a common concern for the protection of the
environment.
The subject of human rights is, of course, not new. We rejoice that the
European Community has time and again emphasized that respect for, and
promotion and safeguarding of human rights is an essential element in
international relations and, therefore, one of the cornerstones of cooperation
and of relations between the Community and its member States and other
countries.
The expression of concern about human rights violations can no longer be
considered mere interference in a State's internal affairs. Established
principles governing relations among States - such as non-interference in the
internal affairs of other States and respect for the national sovereignty of
States must accommodate efforts by the United Nations and by regional
organizations to protect the human rights of individuals and social groups
that are threatened in particular States.

A few words about Greece's relations with its neighbours and the state of
affairs in our region.
We have repeatedly and officially stated that Greece has no territorial
claims whatsoever against any of the countries neighbouring ours. We offer
our friendship to all of them and we hope, indeed we are certain, they will
reciprocate. We maintain the best possible relations with our Balkan as well
as our Mediterranean neighbours.
Regarding our relations with Turkey, we consider that it is of primary
importance for Greece and our neighbour Turkey that our two countries display
the necessary will and imagination to create a climate of mutual confidence,
security and stability which will redound to the benefit of the Eastern
Mediterranean in general and our two peoples in particular.
Greece believes that it is high time for our two neighbouring States to
find the way, on the basis of international law and international conventions
and treaties, to establish closer relations, compatible with the requirements
of the Charter of the United Nations, the Helsinki Final Act and the Charter
of Paris, as well as with the expectations of our peoples, dictated by
geographical proximity and by common interests. This intention, our political
will and our sincere desire have been repeatedly stressed by our Prime
Minister, Mr. Mitsotakis, who has already met with the Prime Minister of
Turkey, Mr. Demirel, four times this year, while I have had the opportunity to
speak in the same spirit to my Turkish counterpart, Mr. Hikmet Cetin, with
whom I have already met three or four times. We, for our part, laid emphasis
on the fact that the problem of Cyprus, which exercises a negative influence
on our bilateral relations, should at last find a proper solution on the basis
of all relevant United Nations resolutions.

I should like to remind the Assembly that despite coordinated efforts the
problem remains unresolved. Cyprus continues to be divided and a large part
of its territory is still under Turkish occupation. The other consequences of
the 1974 invasion, such as those of the refugees, the missing persons, and the
continuing efforts to change the demographic structure of the island and to
plunder of Cyprus' cultural heritage, still exist and constitute the main
elements of the tragic reality of this Mediterranean island, an integral part
of the European family and a State Member of this Organization. In this
respect, the report of the European Commission of Human Rights published on
2 April 1992 sets out the violations of human rights in Cyprus, concerning
missing and displaced persons, separation of families, deprivation of
possessions and so on.
Despite the present status quo in Cyprus which the most recent Security
Council resolution explicitly characterizes as not acceptable we, together
with the international community, look forward to the systematic efforts of
the Secretary-General with the active support of the five permanent members
of the Security Council to bring about a just, a viable and a functional
solution to the Cyprus problem.
In this respect, we note that the Secretary-General's set of ideas,
including the map attached thereto, which was initially discussed last July
and August, with special emphasis on the territorial, refugee and property
issues, should form the basis of negotiations during the follow-on talks
scheduled to be resumed in New York in late October.
We urge Turkey to use all its decisive influence on the Turkish-Cypriot
side to ensure that it approaches the talks in a constructive manner which may
well contribute to the solution of the problem and the elimination of a real
anachronism in today's Europe.

In conclusion on this subject, I wish to stress once again that the just
settlement of this problem would greatly benefit relations between our two
peoples and our two countries. Moreover, it would also constitute an
important element of Turkey's aspirations to its European orientation. We
have been trying, most emphatically, to make it clear that it is our will to
establish the most friendly relations with our neighbour Turkey. I do not
think that the international community would be proud if it were to leave this
problem, which has been dragging on for over 18 years, unresolved.
The situation in the Balkans remains a cause of major concern to all.
The Yugoslav crisis continues to constitute a potential danger for
destabilization of the whole Balkans and a danger for peace and security in
the wider area. Greece, as a Balkan country, naturally is directly concerned
and, therefore, from the very beginning of the crisis has not spared any
effort to achieve a speedy and negotiated solution. The convening of the
London Conference under the co-chairmanship of the European Community and the
United Nations represents our only hope for a lasting settlement. We wish to
reiterate here our full support to the chairmanship of the Conference, to
which we are ready to offer all our assistance.
The Assembly should send a clear message to all former Yugoslav parties
that there can be no alternative to a negotiated solution of the crisis and
that the international community is determined not to recognize any
fait accompli created by force. We believe that no single party is to blame
for the current crisis and its horrors and that all share part of the blame.
In any event, we must act swiftly to stop the war before it is too late, for
the dangers of spill-over of the crisis are real.

Any form of military intervention in the former Yugoslavia is highly
inadvisable. We have cautioned against it because we consider the staging of
a war to stop another war absurd and self-defeating. Indeed, if a majority of
other States were to decide on some form of military intervention in
Yugoslavia, Greece would in no way participate. All States - and mainly
Balkan States - that neighbour the former Yugoslavia, and all States with a
special interest in the area, should in any case be excluded from such
action. Otherwise, the enmities, the mistrust and the rekindling of bitter
memories of the past will be a source of persistent bitterness and instability
for generations to come.
We want the Balkans to be an area of peace and we wish to avoid a return
to the time when they were known as the powder-keg of Europe. We want good
relations with all our Balkan neighbours. We are ready to support them
economically and also to facilitate the development of their relations with
the European Community. We have no claims against anybody and we expect them
to have similar motivations toward us. It is for this reason that, as regards
the former "Yugoslav Federal Socialist Republic of Macedonia", we have
actively and consistently advocated full compliance with the Lisbon
Declaration of the European Community, according to which that Republic should
be recognized under a name which does not include the term "Macedonia".

Otherwise, we will surely have sown the seeds of future tensions and
conflicts in the area and we will have jeopardized the ability of the peoples
of the Balkans to live and coexist peacefully together. Our insistence on
this point is not only an emotional or sentimental matter, now is it only a
matter of historical accuracy. It is, more than anything, a matter of
political realism. The usurping of a Greek name and of ancient Greek emblems,
combined with constitutional provisions insinuating territorial expansion, is
nothing if not a clear indication of territorial claims. If we allow this
policy to be pursued we shall condemn future generations for we shall be
forming the nucleus of friction for some time to come.
Having said that, I wish to make it quite clear that we have never
harboured any enmity towards this nascent republic. Even when, recently, we
reluctantly had to discontinue fuel exports there, in order to counter
unjustified, unfounded accusations that Greece was circumventing Security
Council resolutions 713 (1991) and 757 (1992), we never interfered with the
supply of food and humanitarian aid. As a matter of fact, exports of fuel
supplies have already been resumed now that the European Community has adopted
new regulations to ensure the movement of goods towards the former Yugoslavia
that safeguard the effectiveness of the United Nations embargo.
The arms embargo should also be reinforced with respect to all sides and
an effective mechanism for its control should be put in place.
Concerning Kosovo, which is a particularly sensitive, potentially
dangerous area, we should encourage the Serbian Government and the ethnic
Albanians to pursue a serious and open dialogue within the framework of the
London Conference with a view to reaching an early solution to the problems of
this area. We maintain that a status of autonomy, without any change of
frontiers, would satisfy all concerned.

The international community must also be alerted to the various reports
from many parts of the former Yugoslavia concerning atrocities. It should be
made clear to all those who are responsible for such acts that they will be
held personally responsible. This is a point about which my Government feels
particularly strongly.
The easing of international tensions with the end of the cold war
provides new possibilities and resources for development. Our immediate
objective should be to restore growth that would not irreparably destroy the
air, the rivers, the forests, the oceans or any other part of nature. The
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development held at Rio de
Janeiro last June has raised high hopes that the consensus which has emerged
and which strikes a balance between environment and development will be
sustained. At the same time, we note with great satisfaction that a political
consensus is growing concerning the fundamental relationship between
pluralistic democracy, respect for human rights, and development as an
equitable and sustainable process.
Now that the end of the cold war has raised the hopes of millions, a
system of collective security is envisaged to preserve world peace and
stability and to provide a new vision of development very much along the lines
of the Charter of the United Nations. Economic and social development is not
possible without peace and stability, which are prerequisites and not
substitutes for development. The last 18 months have witnessed profound
historic changes in the world economy. A large part of the world remains in a
state of transition and uncertainty while it is being transformed
fundamentally. The Secretary-General has offered us a new concept of
integrated development no longer based on the traditional strict
differentiation among political, economic and social issues. In his

introductory remarks to the high-level segment of the Economic and Social
Council, he argued in favour of an integrated approach to global issues under
which the United Nations system, through preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and
peace-keeping will bring its political influence to bear on the solution of
economic and social issues. This approach is best suited to the Organization
because it will secure "a unit thrust" in all the activities of the United
nations system through enhanced coordination of agencies.
The recently concluded Conference on Environment and Development held at
Rio de Janeiro is a first example of this approach. A conceptual bridge was
crossed there. We hope that fundamental principles agreed on at Rio de
Janeiro will be translated into concrete action.
The world economic situation presents an uneven and variegated picture.
In countries where there is a movement towards a market system, economic
difficulties are increasing, exacerbated by new assertions of nationalism, as
well as by ethnic and religious challenges, which threaten social peace and
the cohesion of States.
In the developing countries growth remains on the whole sluggish, while
there has been great diversity in performance among them. Moreover, the
problems which plagued the developing world in the 1980s still persist. As
pointed out in the World Economic Survey. 1992. world production fell in 1991
for the first time since the Second World War, and the recovery that was
beginning to take shape appeared to be exceptionally weak. The Uruguay Round
of trade negotiations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)
remains stalled. Financial assistance for development purposes is still hard
to come by, while developing and other countries must complete painful
adjustment programmes. High inflation, large-scale deficits, debt burdens and

lack of adequate investments have not yet shown signs of improvement.
Furthermore, economic hardship has given rise to fanaticism, unchecked
migratory movements, civil strife and criminal acts. Development continues to
be the most serious challenge of all countries.
The world economic situation provides an opportunity for a strengthening
of the role of the United Nations system as regards enhancing international
cooperation for development. The important political changes of the last two
years and the integrated nature of political, economic and social issues call
for the United Nations to play a major role in shaping the directions of
social and economic development.
Progress in the regional conflicts that have been on the agenda of our
Organization has again been uneven. Peace in the Middle East remains
elusive. The most important element of the Middle East problem is the
Arab-Israeli conflict. Two of the most ancient peoples in the world, each of
which has made outstanding contributions to the common heritage of mankind,
have for decades confronted each other, seemingly unwilling to accept for the
other what each demands for itself, that is, the right to exist within safe
and recognized borders, the right to a homeland, and the right to take charge
of its own destiny. However, the events of the last 12 months seem to
indicate that each side may now be prepared to accept for the other at least
part of what it demands for itself. And this development, although in itself
not sufficient for the solution to the conflict, does seem to justify the
judgement that the chances for peace are better now than they were a year ago.

I wish in this connection to pay tribute to the commitment and
perseverance of the sponsors of the peace process launched in Madrid in
October 1991, as well as to the wisdom and courage displayed by the parties
directly involved. It is the fervent hope of the Greek Government that the
new Israeli Government, as well as the Arab parties involved, will seize the
opportunity to work together towards a comprehensive peace.
No one can dispute today that apartheid is an unacceptable political
system that has to be eradicated in all its forms and practical consequences.
Furthermore, the international community and the main political leaders in
South Africa are committed to the creation of a united, non-racial and
democratic South African society through peaceful means and through
negotiations involving all parties concerned.
However, the recent wave of violence in South Africa, which claimed many
innocent lives, seemed to pose a serious threat to the negotiating process,
and to undermine the results achieved so far. Greece firmly believes that no
effort should be spared to help South African society keep the momentum and to
continue building upon what has been achieved. Let us bear in mind that, now
more than ever, the new reality of intensified subregional, regional and
international cooperation in the political and economic fields points to an
important role for a new, democratic, united and non-racial South Africa.
In the Horn of Africa, in Somalia, a human tragedy of almost
unprecedented scale is unfolding. War, drought and the collapse of civil
authority threaten the very existence of the country: the physical
existence the lives of its people. Starvation has already claimed
thousands of lives.
We know, however, that the difficulties of the two regions I have just
referred to are only part of a more complicated, multifaceted structural p

problem faced by the whole continent of Africa in all fields of human
activity. We have to give all possible help to the countries of Africa to
solve their present problems and to undertake new efforts of cooperation and
integration which will foster development, peace and stability.
The Greek Government welcomes the positive results of the Helsinki summit
of 1992 in the framework of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in
Europe (CSCE) and attaches particular importance to the comprehensive nature
of the CSCE process, which brings together the Governments and the peoples of
Europe and those of the United States and Canada. The Helsinki follow-up
meeting provided an important opportunity for discussions on the future role
of the CSCE. In particular, the strengthening of its institutions is expected
to increase the effectiveness of the CSCE in the prevention, management and
peaceful settlement of disputes. The Concluding Document adopted at the
summit characterizes the CSCE as a regional arrangement in the sense of the
provisions of Chapter VIII of the United Nation Charter. In that way, the
CSCE process contributes substantially to the collegiality of the world
community and is therefore supported wholeheartedly by the Greek Government.
Although the international community has increased its cooperation in
combating drug abuse and the illicit production of and trafficking in
narcotics, this scourge continues to plague and undermine our societies.
Consequently, further intensified and more effective international cooperation
is required within the existing international and regional mechanisms provided
for by the United Nations and regional organizations.
My country, which lies at the crossroads of the world, continues to be
actively engaged in the fight against drugs. It is in the process of adopting
new legislation and policies to enhance its effectiveness in combating the
problem. Furthermore, we have increased our cooperation with all States of

our region with a view to adopting and implementing effective practical
measures against drug trafficking.
In conclusion, I should like to reaffirm my country's commitment to the
United Nations and to the spirit of international cooperation and solidarity
it embodies. We join forces with the other nations of the world and pledge to
make every possible effort for world peace and stability and for a humane
international community, on an enduringly beautiful planet.


On
behalf of Venezuela, I congratulate our President and the Government and
people of Bulgaria on his election to preside over this session of the General
Assembly.
I welcome the new Member States, whose presence among us makes this
Organization more universal.
I also wish to place on record our gratitude to the Permanent
Representative of Saudi Arabia, Ambassador Samir Shihabi, who presided over
the work of the forty-sixth session with such distinction.
We are meeting at a time of particular instability and uncertainty. The
international system is trying to find a new order and basic principles and
guidelines to enable us to build a more just and egalitarian world. We are
living at a time of rapid historical change. The most dramatic events and the

most unexpected changes are taking place before a seemingly helpless world
leadership.
The end of communism is already a thing of the past; the collapse of the
Soviet empire is ancient history. The absolute triumph of the West is
beginning to be questioned, given the financial and exchange rate problems
which the industrialized countries are experiencing, together with their
profound social crisis. We might be talking about a post-capitalist era in
which the quest for supposedly free competition has turned into a total
dehumanization of the economic model, producing a yawning gap between rich and
poor in world society.
We are facing not the end of history, but rather a great lack of
leadership, of confidence and of enthusiasm for the future. The
industrialized countries, bogged down in their economic rivalries, cannot
coordinate their actions in favour of peace, stability and justice. Deprived
of the enemy which used to make them act together, they are now experiencing a
substantial weakening of the bonds which used to unite them.
The times in which we live require strong, democratic international
organizations if the preventive diplomacy the Secretary-General has described
in his "Agenda for Peace" which we are studying very carefully is to take
root. We support the more active role he envisages for the Organization, in
the area not of intervention, but rather of prevention. To achieve this, the
United Nations and the specialized agencies must cooperate
"to address the deepest causes of conflict: economic despair, social
injustice and political oppression." (A/47/277, para. 15)
The Security Council, which should have been the most efficient United
Nations body, is an anachronism. It still reflects the interrelationship of
forces that existed when it was created. When the United Nations came into

being, its keystone was the Council, controlled by its five permanent members,
which was given predominance to try to eliminate the limitations which had
made the former League of Nations ineffectual. The founders of the
Organization thought that this time the big Powers would be able to exercise
effective leadership, in keeping with their power; that is, they would have
the ability to act as world monitors and arbitrators and bring order to the
world.
To the frustration of humanity, the two super-Powers proved that they
alone were enough to lay the foundations of international order. The Security
Council, from the day the Organization was established until the end of the
cold war, was to play second fiddle in the management of world affairs.

After the collapse of the Soviet system, the Security Council began to
regain its original functions. But it is doing so under the aegis of the
triumphant values. Thus the major countries can outline an international
scenario in accordance with their interests. This situation should be
reconsidered so that, as the Secretary-General has said:
"Democracy within the family of nations means the application of its
principles within the world Organization itself." (A/47/277, para. 82)
Before the General Assembly, the President of Venezuela,
Carlos Andres Perez, clearly conveyed his concern over the need to make the
Security Council more representative. He said:
"Our own people's aspiration to democracy can also become a
permanent aspiration of the United Nations. The Organization will not be
strengthened unless an agreement is reached to eliminate the right of
veto exercised by the permanent members of the Security Council, a right
that responded to circumstances and realities that have ceased to exist.
This mechanism runs counter to the spirit of the Charter of the United
Nations and limits its effective contributions to collective security.
"The right to veto Security Council resolutions is a mechanism that
limits the achievement of consensus among the Member States of the United
Nations. The Security Council must be a representative body, and in no
way should any of its members negate the majority view of the United
Nations. If we want collective and democratic security, we must aspire
to universal egalitarian law." (A/46/PV.8. p. 13)
In our changing times, concepts of State sovereignty and integrity are
also being re-examined. Paradoxically, the "champions of freedom", once
victorious, are trying to impose a homogeneous and intolerant world order in
which an independent protagonist would be seen as a destabilizing and

threatening factor. This is a matter of serious concern to the States of the
southern hemisphere. In the past, we were important to the North in two
ways: as the natural scenario for the East-West confrontation and as
essential suppliers of raw materials.
The confrontation between East and West is gone and with it the political
and strategic usefulness of the third world. Raw materials have become
marginal in the present world economy. The slump in the demand for
commodities becomes more acute with every passing year. The phrase
"mobilizing effect" used to mean that any surge in the rich economies would
carry the developing economies along with it. When the North was growing, so
were exports of raw materials. The situation has completely changed
traditional export commodities no longer have the same value. International
markets can almost do without us.
The only way to preserve peace is to find balanced links between the
hemispheres, put an end to relations of confrontation and strengthen
cooperation between peoples. I have not come here to point out the mistakes
made by the North. The countries in the South also bear heavy
responsibilities. We must meet our challenge. The era of demagogic populism,
inefficiency and corruption is over. If we wish to compete in a world of open
markets we must devote ourselves to productive work and reward creativity.
Venezuela has realized this and is in a position from which it can look to the
future with optimism, provided there is compliance with the rules of open
markets and competitiveness between nations.
However, we must emphasize that while large regions in the South,
especially in Latin America, are striving to internationalize their economies
by opening them up to competition, the North is increasingly locking itself
into inward-turning blocs. Ultimately, the free market one of the triumphant

values to which I have already referred would seem to work in a single
direction.
If the rigid attitude of some international financial institutions
persists, together with the dangerous protectionism that is again emerging
among the industrialized countries, then the 1990s, which in Latin America
began with severe economic measures and hopeful signs of growth, may also turn
out to be another lost decade.
The North is not making a contribution to the establishment of the
necessary economic links between the two hemispheres. The new world order
implies a dual concept: on the one hand, the failure of the South and, on the
other, the defeat of the communist East. The power logic being applied is
simple and direct. There is no longer any question of the loss of any given
strategic resource or strategic position falling into the hands of communism.
There being no enemies, there is no longer any danger of losing friends; worse
yet, there is no longer any need for friends. What is important now is that
there be no disorder and no anarchy. What matters now is the willingness of
the South to submit to certain global rules of the game as defined by the
North in terms of its own interests.
Yet they fail to understand that these rules of the game become
inoperative in situations ->f anarchy and civil strife, which can dismember a
State and have spill-over effects on those surrounding it. Somalia is a
tragic example of what the southern hemisphere could become, on a larger
scale, in the twenty-first century. Some wealthy States may feel that they
can live unaffected by such realities. They are mistaken. We must not forget
that the South has its own ability to make an instinctive response: the
migratory flows of its impoverished masses to the North. This flow, which is

always difficult for any Government to control, could come to undermine the
bases for the democratic and social stability in many developed countries.
The best proof of this is the resurgence of extreme rightist movements and the
outbreak of racial violence and xenophobia in many countries.
These problems and the persistent imbalance between the North and the
South highlight a series of essential issues that the Assembly should
consider. The first is the democratization of the decision-making processes
in the Security Council. This implies a new debate on the veto procedure and
an increase in the number of permanent members so as to allow for the
representation of the new world realities.

The new circumstances in the world have been conducive to solving various
regional problems, such as those in Angola, Namibia, Central America,
Mozambique and Cambodia; to a large extent, in other areas, such as
Afghanistan, Western Sahara, South Africa and the Middle East, there are
signs, because of the new circumstances, that warrant hope for negotiated
solutions to conflicts. Venezuela supports measures designed to achieve
peaceful solutions to these problems and hopes that the favourable
international climate will help maintain peace.
We also supported the Rio summit on the environment and hope that the
decisions adopted there, particularly those related to the problem of
financing Agenda 21, will be implemented as soon as circumstances permit. '
Similarly, we give our full support to the Second World Conference on Human
Rights, to be held next year, as well as to the forthcoming conferences on
population and on the status of women and to the summit on social development.
Despite the endeavours of the United Nations, the outlook is not
encouraging. None the less, when all the countries gathered here in the
Assembly commit themselves to working for change, for a world where hunger and
war have vanished, where the environment is protected, and where realistic
measures are adopted to prevent conflicts, then we shall be building the just
society of which we have always dreamed.


Let me
most cordially join in congratulating the President of the General Assembly at
its forty-seventh session.
For the first time, the delegation of the Republic of Uzbekistan is
taking part in the work of the United Nations General Assembly as an
independent State. It is an honour for us to express our sincere gratitude to
all State Members of the United Nations for the support and cooperation they
have given the young independent Republic of Uzbekistan.

We are very grateful to Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for his
constant attention to our region. The decision to open at Tashkent an office
representing the United Nations and a number of its specialized organizations
is clear evidence of that attention. This approach arises from the main
orientation of United Nations activities at the present time, which were
formulated in concentrated form by the Secretary-General in his report "An
Agenda for Peace" (A/47/277).
Recently the people of Uzbekistan solemnly marked the first anniversary
of its independence. The fact that now we have begun building an independent
State is the logical result of the constant and selfless struggle for
independence waged over the centuries by our people and its best sons.
Achieving independence has never been easy anywhere in the world. For
that reason our year of independence is only the beginning of a long process.
We are laying the groundwork for an independent Uzbek State.
We have saved our language, religion, traditions, customs and moral
principles from the danger of complete disappearance; we are fully
reincarnating our national values. Our natural resources, together with the
economic, scientific, technical and moral potential built up by the labour of
previous generations, can serve as a guarantee for the social and economic
development of independent Uzbekistan.
To turn this potential into a real force, our Republic, under the
leadership of President Islam Karimov, is working out an appropriate system;
is looking for the best structure of governmental administration and for

ways to develop the economy and to construct its foreign and domestic
policies. Measures are being taken for the social protection of the
population against the shocks that are inevitable in the transition to a
market economy, to a society which is new to us.

In the process of building an independent State, we are utilizing the
positive experience accumulated by other developed nations and based on
openness and market relations. Of course, in so doing we are taking into
consideration, first and foremost, the specific features and concrete
circumstances of our country and the national and cultural traditions of the
people who live there.
We seek to create a social and political structure under which the
principles of human rights and freedom will be strictly observed. Our State
policy is designed to protect the interests and rights of all peoples,
irrespective of their nationalities, religion or beliefs, to preserve and
develop their cultures, languages, national traditions and customs and to
involve them actively in State and public life.
We have firmly rejected the domination of any one ideology or any one
world view; in fact, we are establishing a multiparty system as an essential
and logical element of genuine democracy.

At the same time, we are outlawing those forces and movements that
attempt through blackmail, threats and violence to change the structure of the
State, that endanger the territorial integrity and security of our Republic,
that sow ethnic and religious dissension, that encroach on the constitutional
system and the moral foundations of our people's life. We require the
activities of all forces and movements to remain within the limits of the law.
In our economic policy, we reject the structure based on the command
administration system, which is highly centralized and distributive. We
completely reject ideology. Equal rights apply to all types of property.
Of course, there are difficulties being encountered in carrying out our
political and economic programmes. This is something we all recognize.
Today our people is going through a difficult period of transition. This
is due to the fact that for many years our republic was the victim of a policy
of repression and diktat, resulting in a dependent economy and making our
region a raw-materials appendage.
It is not easy to rescue our people from the consequences of the
totalitarian hegemony of communist ideas. Certainly, a new and just society
cannot be created in a day, or even in a year. We understand all this clearly.
The most important thing is that, on the basis of inter-ethnic accord and
unity among our citizens, we have established a stable social and political
situation in our country.
The peoples of our region. Central Asia - Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Turkmans,
Kyrgyzes and Tajiks - are the children of common forefathers. We share the
same land and water, the same religion, the same history and the same fate; we
share the same cares, joys and anxieties. Historically, we have always been

naturally connected and interdependent. We created our common history through
cooperation. Many of our internal problems are evolving; they could easily
become inter-ethnic or international problems, affecting the interests of the
peoples of our region. This is what is special about the general situation
and the international position of Uzbekistan and of Central Asia as a whole.
At present the Government and the people of Uzbekistan are deeply
concerned about the course of events in Tajikistan, which is on the brink of
civil war. The serious international danger is that armed clashes between the
opposing forces, which have claimed thousands of lives among the peaceful
population, could easily spread to neighbouring Central Asian States.
In the Central Asian region, with its dense population of over
50 million, such an armed conflict could have unpredictable consequences.
Should the conflict spread, the peoples of Central Asia could be involved in
an endless fratricidal war, which could ultimately destroy the freedom and
independence they have recently won. That is why the current situation is
dangerous for us. We have every reason to be concerned.
In practice, the border between Tajikistan and Afghanistan, where there
are hundreds of thousands of men under arms, remains open. The actions of
extremists and fanatical armed groups incited by those who are playing on
people's national and religious feelings could have unpredictable consequences.
Uzbekistan strongly opposes interference in the internal affairs of
independent Tajikistan and is against stirring up the fire of war. Uzbekistan
advocates preventing the spread of the armed conflict and finding a solution
as quickly as possible by peaceful and civilized means.

Uzbekistan supports the appeal of the Government of Tajikistan to the
United Nations to provide assistance in finding a solution to the grave
crisis, which could become international in scope. Uzbekistan regards as
decisive in the present circumstances the role of the United Nations and the
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Fully aware of the danger
of the situation, and in a spirit of humanity, and, at the same time, of
responsibility for the fate of our peoples, Uzbekistan has requested
Secretary-General, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, to examine the situation and inform
the Security Council, and various United Nations committees and commissions,
of our concern.
The President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Islam Karimov, in his letter
addressed to Secretary-General Boutros-Ghali, stressed that only timely and
effective assistance by the international community can be decisive in
supporting the process of democratization and the political and economic
reforms under way in the new independent States of the region.
In proposing this initiative, Uzbekistan proceeds from the concept that
the predominant idea of the new international order should be the prevention
of aggression and conflicts and the establishment of democratic machinery for
making such an order a reality. That concept was convincingly expounded as
preventive diplomacy by Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. In our view
the guarantee for such preventive action can be found in cooperation in the
broad sense of the term.

I think that what I have said is sufficient for an understanding of the
need to create a United Nations Eastern Centre in our region with the aim of
extending the principles of the world community and international norms to the
central part of the Eurasian continent. I believe that Tashkent, as a
historic centre of that region, with its rich past and its modern experience
in peacemaking activities, would be fully worthy of the honour of serving as
the seat of the Eastern Centre. That would provide the world community with
reliable information on the processes of social development in the region,
expedite the solution of its problems and make it a zone free of conflicts.
In our view, that is the main goal of the United Nations and the new
world order.


In
addressing this Assembly for the first time, I should like, first, on behalf
of my delegation and on my own behalf, to carry out the pleasant duty of
conveying to Mr. Ganev of Bulgaria our most earnest and warmest
congratulations on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at
its forty-seventh session, and to assure him of our cooperation with a view to
achieving a successful outcome.
We should like also to take this opportunity to pay a well-deserved
tribute to Mr. Samir Shihabi of Saudi Arabia for the deft and skilful manner
in which he led the work of the last session.
To the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, we reiterate our
most earnest congratulations on the outstanding manner in which he has been
discharging his difficult responsibilities since he was elected head of our
Organization.
We also take this opportunity to welcome the positive and beneficial
influence of the activities of our former Secretary-General,
Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, who was able to give our Organization a new
dynamism and brought it closer to the goals assigned to it by its founding
fathers.
On behalf of Zaire, I welcome the new Member States that have joined the
Organization, thereby bringing us closer to its much-desired goal of
universality.
But we are bound to note that the purposes of our Organization laid down
in its Charter are far from being achieved, because in many places throughout
the world the universal peace that we so earnestly seek is still just an
ambition. Indeed, hotbeds of tension have been rekindled, thereby
jeopardizing international peace and security, which our Organization has a
duty to guarantee. We earnestly appeal to all parties in conflict, wherever
they may be, to lay down their arms and exclude the word "force" from their
vocabulary.
In this vein, we find a great deal of merit in the Secretary-General's
report, "An Agenda for Peace" (A/47/277), to the international community, in
which we find valuable recommendations on preventive diplomacy, peacemaking
and peace-keeping.
We believe that the Assembly should give the greatest attention to this
analysis. Zaire pledges its help in studying these ideas, so useful to our
Organization.
The Secretary-General's recommendations lead us to focus on a few of the
many areas of tension.
The Security Council meeting on violence in South Africa made it possible
to avoid a break in the dialogue established within the Convention for a
Democratic South Africa (CODESA). We reiterate our appeal to all political
forces to put an end to their antagonism so that negotiations for the
establishment of a representative government may resume. To this end, we
strongly urge the South African Government to use all necessary ways and means
to put an end to extremist acts of all kinds that lead to violence.
In the Middle East, since the establishment of the Government resulting
from the latest elections in Israel and the resumption of negotiations between
the parties concerned, we have reason for some hope. We Therefore urge all
parties committed to the quest for an overall political solution that would
lead to lasting peace in that region to continue along the path of dialogue.
For some years now we have witnessed considerable efforts by the United
States of America and the Russian Federation the Powers with the most
sophisticated and most destructive weapons, whether nuclear, conventional,
biological or chemical drastically to reduce the number of such weapons,
thereby helping to establish a new era in international politics and in peace
and security for States and peoples. Zaire welcomes this most sincerely, and
we hope that other military Powers will follow their example. If they do, the
second millennium, for which we are preparing so busily, will open up new
prospects for humankind as a whole.
Today, in a surge of world-wide solidarity, the developed countries
living in prosperity should help, in a spirit of true partnership, the
countries of the South to solve the problems related to underdevelopment,
which have many complex causes. It is true that underdevelopment will not go
away overnight simply because the prosperous countries of the North decide to
make available to third world countries financial resources resulting from
cutbacks they may make in their military budgets; rather it will be ended by
strategies to do away with the dire poverty of the nations of Africa and other
underdeveloped countries.
That is why Zaire is convinced that a harmonious future for our planet
depends on peace, security and prosperity shared by all nations, both of the
North and of the South. And that is why Zaire also believes that the Final
Document of the International Conference on the Relationship between
Disarmament and Development should now be implemented in order to find the
necessary resources to solve the daunting problems our peoples face.
It is clear that the collective security aspects likely to create tension
and conflict in the world are not only military, but also spring from the
extreme impoverishment of our peoples, linked to high population growth rates
and the debt burden.
Looking at our ravaged economies, we believe that debt servicing must in
no way hamstring our development efforts. Our countries' total external debt
is constantly increasing, and has now reached more than $1.5 billion. Without
any real readiness to cooperate on the part of the industrialized countries,
and without considerable efforts devoted to the planning and establishment of
appropriate ad hoc structures, there will be no hope of recovery for our
economies.
We strongly hope that those devising strategic development policies for
the fourth decade will take into account the recommendations of the Economic
Commission for Africa (ECA) resulting from the Conference of Ministers
responsible for economic development and planning, held in Addis Ababa from
20 to 24 April of this year, which drew up guidelines for the years ahead.
We also hope that, in accordance with the New International Development
Strategy for the 1990s, the United Nations and the international community
will support efforts aimed at the economic recovery of Africa, for the common
good of all humankind.
Zaire hails the effective measures to protect and improve the environment
envisaged in the Rio Conventions. Indeed, as we have vast areas of protected
forests, we would appreciate acceptance by the international community of the
idea of recompensing countries that set aside major forested areas with a view
to protecting them from the ravages of humankind.
Zaire, whose vast expanses of tropical rainforest have given it the
status of the planet's "second lung", after Amazonia, has for long been in the
vanguard of environmental conservation. Our country has a major network of
linked national parks and reserves covering 8 per cent of our national
territory. Some of these nature reserves the oldest of which were
established more than 75 years ago - protect the rarest of species, including
the okapi, the white rhinoceros and the gorilla. In the context of the
Conventions adopted in Rio de Janeiro, Zaire offers all these natural
resources to the international community as a contribution to the common
heritage of humankind.
Therefore, my country calls upon the international community,
particularly the developed countries, to ensure that additional resources are
made available for the effective implementation of Agenda 21 and the new
Conventions dealing with biodiversity and climate change. My delegation
appeals to all countries to give massive support to Agenda 21 and its
accompanying Conventions; it asks that they sign them and take all the
necessary steps to ratify them. We invite countries of the North that might
still be hesitant about adapting their future behaviour to the requirements of
environmental conservation and protection to respond positively.
It is no secret to anyone that Zaire is today experiencing a deep
multisectoral crisis essentially attributable to the disastrous management of
its human, financial and material resources. The readiness for change
expressed by our people as a whole triumphed on 24 April 1990 with the
statement delivered by the President of the Republic, which finally recognized
the need for democratic political reform.
Following the example of other African countries, Zairians claimed and
obtained the holding of a national sovereign conference. Opened in
August 1991, that conference is taking place in an atmosphere whose tone was
set, on the one hand, by the troubles of September 1991, which ruined the
country's already reeling economy, and, on the other, by a succession of
political crises spawned in the climate of distrust that existed between the
established powers and the opposition. Suspended a number of times, the work
of the national sovereign conference none the less has managed to continue to
this day because our people has spared no sacrifice to lend its full support
to this forum. Because of this, the date of 16 February will live in our
memory. Thus, as I speak, the meetings of the national sovereign conference
are about to culminate, more than a year after its opening, in the adoption of
committee reports following the election of a Prime Minister and the
establishment of a transition Government.
The transition period will be managed by three institutions: the
Presidency of the Republic, the Supreme Council of the Republic, and the
transition Government. As regards the transition Government, the national
sovereign conference elected Mr. Etienne Tshisekedi Wa Mulumba as Prime
Minister in the vote held last August. The transition Government pledges
before international opinion to guide this period of transition in the calmest
and most peaceful manner possible.
The essential, indeed overriding, goal of the transition remains the
establishment of a state based upon the rule of law. Welcoming the role
played by the free press in the evolution of democracy in our country, the
Government is determined to encourage and support the media so that they can
play their full role in all freedom. Moreover, the transition Government and
the Supreme Council of the Republic will establish the High Council for
Audio-Visual Media, which will manage the official press agencies in the same
spirit. The Government is also committed to fighting censorship and to
promoting freedom of the press in all its forms.
The establishment of a State based on the rule of law necessarily entails
respect for the rights of the individual. That is why the Government will
work in concert with the associations responsible for human rights issues. To
that end, they will be granted the civil status that has been hitherto denied
them, as well as being guaranteed access to the media and freedom of action
throughout our national territory.
A top priority for the transition Government is laying the best possible
groundwork for the advent of a State based on the rule of law. To this end,
Zaire intends to hold free and democratic elections shortly. We therefore
urgently appeal to the international community to help us organize these
elections in the greatest possible transparency.
In conclusion, I should like to draw attention once again to the most
alarming situation of our planet, a situation on which the entire
international community is focused. My delegation is convinced that the
United Nations is and will remain the ideal framework for the quest for
peaceful solutions likely to defuse the hotbeds of tension that have developed
in Africa, Asia and Europe.
As for Zaire, I have just recalled the great choices made by the national
sovereign conference to provide the Zairian people with a new era of peace,
democracy and economic development. In accordance with the United Nations
Charter, Zaire announces its faith in the basic rights of the individual. To
that end, my country will spare no effort to ensure the victory of legality,
justice, equity and equality.
I wish the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly the fullest
measure of success.


The recent accession of the Republic of San Marino to
membership of the United Nations makes it possible for me to take part in this
general debate, prompted by the desire to contribute to fulfilment of the
great tasks of the Organization. San Marino has always paid attention to the
difficult work undertaken by the United Nations. We have felt deep
satisfaction with its several achievements and have shared the anxiety and
disappointment caused by the numerous violations of peace and by the obstacles
to progress that this Organization has had to face.
What impressed us most was seeing the idea of universality, originally
embodied in the Charter, become a reality in which everyone might
participate. The United Nations has undertaken the difficult and essential
task of drawing the world's attention to the issues and problems that mankind
must face urgently. Thanks to the commitment of the United Nations, our hopes
have been strengthened by greater certainty by a deeper sense of confidence.
Today the world and, in particular, the European continent are
concentrating their attention on the former Yugoslavia on its never-ending
war, on the useless destruction of goods and property, on the inexcusable
death of too many civilians, on the indiscriminate use of heavy weapons, on
the extremely serious violations of fundamental human rights, on the
unacceptable concentration camps a phenomenon that we believed Europe had

relegated to history on the obstacles brutally placed in the way of the
relief missions that have been so generously organized by the United Nations,
and on the non-observance of the rights of minorities and of freedom of
religion.
If I am to speak frankly, as my position requires, I have to say that
crimes that we have always considered to be the most serious, nationally and
internationally, are being committed, and have been a reality for quite a long
time, in the former Yugoslavia. A premeditated and determined refusal to find
a peaceful solution must be considered an act of war, but counter-attack is
difficult when there has been no actual attack. Peace is not a condition that
can be imposed; it is a more complex reality, a permanent state that has to be
felt.
In my opinion, every man has to be resolved to want peace and want to
live in peace. This condition may exist only if men are in a state of peace,
if their rights are respected, and if they are free to enjoy their liberty and
their rights. It may exist only if men's legitimate aspirations are satisfied
and if everyone is convinced that, in the exercise of his rights, nobody is
riding roughshod over the rights of any other person, even if that person is
of a different colour or a different faith.
The most praiseworthy and indispensable initiatives aimed at the
restoration of peace will be useless until men are educated to a deep-rooted
sense of peace. I believe that this is the future role of the United
Nations a role that the Organization will have to play with determination
and authority. We have a common duty to contribute to the removal of
war-clouds and bilateral tensions. It is essential that we commit ourselves
to that end. In those circumstances, humanitarian support is increasingly

necessary. The entire world should be grateful to the United Nations for
carrying out its mission with courage and great generosity in risky
circumstances, which, owing to the irresponsibility of those who encourage and
support war, can sometimes turn to tragedy.
But let me invite representatives to take on a more effective commitment
to the idea and the sentiment of peace. We must all defend the right to
peace, the main feature of which is freedom and respect for minorities. What
force must freedom have if peace is to be maintained? It is the force rooted
in and safeguarded by democratic government.
I am well aware that even the most advanced democracies are far from
satisfying the two requisites of freedom. The first requisite, which takes a
negative form, is the absence of any need to depend on the will of others; the
second, which takes a positive form, is participation in the decision-making
processes.
In any case, I am convinced that any other political system would do more
to deprive people of freedom. Democracy, even in its most imperfect forms, is
organized in such a way as to ensure that individuals may participate in the
exercise of power. This occurs where there is positive freedom. However,
that freedom is limited if negative freedoms freedom of thought, freedom of
association and of religion, and all the other freedoms granted by modern
constitutions - are not guaranteed and safeguarded.
This implies that everyone must account for all acts perpetrated against
freedom all acts that violate human rights, and all acts that imperil
peace. San Marino believes that the concept of personal responsibility must
be stressed and must be made paramount internationally.

In democratic institutions, the exercise of power both political and
military is a service rendered to civil and democratic growth and the social
economic development of the entire community, in favour of the individual,
never against him. Those who use power against a part of the community,
against a minority or against a group of individuals, or those who hinder or
make civil, cultural, social and economic development regress must account for
their actions.
In these days the tragic scenes and information from Somalia fill us with
sorrow. It is an offense to our civilization, intelligence and dignity that
on the threshold of the year 2000 people should be starving to death.
Unfortunately, we still have to cope with this tragic reality, and we hope
that the United Nations will find timely and real solutions to this problem.
On the other hand, many other situations are awaiting solutions that are
neither easy and immediate: the fight against drugs; the improper use of the
natural environment and the damage caused by air and nuclear pollution; the
phenomenon of migrations and the obligations States have towards immigrants;
refugees' living conditions and the causes of the refugee phenomenon; issues
concerning the young and the incentive to a greater commitment by the young to
modern society; the struggle against racism and racial discrimination, against
all forms of intolerance and against any attempt to restore that horrible
practice called ethnic cleansing; terrorism; the ever-lasting imbalance in the
distribution of wealth and resources which impoverishes poor countries more
and more.
Having mentioned the tragedy which has overwhelmed Somalia, I should
like, on behalf of my country, wish to renew to the people of Somalia the
expression of our most sincere solidarity.

Environmental conditions, drought, famine, relentless desertification,
the simple tools used in impoverished agriculture and the unfair distribution
of food supplies caused by the lack of solidarity determine the daily life of
millions of people suffering from hunger. However, one of the biggest
scandals of our time is the fact that the food supplies made available do not
reach those who have been waiting for them for so long that they no longer
need them.
Representatives probably thought that the speech delivered by the
representative of the Republic of San Marino to the General Assembly would be
a systematic and comprehensive review of the United Nations activities.
Rather, I wished to make a number of remarks on how the world could change in
order to become a better one. The Charter of the United Nations and the
unanimous and determined commitment of the Security Council, the General
Assembly and the various United Nations agencies, commissions and committees
show that today only the United Nations is capable of improving this world be
making it more equitable.
In the long history of the small Republic of San Marino, an important
statement is recorded: at the end of the thirteenth century, a judge, who had
been given the task of finding a solution to a real estate dispute between the
people of San Marino and some podestas in nearby Montefeltro, questioned a
citizen from the San Marino community in order to know why that community was
free from certain duties. The reason given by that citizen was that
San Marino was free and made up of free men. The judge, out of curiosity,
asked the witness: "quid est libertas?" The man quickly and firmly replied:
"Nemini teneri" - not to be subject to anybody. A modern interpretation of
those words is that a free man is one whose personality and dignity are
respected.

San Marino hopes to see this concept become a reality throughout the
world. We are sure that this goal can be achieved, with the free and
determined contribution of all under the auspices of the United Nations.


At the outset I
should like to convey to the President of the General Assembly my heartiest
congratulations on his unanimous election. He is one of the principal
architects of the advent of democracy and profound change in Bulgaria. I am
certain he will guide with skill and efficacy the work of the General
Assembly, which I hope will carry on resolutely in the reform of its programme
and its working methods.
To our new Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, I should like to
express the great pleasure of the Government and people of Luxembourg on his
election to head our Organization. The decisions he has taken and the
proposals he has put forward since the beginning of the year make it fitting
for me to pay tribute to him for his lucidity, courage and resolve to make of
the United Nations an organization that is capable of answering the challenges
of our time.

I welcome the representatives of the 13 new countries that have joined
the United Nations since the beginning of this year, bringing the number of
Members to 179.
Last Tuesday my colleague Douglas Hurd put forward the positions of the
twelve member States of the European Community concerning the major problems
that confront the international community at present. Clearly, I subscribe to
everything that was said by the representative of the State which occupies the
presidency of the Council of Ministers of the European Community, so I shall
limit myself to stressing several issues that are of particular concern to the
Government and people of Luxembourg.
Two tragedies giving rise to the utmost concern are occurring at
present. I refer to the famine in certain parts of Africa and to the civil
war in Yugoslavia. Both of these show once again that the international
community's right to humanitarian interference in regional conflicts can no
longer be called into question.
The famine in Africa threatens the lives of an extraordinarily large
number of human beings, and it must immediately be at the focus of our
attention. We are confronted, on one hand, by an overwhelming drought, that
has afflicted all of eastern and southern Africa and, on the other hand, by
the lack of organization in the production and distribution of foodstuffs,that
has resulted from civil wars.
In the Sudan and in Somalia, the European Community has continued, over
the last few months, to intervene with the parties involved to ensure that
those parties will allow and guarantee the distribution of international food
aid. It is indeed outrageous that a government or armed factions should
interfere with this operation. I am glad that our Organization has sent

military forces to Somalia to guarantee food distribution. My country is
contributing to all these efforts by providing financial assistance which, per
capita, is among the greatest in the world. We believe that the United
Nations should consider what measures it might undertake to ensure that famine
is no longer used as a weapon in the civil war raging in the Sudan.
The continuing tragedy in Yugoslavia is of the most profound concern to
the people of my country. Unfortunately we are witnessing a resurgence of
most of the criminal practices of nazism, including even the horrendous
"ethnic purification" applied to persons from a different sociological group.
The problems raised by the presence of minority populations in the republics
of the former Yugoslavia cannot be resolved by military intervention; they can
be resolved only through negotiated arrangements modelled on those proposed in
November 1991 by the European Community.
I make a solemn appeal to all the peoples of the former Yugoslavia to
support energetically the efforts of those leaders who wish, fully,
unreservedly and without any hidden agenda, to implement the measures defined
at the London Conference on 26 and 27 August. Only in that way can peace and
prosperity be re-established. Only on that basis can an equitable solution be
found to the problem of nationalities or minorities the problem that gave
rise to this conflict, just as it was at the basis of the bloodshed which,
unfortunately, continues in certain areas of the former Soviet Union.
With regard to this extremely complex problem, I should like to make some
further observations. As the representative of a small country that owes its
existence to the principle of self-determination, I am clearly not in a good
position to deny this right to other peoples. However, I must make the point
that, where several types of population are closely linked, the application of

this principle is not sufficient to resolve the problem of nationalities As
we have seen, it can serve as a pretext for attempts at conquest and at the
annexation of territory, as well as at the forcible expulsion of minority
populations, and even the extermination of such peoples.
The solution to the problem of minorities can be based only on the
following principles: rejection of the idea that frontiers can be changed by
force; the granting to national minorities of special status ensuring respect
for their ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious identities; the adoption
of arrangements for cross-border cooperation to enable these minorities to
maintain close contact with their compatriots in neighbouring countries. In
this respect, it seems to us that Italy's solution for the Haut Adige/South
Tyrol is exemplary.
The establishment, by the Conference on Security and Cooperation in
Europe, of the machinery of rapporteurs for human rights, as well as the post
of commissioner for minorities, should make possible the early identification
of potential nationality conflicts and the search for means of prevention.
It seems to me that the world conference on human rights to be held next
year in Vienna could provide the appropriate framework for an attempt to
define certain fundamental rights of minorities and, if possible, to codify
them in a new legal instrument. If it were possible, in addition, to
establish machinery for an independent forum to verify, at the request of a
wide group of people, respect for these minimum rights through the legislation
of a given country, that would help to avoid armed conflicts in the future.
In the last analysis, the problem of minorities can be resolved only if
all peoples living in a territory can be made to feel that they belong to one

family so that they put emphasis on that which unites them rather than on that
which divides them. It was united action rather than division that enabled
the European Community to secure a new instrument the Maastricht Treaty
for the purpose of pursuing their policy of integration, but with respect for
national identities. In this regard, I should like to welcome the decisive
step that the people of France took by saying "Yes" to the Maastricht Treaty,
which my country ratified two months ago.
Luxembourg has always been in the vanguard of European integration. From
experience it knows that the key to its wellbeing and its security lie in the
Community and that only together with its partners can it exercise its
sovereignty fully.
With regard to the problems of the Middle East, we are very gratified at
the more conciliatory spirit motivating the new Government of Israel, at the
gestures that have already been made by that Government, and at the
willingness expressed by the Syrian authorities to conclude a peace
agreement. It must be understood, of course, that negotiations for the
establishment of an interim regime in the occupied territories can in no case
come up with a result short of the Camp David Accords.
With regard to Iraq, we continue to demand that the existing regime
implement all Security Council resolutions as rapidly as possible. The Iraqi
Government bears full responsibility for the deterioration of the humanitarian
situation in particular, because it has not yet implemented resolutions
706 (1991) and 712 (1991). Iraq must cease all military action and all other
repressive measures against the civilian population.

In South Africa, the halt of the work of the Convention for a
Democratic South Africa (CODESA) has been most disappointing for my
Government. Together with our European partners, we call on all the
parties concerned to resume it as soon as possible in a constructive
spirit. The problem of violence can be solved only if the police show
restraint and if all political movements give categorical instructions to
their members definitively to renounce the use of force. I congratulate
the Security Council on its resolution 772 (1992) of 17 August, which
allowed for the sending to South Africa of a number limited, it is
true of United Nations observers to examine ways to strengthen the
machinery for the transition towards a non-racial democracy.
I must obviously express our views concerning the work now going on
within the United Nations.
First, I should like to express to our Secretary-General my full
appreciation of his excellent report entitled "An Agenda for Peace"
(A/47/277), which he presented at the beginning of the summer. It
contains important proposals on preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and
peace-keeping. The new international political situation is favourable
for stronger United Nations action, which I hope to see, particularly in
the following three areas.
The first is preventive diplomacy, which would assist us in
anticipating and avoiding the outbreak of new conflicts. Would it not
help the proper management of international affairs to ensure more active
and systematic use of the various means for such diplomacy? The
Secretary-General has a crucial role to play in this respect. We could
also make better use of the potential of the International Court of
Justice to resolve disputes between States.

The second area is that of the make-up and functioning of a genuine
system of collective security. The United Nations must be in a position
when necessary to act very quickly, especially in cases of aggression or
threats of aggression by one country towards another. To do this it must
have available at very short notice the necessary human and material
resources. Certain countries I mention in passing, France and the
United States - have already responded very positively to the invitation
in this regard by our Secretary-General.
The third area is that of the means for establishing peace.
Unfortunately, all too often the diplomatic action of our Organization,
sometimes in cooperation with regional organizations, such as the European
Community, is not followed up. Too many cease-fires have been broken
recently, too many embargoes on the delivery of weapons have been
violated, for us to remain indifferent to such flouting of international
law.
Never before has the United Nations made so many tangible
contributions to the cause of peace and reconciliation throughout the
world. Nothing emphasizes the new credibility and effectiveness of our
Organization more than the dramatic increase in its peace-keeping
operations in recent years. Thirteen such operations were carried out
before 1987. Thirteen have been launched since 1987. The United Nations
is now ensuring the implementation of peace agreements in El Salvador,
Angola and Cambodia. It is contributing to calming the serious conflicts
in Somalia and Yugoslavia. At present in Cambodia and Yugoslavia the
United Nations is carrying out two of the most important operations in its
history, involving a total of more than 40,000 personnel, both military
and civilian.

The growing diversity of the tasks entrusted to our Organization
highlights its ability to adapt to different situations. Today the United
Nations is disarming adversaries and gathering and destroying weapons;
reforming governmental institutions which are not up to their tasks;
repatriating refugees; clearing mines; monitoring elections and respect
for peace agreements and human rights agreements; and providing
humanitarian assistance and aid to refugees.
It is an honour for my Government to be able to contribute to the
United Nations Protection Force in Yugoslavia, admittedly modest in
absolute numbers, but nevertheless representing 10 per cent of my
country's army.
The cost of peace-keeping operations has considerably increased, and
their importance demands that there be not the slightest delay in
payment. The United Nations must be in a position to prepare, launch and
carry out such operations on a sound financial basis. The establishment
of a revolving reserve fund would substantially strengthen that basis.
Meanwhile, all countries must agree to meet their financial obligations
without delay.
At its last session our Assembly adopted a resolution (resolution
46/36 L) concerning the establishment by the United Nations of a universal
and non-discriminatory Register of Conventional Arms. Luxembourg hopes
that during this session the technical procedures required can be
determined and that the Register will become operational by the beginning
of next year. The United Nations will thus be making an important
contribution to the necessary global transparency in arms transfers and to
the vast disarmament movement, which must continue.

I welcome the agreement reached last June between President Bush and
President Yeltsin concerning a drastic new reduction in strategic nuclear
arsenals. The forthcoming conclusion of negotiations concerning a
Convention on chemical weapons marks a fundamental step in the
international effort to eliminate all weapons of mass destruction. I hope
that all members of our Assembly will approve the Convention without
reservation and will immediately sign it.
Our Assembly has recorded significant progress on the basis of
another initiative of the European Community. This relates to the
measures decided on to strengthen United Nations coordination in the area
of emergency humanitarian assistance. The creation of the post of
Emergency Relief Coordinator, to which Mr. Jan Eliasson was appointed, and
the establishment of a central revolving fund of $50 million now enable
the United Nations to cope more effectively with humanitarian crises.
Luxembourg welcomes the broad democratization movement developing
throughout the world. It involves political changes which are often
painful, complex and difficult, but they are necessary in order to build a
better future. A growing number of Governments involved in such processes
are requesting electoral assistance from the United Nations. Given the
particular importance of free and honest elections, I believe the United
Nations should continue to strengthen its capacity for acting in this
area. I also propose that the United Nations cooperate with other
international organizations with experience in this field in particular,
the Council of Europe.

My Government believes that the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development, held in Rio, was a historic event. It is
true that not all our hopes were fulfilled and that many of the decisions
taken lack clarity and courage. But who could deny the importance of the
preparatory work and the awareness which it brought about? A world-wide
process was launched. Major political commitments were made at the
highest level.

However, the real battle still lies ahead. The convention on climate
change and the convention on biological diversity still must be ratified and
implemented; above all, they must be finalized and finely honed. The
negotiation of a convention on desertification still remains to be dealt with,
and international cooperation on the protection of all forests- which is
essential is still undefined.
Agenda 21 opens up a vast field of work in all areas of the environment
and development. Progress needs to be made in this respect on the national,
regional and international levels, with the participation of all players in
society and in particular of non-governmental organizations.
Poor countries must accept the fact that environmental protection is not
a luxury; and rich countries must ask themselves if and to what extent their
means of production and consumption are compatible with the demands of
sustainable development.
The future of the planet cannot be jeopardized by national egoism.
My Government has decided to increase substantially the amount of aid
earmarked for humanitarian assistance and development cooperation. It is
prepared to work together with all those who are interested in promoting human
development; transparent and honest management of public affairs; the
participation of all, and above all of women, in the development process;
and,in a general sense, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The tasks.before our Organization are numerous and most significant. A
major process of transformation and restructuring lies ahead. Three years
from now, we shall be marking the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations.
Let us hope that by that time we shall have established a revitalized
Organization, one that can effectively shoulder the responsibilities that the
peoples of the world are so eager to entrust to it.