The Burundi delegation, which I have the honour
of leading at the current session of this General Assembly,
would like to begin by taking this opportunity to present the
friendly greetings of the Government and people of
Burundi.
Burundi attaches overwhelming importance to the
noble ideals of justice, peace and security which the United
Nations has defended and pursued. This is why, even
during the acute crisis that has rocked our country these
past three years, we have always tried to participate as
actively as possible in these proceedings. We offer well-
deserved thanks for the Organization’s tireless efforts to put
an end to the fratricidal war we have been experiencing
since 21 October 1993.
Our delegation welcomes the fitting choice of a
worthy son of Malaysia to act as President of the fifty-first
session of the General Assembly of our Organization. We
are convinced that his intellectual and moral qualities,
together with his thorough knowledge of the concerns of
the world today, are undeniable assets in ensuring the
success of our work.
He can count on the full support and readiness of my
country, which has a Vice-President on the Bureau, and we
will make our modest contribution to ensuring the success
of the work of the President.
We also wish to pay tribute to his predecessor,
His Excellency Mr. Diogo Freitas do Amaral of Portugal,
for the competence and clear-sightedness with which he
conducted the proceedings of the previous session, when
the United Nations was commemorating its fiftieth
anniversary.
Finally, we wish to express our appreciation for the
role that His Excellency Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali,
Secretary-General of the United Nations, has played
throughout the world during his term of office to promote
peace, cooperation and development. We particularly
remember the important appeal for peace and national
reconciliation he addressed to the people of Burundi and
Africa during his visit to Bujumbura in July 1995.
Despite the crisis in my country, we believe that this
message will finally be heeded by those who opted for
violence to satisfy their ambitions.
As members know, the fifty-first session of the
General Assembly is taking place at a time when my
country, Burundi, is suffering the deepest crisis of its
history. The end of the cold war certainly made it
possible for the international community to free itself
from the ideological shackles and other constraints
imposed on it by East-West antagonisms. The United
Nations has thus been able to focus on its fundamental
objectives and effectively respond to some of the
problems the rivalry between super-Powers had long
made it impossible to solve.
However, we cannot but note, not without bitterness,
that in the post-cold-war period, new, more complex
conflicts have broken out, mostly within countries, that
have caused serious humanitarian problems. That,
unfortunately, is the case in my country. For three years,
Burundi has been in the grip of widespread massacres and
acts of genocide.
Since October 1993, Burundi has been increasingly
mired in a tragedy from which it seems unable to escape.
The consensus Government established in October 1994
in the context of implementation of the Convention on
Governance of 10 September 1994, after lengthy
negotiations among political parties, has been
characterized by suspicion and a lack of trust at the
highest echelons of State and a serious lack of will to
restore peace.
The complicity of the previous administration with
armed groups, massive human rights violations, duplicity
at the top of the State administration and the absence of
leadership have led to denunciation of the Convention on
Governance and a breakdown in institutions. With a view
to avoiding implosion in the face of the threat of renewed
genocide, and lacking a credible alternative, the active
forces of the nation requested His Excellency President
Buyoya to take on the burden of responsibility of putting
Burundi back on track.
The new administration has decided that its priority
is to put an end to massacres and slaughter, to restore
peace and security for all, to end impunity, to reintegrate
displaced persons and reconstruct the country.
The government of public salvation was inaugurated
on 2 August 1996. This is a broad-based team that
3

reflects the various ethnic components and political trends.
All regions of the country have been represented.
The Government wants to promote solidarity and unity
to ensure the success of its transitional programme, which
will last three years. Its plan of action was made public
recently by the Prime Minister, His Excellency
Mr. Pascal Firmin Ndimira. Its aim is to make good the
commitment entered into by the Head of State to bring
Burundi back to the path of peace, security and prosperity
by means of dialogue and national debate.
The changes in Burundi since 25 July 1996 have been
welcomed by the population of Burundi as a rescue
operation. The messages of support from all quarters and
the spontaneous demonstrations throughout the country
were visible signs of the support of the people of Burundi
for the new administration, which has come to the
assistance of a country that was on the brink.
However, some countries, particularly our neighbours,
were slow to realize the need, if we were to avoid genocide
in Burundi and maintain the sovereignty of the country, to
establish an administration that would bring people together
in the quest for security, not of one ethnic group to the
detriment of others, but of all.
This was therefore not an attempt to undermine
democracy, as some claim. The Government wants, instead,
to end the massacre of innocent populations battling with
the various armed factions within the country and outside,
from the capital to the heart of Burundi, to restore peace
and security for all and create conditions conducive to
comprehensive democratization based on national realities.
The efforts being undertaken by the new
administration to restore peace and organize dialogue and
national debate have been hampered by the economic
sanctions against Burundi. I am duty-bound to draw the
attention of representatives here to the damaging effects of
the economic blockade imposed on my country at the
Second Arusha Regional Summit on Burundi on
31 July 1996. The international community must not, one
day, say that it did not know. The countries of our
subregion were more than anyone else aware of the chaotic
and complicated situation in Burundi before 25 July 1996.
They also knew of the almost total institutional paralysis as
a result of the crisis. Every day they see my country’s
continuous struggle to restore peace and security despite the
host of difficulties before us.
We therefore see the embargo imposed on Burundi
as unfriendly, unjust and illegal. It violates international
public law and the international accords and conventions
that our countries have ratified. The embargo, which is
really a total economic blockade against my country,
constitutes a dangerous precedent, violating Article 1,
paragraph 2, of the Charter of the United Nations
regarding the right of peoples to self-determination and
the sovereignty and equality of States.
This blockade flouts the principle of non-interference
in the internal affairs of other States as stipulated in
Article III, paragraph 2, of the Charter of the
Organization of African Unity and the Declaration of
24 October 1970 adopted by the General Assembly on the
duty of States to refrain from interfering in the domestic
affairs of other States.
The nature of the sanctions adopted flies in the face
of the principle of the non-use of force and the peaceful
settlement of international disputes in accordance with the
Declaration of 24 October 1970 adopted by the General
Assembly. We know that States are prohibited from using
force against another State, even in the case of damages
caused by the latter.
In the case of Burundi, there was no damage to any
of our neighbours. However, our access to the sea, our
right of transit and our freedom of trade have been taken
away. The illegality of the embargo is obvious, since
international and regional treaties recognizing Member
States’ freedom of transit have been violated.
These instruments include the Marrakesh Agreement
establishing the World Trade Organization, the treaty on
the Common Market of Eastern and Southern Africa, the
Convention on Transit Trade of Land-Locked States, not
to mention the charters and agreements of neighbouring
countries, such as the Economic Community of the Great
Lakes Countries and the preferential trade area.
What is worse — and we would emphasize this here
before the General Assembly — the sanctions imposed
are hindering the action of our Government, weakening
the chances for peace and working in favour of the
extremist militias and armed bands, which feel
encouraged by them. At this very moment, the latter are
using the embargo to intensify their acts of violence and
destruction in the country.
The embargo imposed on Burundi has had
catastrophic consequences on people who, as a result, find
4

themselves deprived of urgently needed medications,
vaccines, diagnostic materials and surgical instruments.
Today, children, women and the elderly are dying.
The vaccination rate, which, because of three years of
war, has fallen from 80 per cent to 30 per cent among
children under five years of age, may soon reach zero if
nothing is done to improve the situation in the meantime.
That will necessarily have an impact on the most vulnerable
members of the population. Further, the population of
Burundi is at risk of widespread famine, which will have
unfortunate consequences for the inhabitants of
neighbouring countries. It will have a greater impact on the
most vulnerable, namely, displaced persons, the homeless
and the repatriated, which latter group has already been
living for three years now in inhuman conditions. Nearly
80 per cent of them are children, women and the elderly.
Lastly, owing to lack of fuel and non-availability of
educational materials, a large number of pupils and students
may leave school. The drop-out rate is already 18 per cent
for secondary education, 21 per cent for technical training
and 20 per cent for university studies.
As for the economic aspects of the embargo, I would
point out that Burundi lives essentially on agriculture and
animal husbandry. There will be a sharp decline in our
harvest if fertilizers, concentrates and veterinary
pharmaceuticals continue to be held by embargo in the
ports of neighbouring countries. The result will obviously
be widespread famine.
The few industries still operating are gradually
shutting down owing to lack of raw materials. State
revenues are at a dangerously low level because of our
inability to export and import. That will lead to
unemployment or inability to pay workers in both the
public and private sectors and foment social unrest that will
increase insecurity and destabilize the country. Overall, the
situation will favour the retaking of territory and strengthen
the armed actions of rebel groups and other outlaw bands
against the peaceful population, with the risk of widespread
civil war.
This apocalyptic prospect can and must be avoided.
The neighbouring countries behind the embargo had
demanded that the new regime end its suspension of the
National Assembly and political parties and commit itself
to dialogue with the armed groups, points that are priorities
of the new regime’s programme made public on
25 July 1996. Decree Number 100-023 of
13 September 1996 has just reinstated Parliament, the
political parties and political associations.
Furthermore, the Government of Burundi has just
reiterated its solemn commitment to engage in dialogue
and to discuss all the country’s fundamental questions
with all interested political partners, including armed
groups. We renew that commitment here before the
Assembly.
That measure, which is already a priority of the new
regime, was the latest recommendation of the Arusha
Summit Meeting on 31 July 1996. Now that my
Government has responded positively and promptly to the
conditions fixed by its neighbours, we invite them to take
all appropriate steps to lift the embargo immediately so as
to alleviate the indescribable suffering of the people of
Burundi and to enable dialogue — which is also hindered
by the embargo — to take place by opening lines of
communication, both on the ground and in the air, and by
fulfilling their commitments.
My country, Burundi, seeks to play an active and
constructive role in the development of peaceful, friendly
and mutually beneficial relations with countries of the
region and the rest of the world. In return, we require of
our partners that they refrain from threat or use of force
or from any other action incompatible with the purposes
and principles of the United Nations Charter.
Because of the war and the embargo, my country
continues to suffer from a very critical economic
situation. It is land-locked and therefore must rely on its
neighbours for the transit of its exports and imports. For
that reason, we attach great importance to the policy of
good-neighbourliness and non-interference in the internal
affairs of other States.
My Government is perfectly well aware of the
concerns of the international community over the crisis in
Burundi. We express our gratitude to all our bilateral and
multilateral partners that have given us their support,
solidarity and understanding in this difficult period.
However, we remain convinced that the imposition
of conditions about the pace and the way to resolve the
current conflict cannot benefit the people of Burundi. We
are determined to find lasting and definitive solutions to
the evil that is eroding Burundi, but such complex
problems cannot be resolved by precipitate action or by
holding a knife to our throats.
5

The political situation in the Great Lakes region
continues to be cause for concern. This geographical area
holds the sad world record for number of refugees.
Following the genocide carried out in Rwanda in April
1994, several hundreds of thousands of persons sought
asylum in neighbouring countries, particularly in Zaire and
Tanzania.
Following the crisis of October 1993, those countries
also contained tens of thousands of Burundi’s citizens, who
swelled the ranks of those gone into exile. In
February 1995 an international Conference about this thorny
question was held in Bujumbura, under the auspices of the
Organization of African Unity (OAU) and the United
Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees.
The decisions and recommendations made at that time have
remained virtually a dead letter. However, we have noted
the voluntary and peaceful repatriation of a large number of
Rwandan refugees who had sought asylum in Burundi.
The OAU and the United Nations, through the Office
of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees,
should step up their initiatives designed to encourage all
persons who wish to return to their countries once the
conditions of peace and security have been met. The
authorities of the countries concerned must, of course, play
a primary role. The Government of Burundi, for its part, is
prepared to welcome at any time all of our nationals who
wish to return to their respective homes. To that end, it is
now organizing and doing all it can to bring about the rapid
restoration of a climate of peace, understanding and
national reconciliation.
We encourage all efforts being made by neighbouring
countries, by friendly countries, the Organization of African
Unity, the European Union and the United Nations on
behalf of this troubled region and to return the situation as
a whole to normal.
At the same time, we draw the attention of the
international community to other scourges and other
phenomena that are rife in this geographical area. I am
referring to the trafficking in and proliferation of weapons
and the training of militias and armed groups that foment
terrorism and threaten the security of our fellow citizens
from certain neighbouring countries.
We note the spread of the ideology of genocide,
hatred, violence and marginalization made manifest in
intolerance and ethnic fundamentalism. The pernicious ideas
propagated by the champions of those ideologies will, in
the long term, generate social upheavals with political and
ethnic roots that will in turn cause enormous human and
material damage. The genocide in Rwanda, the massacres
perpetrated in Burundi since the October 1993 crisis, the
killings we have witnessed in South Kivu, in particular in
the Massissi region and very recently in the region of
Uvira, are the best example of this threat to peace and
security in our subregion.
The international community must mobilize to
combat such inhuman and degrading acts, whose
philosophy is so strangely reminiscent of notorious
Hitlerite nazism.
With regard to the other conflicts with which Africa
is beset, the Government of Burundi welcomes the
positive developments in the situation in Somalia and in
Liberia. It appreciates the decisive role played by the
OAU, the United Nations and subregional organizations
in helping to sort out differences and commit the parties
to disputes to a process of peace and reconciliation.
In that connection, my Government welcomes the
establishment by the OAU of a Mechanism for Conflict
Prevention, Management and Resolution. African leaders
have thereby demonstrated their determination to become
more involved in solving problems on their own
continent.
We take this opportunity to express our thanks to the
European Union, the United Nations and other bilateral
partners for the political, material and financial support
given that initiative. To that end, Burundi is convinced of
the overriding importance of preventive diplomacy and
the peaceful settlement of disputes through dialogue and
negotiation.
The United Nations has two main priorities, namely,
the Agenda for Peace and the Agenda for Development.
Their success entails a determined struggle against
terrorism and organized crime as well as the elimination
of the nuclear threat. Burundi therefore supports the
organization of an international criminal tribunal.
Burundi’s representative to the United Nations has
just signed the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
My Government warmly welcomes that noble decision by
the General Assembly of our Organization. It is a signally
important step towards the establishment of a world of
peace free from the threat of meaningless death caused by
man himself.
The Government of Burundi is also concerned about
other contemporary scourges, such as the trafficking in
6

and the distribution and consumption of drugs and other
psychotropic substances. They are a grave danger,
especially for our young people who are our future. Apart
from their deleterious effects on health, they are a
formidable weapon in the hands of the supporters of
international terrorism.
For that reason, we wholeheartedly support efforts
being made within the framework of international
cooperation to eradicate that disaster confronting humanity.
We emphasize this fact, for armed groups that are
organized to rob, rape, burn and kill sate themselves with
these harmful substances to kill in cold blood, without
remorse and without pity.
Several delegations have recognized the fact that many
African Governments are increasingly committed to
shouldering their responsibilities for the development of
their continent. It has been noted, in particular, that over the
past two years the average growth rate in gross domestic
product has reached 5 per cent. Those efforts deserve encouragement.
Nevertheless, the burden of external debt continues to
weigh heavily on many of our countries and often
undermines their development efforts. That is why the
Government of Burundi pleads for the substantial easing of
external debt in order to give every chance to programmes
aimed at improving the living standard of our people.
I should like to join other eminent heads of delegation
who have spoken earlier in announcing that my
Government shares the hope that our Organization will be
reformed and made into an efficient and effective
instrument better able to respond to the purposes and
principles assigned it by its founding fathers. The United
Nations must adapt its structures and working methods to
the current and future concerns of our planet and all
humankind.
We view with special attention the ongoing
discussions on restructuring the Security Council to allow
for more equitable representation in that body, to increase
its membership and to achieve its general democratization.
Given their political and economic advantages, Germany
and Japan have legitimate aspirations for permanent seats
in the Security Council, as does Italy. Since none of the
proposals before us commands general support, it is just as
legitimate to take into account the cogent suggestion put
forward by Italy for a possible rotation of permanent seats
among States of respective regions. We believe that Africa,
Asia and Latin America should have at least two permanent
seats per region in that lofty, decision-making body of the
Organization.
My country, Burundi, wishes to reaffirm its total
commitment to and unswerving support for the noble
ideas upheld by the Organization. We hope that the
United Nations will continue to move forward in the
struggle against racism, intolerance, xenophobia, terrorism
and child prostitution. It is our ardent desire to see this
vast home of mankind promote and further promulgate
the values of peace, freedom and mutual respect and
fraternity among men in order to stave off for all time the
spectre of war, hunger and famine in the world, through
a more generous and more committed international
cooperation. All countries of the world, rich and poor,
small and large, are urged to join forces to meet that
challenge: the challenge of building a better future in a
more just, more peaceful, more human world.


On behalf of the delegation of the Socialist
Republic of Viet Nam, I would like to congratulate you
warmly, Sir, on your election as President of the General
Assembly at its fifty-first session. We are truly proud that
you, an experienced representative of Malaysia, a member
country of the Association of South-East Asian Nations
(ASEAN), have been elected to this important position. We
are confident that, under your guidance, our session will
achieve many fine results.
Let me take this opportunity to express our high
appreciation of the performance of your predecessor,
Mr. Diogo Freitas do Amaral. We also hold in high
regard the dynamism and perseverance of Secretary-
General Boutros Boutros-Ghali in the service of our
common cause.
Last year at this time, we had the opportunity to take
a retrospective look at the world’s development over the
past half-century and the role played by the United
Nations in this long journey. One year later, the world
landscape is still full of contrasts, interwoven with factors
and trends of hope and with events and tendencies that
give rise to the concerns of the international community
at this end of the twentieth century.
In a world of teeming changes, what emerges as
invariable are the legitimate aspiration and vigorous
determination of nations to achieve peace and
development based on equality, democracy, respect for
the independence and sovereignty of each country and the
identity of each nation. In this grand endeavour, peoples
turn to the United Nations for timely support and fruitful
assistance because the Organization, having waded
through the vicissitudes of a half-century of history, has
been daily affirming its crucial role for the world as a
whole. Today’s challenge for our world Organization is
how to reform and adapt itself to the new international
circumstances in order to meet the expectations of the
peoples.
As the system of international relations in the post-
cold-war era takes shape, we can already see its trend
towards diversification and multicentrism. In this context,
multilateral institutions and mechanisms, especially the
United Nations, have assumed an ever-more essential role.
However, there are various ways of interpreting the role
of our Organization today. As regards the vast majority of
the Member countries, the United Nations, in its capacity
as a centre for harmonizing inter-State relations, should
play a fundamental role in firmly defending international
law and in encouraging States’ strict and consistent
respect for and observation of the United Nations Charter.
In this spirit, the United Nations must use its weight and
responsibility to stem the practices — such as coercion
and imposition, arbitrary embargo and sanctions that bring
suffering to innocent people, and flagrant interference in
the internal affairs of States, in violation of their
independence and sovereignty — that run counter to the
current general trends.
To play its role adequately, the United Nations must
reform itself so as to increase the representativeness of its
institutional organs and to democratize and ensure greater
15

transparency in our Organization’s working procedures and
methods. The cornerstones of the democratization of the
United Nations system are the reform of the Security
Council and the enhancement of the role of the General
Assembly. This is a complex and difficult task which
requires utmost perseverance. The expansion of the
composition of the Security Council and the
democratization of its decision-making procedures constitute
an urgent demand of the international community. At the
same time, the authority and role of the General Assembly,
the broadest and most representative body, must be
strengthened in response to the legitimate appeal of us all.
Certainly, the reform must be undertaken on the basis of
the agreed principles, particularly that of consensus,
reflecting to the fullest extent the views and aspirations of
the majority of the member countries and ensuring the
interests of the different regions.
If in today’s world democracy in a society means the
active participation of its citizens, democracy in
international relations requires the active participation of all
countries, large or small, rich or poor. Only an increasingly
democratized United Nations can enjoy the prestige and
confidence necessary for playing its role in harmonizing the
actions of States on the basis of international law, as all
desire it to. Let us build upon the momentum gathered at
the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations so that on
entering the twenty-first century, the United Nations can
truly serve as an example of democratization in the world’s
political life.
The wise way to achieve the common objectives of
national independence, peace and development is that of
cooperation in the spirit of equality, mutual respect and
mutual benefit. The globalization of the world economy, the
liberalization of trade and investment and the dizzying
advances of science and technology now present every State
with both unprecedented opportunities and imposing
challenges. It is no mere coincidence that the recent summit
of the seven major industrialized countries, the G-7, in
Lyons, focused on the theme of globalization.
However, the developing countries, and especially the
underdeveloped ones, are approaching this trial that is so
vital for their development and prosperity poorly equipped
and in extremely difficult conditions. Therefore, it is
incumbent upon the international community and in
particular the developed countries, to give the required
attention and adequate assistance to help solve this crucial
equation, because it is impossible to accept, in the context
of interdependence, a world in which affluence is
concentrated in a small number of countries while the
majority of countries continue to struggle against
increasing poverty and the gap between the rich and the
poor grows inexorably wider.
Given its strength and prestige, the United Nations
is able to and needs to play a useful role in this process.
In implementing the Agenda for Development, our
Organization should concentrate first on the regions in
difficulty and on the essential issues. With its financial
resources and groups of experts, the United Nations
system can assist the countries of the South to overcome
their disadvantaged position and succeed in their efforts
for timely regional and global integration, in the context
of an economic, trade, scientific and technological race on
a global scale.
In Viet Nam, for instance, the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) is carrying out projects
to assist us in our integration into the Association of
South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN). UNDP is also
playing an active and effective role to facilitate the
establishment of a framework for cooperation among the
countries along the Mekong. UNDP is currently working
on a national capacity-building project so that Viet Nam
can be prepared to participate more effectively in the
World Trade Organization (WTO) in the near future.
Such practical bilateral and multilateral development
projects are to be welcomed.
However, we are now facing a glaring paradox: the
need for international cooperation for development
continues to grow, while the available means become ever
more scarce and natural resources more depleted. In the
fierce competition for development, States must
concentrate their resources on domestic needs in order to
restructure their economies and solve the pressing social
problems, thus enhancing their internal strength. That is
quite understandable.
Nevertheless, in the current context of increasing
interdependence among States, international cooperation,
especially the flow of capital and technology transfer
from the developed to the developing countries is
indispensable, and it is also necessary and beneficial for
the sustainable development of the developed countries
themselves. Moreover, today, when urgent global issues
are strengthening links between all States, a danger to one
nation may also affect others, and the stability and
prosperity enjoyed by one society may contribute to an
environment favourable for the stability and prosperity of
other societies.
16

Hunger, illness, social injustice and other phenomena
are all potential threats to the security of each country and
the stability of the world as a whole. Allocating of
resources to support the development of developing
countries and contributing in various ways to bilateral and
multilateral international cooperation for development are
wise investments for peace and for the shared future of all
of our societies.
The United Nations is not immune to this discrepancy
between resources and the needs for development
assistance. Today, the resources available to the United
Nations are not increasing; on the contrary, they are
shrinking or being overextended. This worrisome situation
calls for the attention and responsibility of all Member
States, especially of the major Powers and developed
countries that possess greater resources and potential. The
measure to be taken immediately, in the unanimous view of
Member States, is for every State to fulfil its financial
obligations. Moreover, all initiatives to provide
supplementary resources for the United Nations should be
encouraged. Recently, scholars and renowned personalities
have advanced numerous interesting proposals in this
regard. We are of the view that the General Assembly
should assign the Working Group on the Financial Situation
of the United Nations and other relevant working groups
the task of seriously studying these proposals in order to
explore all possible ways of providing the United Nations
with the resources necessary to actively assist in
development for all — first and foremost, that of the
underdeveloped countries.
The United Nations has a rather weighty responsibility
regarding the demands of development. Its role in the
globalization process is therefore no less crucial. Since the
beginning of this decade the United Nations has initiated
and organized a number of world summit conferences on a
set of global issues ranging from environment to social
development, from population to human rights, from
women to children — and coming up we have the World
Food Summit, the aim of which is to find and implement
coordinated measures at all levels — national, regional, and
international — to solve problems of importance for the
future of all nations.
If in the resolution of crisis and conflicts the
participation of the majority of countries is somewhat
limited or even indirect, through an intermediary
mechanism, in the resolution of the global issues for
development the United Nations has been able to mobilize
the direct participation of all countries, big and small, rich
and poor, developed and developing, because these are not
just “to whom it may concern” issues. In this manner, the
United Nations can succeed in its efforts to emerge from
a mere reactive role to crises and conflicts and play a
proactive role in preventing such conflicts and crises.
Clearly, the resolution of global issues is always broadly
democratic in nature.
For all these reasons, we hold that the United
Nations should further strengthen its role of assistance
and coordination in this essential field and continue to
advance the implementation of programmes of action
already adopted. It is evident that no organization can
replace the United Nations in this vital role. In fulfilling
this role, the United Nations will see its prestige enhanced
and its image brought closer to the life of each nation and
each human being.
The year 1996 will go down in the history of Viet
Nam as the beginning of a new stage of development of
our country. Last June, the Eighth Congress of the
Communist Party of Viet Nam was successfully
concluded. The special significance of this historic event
is that, based on the successes achieved over the last 10
years of renewal, reform and national revival, the
Congress decided to lead the country into a new phase of
industrialization and modernization, with a view to
doubling by the year 2000 the 1990 per-capita gross
domestic product and essentially transforming Viet Nam
into an industrialized country in the next 20 to 25 years.
At the same time, we have reaffirmed the pursuit of
our foreign policy of independence and sovereignty,
openness, the diversification and multilateralism of our
international relations, and regional and international
integration. It is because of this direction that the foreign
policy of Viet Nam has achieved and continues to achieve
outstanding results, assisting in the work of nation-
building and development in a practical way, and
effectively contributing to the resolution of international
problems.
Viet Nam has established diplomatic relations with
over 160 countries, including all the major Powers and
the most prominent world political-economic centres. Viet
Nam has commercial relations with more than 100
countries and investment ties with over 50 countries and
territories. In addition to expanding its relations with
countries of all continents, last year as a full member of
the Association of South-East Asian Nations, one of the
most dynamic and successful of regional organizations,
Viet Nam actively contributed to regional and world
cooperation and development.
17

We are participating more actively in the work of
international organizations, especially those of the United
Nations system, as well regional organizations. This year,
Viet Nam begins its term as a member of the UNICEF
Executive Board, and will present its candidature for a seat
on the Economic and Social Council at this session of the
General Assembly. We hope to receive the support of
Member countries of the United Nations to be able to
contribute our share to the work of that important body,
developing and coordinating policies of economic and
social development and cooperation. We are currently
preparing for the successful organization of the upcoming
seventh Francophone summit to be held in November 1997
at Hanoi. As regards broader integration, Viet Nam is also
actively preparing to participate soon in other international
organizations, such as the World Trade Organization and
the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum.
As a new member of the Conference on Disarmament,
Viet Nam played an active part in the negotiations on the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which it recently
signed. By signing that Treaty, Vietnam joined in the broad
appeal of the international community that all States refrain
from all nuclear testing, regardless of the form, strictly
observe the ban on all nuclear-tests and undertake concrete
steps and measures towards the total elimination of all
nuclear weapons. Viet Nam stands ready to cooperate with
all countries for the effective implementation of the Treaty,
contributing to a cleaner environment, to greater confidence
and to consolidation of international security, aimed at a
more secure and healthy world. At the same time, we hold
that the verification activities of the Treaty implementation
process must be carried out in a fair and impartial manner,
with strict respect for the sovereignty of States. In this
spirit, we view that the proposal for a programme of action
for the elimination of nuclear weapons submitted recently
at the Conference on Disarmament by 28 States, including
Viet Nam, deserves serious consideration.
To achieve the objective and sincere desire to build a
Viet Nam with a prosperous people, a strong nation and a
just and civilized society, we are determined to bring into
full play the achievements of the reform and renewal
process and equip ourselves with the internal strength
needed to move forward steadily on the path of integration.
On the basis of our current international relations, we will
strengthen our cooperation with other countries and
international and regional organizations; we will enhance
productivity; we will consolidate the peaceful environment
and create international conditions still more favourable, in
the service of the prosperity of our nation as well as for the
prosperity of the region and the world.
At the threshold of the third millennium, all nation-
States are subject to strong pressures of both opportunity
and challenge. The vast ability of mankind in this age,
together with the extraordinary advances in science and
technology, offers us hope for development and prosperity
for all nations. Yet the poverty that afflicts more than one
fifth of the world population and the gap between the rich
and the poor raise concerns. The opportunities seem great
but the challenges are acutely felt. To begin the twenty-
first century with more hope than anxiety, it will be
important for us first to enhance our sense of
responsibility and broaden our overall long-term interests:
those of peace and development. There is no doubt that
the United Nations, the Organization to which we all
belong, will contribute actively towards achieving that
end.


On behalf of 130 million
Pakistanis, please accept, Sir, greetings on assuming the
presidency of this session of the General Assembly.
I come to address the Assembly in the twilight of the
twentieth century, where we seem to be, in the words of
Charles Dickens, at “the best of times” and at “the worst of
times”. A century now comes to a close which witnessed
two world wars, a Holocaust, hunger, hopelessness and the
spectre of nuclear annihilation.
But there is another twentieth century that we should
remember. The candle flickers on a century that brought
mankind a technological and information revolution
beyond our wildest dreams; a century of breakthroughs in
medicine and health, in communication, in energy, in
transportation and in agriculture; a century that witnessed
the triumph of liberty over authoritarianism, the triumph
of the free market over government control. One historian
has called the twentieth century the age of extremes.
Tested time and again, the world survived.
I come before this Assembly, at this time of
transition from one century to the next — from the
second millennium to the third — to speak of history, of
justice and of morality. Today, the United Nations stands
at the crossroads, not just of the calendar, but of the
direction of the community of nations.
We confront three simultaneous challenges. The first
one is the proliferation of conflicts, disputes and tensions
among and within nations, and the accompanying rise of
national, ethnic and religious prejudice, intolerance and
arrogance. The second challenge is the persistent spread
of poverty. The third challenge is the growing sense of
alienation, the loss of people’s hope and confidence that
the world’s Governments will address successfully the
multifaceted problems inherent in the new technological
era. The manner in which we address these problems will
determine the quality of life that we bequeath our
children.

We remain deeply concerned at the conflicts and
disputes in many parts of the world — in Bosnia, in
Chechnya and in Azerbaijan. Our confidence in our ability
to resolve conflicts has been visibly shaken after the
experiences of Somalia, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan,
Liberia, Rwanda and Burundi.
We hope that the Middle East peace process,
welcomed by the world, will not be reversed and that all
parties will honour their obligations under the agreements
signed.
The success of the Dayton Agreement and the
restoration of peace and justice in Bosnia and Herzegovina
will be an acid test of the world community’s will to
prevent aggression and genocide in the future.
Yet there is another place on Earth where there is a
test of strength between the principles of law and freedom
and the force of aggression and foreign occupation. After
the creation of the United Nations, the people of Jammu
and Kashmir were among the first to have their right to
self-determination recognized by the Security Council. I
should like to quote the words of the Security Council
itself:
“the final disposition of the State of Jammu and
Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of
the people expressed through the democratic method
of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the
auspices of the United Nations.” (Security Council
resolution 122 (1957), second preambular paragraph)
After 50 years, the Kashmiri people still await the
fulfilment of this resolution, of this commitment, of this
promise.
The great African-American poet Langston Hughes
asked fundamental questions about liberty. He asked:
“What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore —
And then run? (...)
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?”
In 1989, as the winds of freedom swept across the
globe, blowing away dictatorship, domination and
occupation, a new generation of Kashmiris rose to demand
their right to self-determination, a right that had passed
from father to son, from mother to daughter — a torch
rekindled from generation to generation. To suppress the
brave Kashmiri youth, India sent in 600,000 military and
paramilitary forces. The tools of murder, torture, rape,
persecution, arson, incarceration and assassination
attempts were ruthlessly used. But as the Nobel Peace
Laureate Martin Luther King said,
“Freedom is never voluntarily given by the
oppressor. It must be demanded by the oppressed.”
Forty thousand Kashmiris have given their lives in
opposing this oppression during the last seven years
alone. India has recruited and trained renegades to subvert
the Kashmiri movement, to create dissension and to
tarnish the image of the struggle for freedom. Under
mounting international pressure, India sought this
September to divert world opinion by organizing a sham
election. Those very people who claim to be front-runners
in the elections cannot even enter the valley without
armed escorts, much less muster popular support.
This is what the world’s media had to say. The Arab
News of 8 September 1996 reported that its correspondent
visited Baramula that morning and saw the entire town
deserted. Not a single person was visible on the streets,
which were being heavily patrolled. The New York Times
of 7 September 1996 reported that while India hopes that
the elections will blunt the guerrillas’ appeal, there are
many in Srinagar who say New Delhi is chasing an
illusion. The Economic Times, an Indian publication, of
17 September 1996 reported that a number of booths in
Anantnag and Pulwama recorded single-digit voting, even
as late as 3 p.m. The Statesman, another Indian
publication, reported on 22 September 1996 that Srinagar
put up a stiff resistance to elections that day, and that
polling was held in a curfew-like atmosphere on deserted
streets. According to the Voice of America’s broadcast of
27 September 1996, United States Senator Tom Harkin
said that these elections were fraudulent and would not be
considered to reflect the legitimate aspirations of the
Kashmiri masses.
The Chairman of the Kashmir All Parties Hurriyat
Conference, Mir Umar Farooq, declared that such
elections cannot be a substitute for the Kashmiris’ right to
self-determination.
The United Nations Security Council declared in
resolution 122 (1957) that the organization of such
elections does not “constitute a disposition of the State”
2

(resolution 122 (1957), operative para. 1) in terms of the
plebiscite to be held under the auspices of the United
Nations. This was confirmed by a recent study by the
International Commission of Jurists.
I should like India to remember the words of the
Frenchman André Breton, who said:
“There is nothing with which it is so dangerous to
take liberties as liberty itself.”
So I stand before the United Nations General
Assembly and urge “to thine own self be true”, to thine
own Charter be true; and to thine own resolutions be true.
India may argue that the Security Council resolutions
that guaranteed a plebiscite to Jammu and Kashmir are old,
but there is no statute of limitations on United Nations
resolutions. Occupation, repression and annexation cannot
nullify the actions of the Security Council itself. The
resolutions of this body cannot be applied selectively only
when politically expedient.
Pakistan calls on the United Nations to implement its
own Security Council resolutions 47 (1948), 51 (1948), 80
(1950), 96 (1951), 98 (1952) and 122 (1957) — seven
specific and binding resolutions guaranteeing self-
determination to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.
Kashmir is the core issue that divides India and
Pakistan. I had proposed a meaningful dialogue to the new
Indian Prime Minister on his assumption of office, and was
encouraged by his positive response. Unfortunately, the new
Government persisted with the strategy of a sham election
in occupied Jammu and Kashmir.
The Kashmir dispute has led to four direct or indirect
wars between India and Pakistan between 1947 and 1971.
India has the third-largest army in the world today, almost
all of which is deployed against my country Pakistan.
South Asia lacks a regional security system. We in
Pakistan have made several proposals for conventional arms
control: first, the negotiation of a mutually agreed ratio of
forces; secondly, measures to prevent the possibility of a
surprise attack; and thirdly, the adoption of agreed
principles for conventional arms control in South Asia.
Over the past 30 years, Pakistan has formulated a
series of proposals to contain proliferation of nuclear and
missile technology in South Asia. All along, India argued
that it opposed bilateral or regional measures and would
accept only a global non-proliferation policy. The
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty is exactly the
kind of global measure for non-proliferation and
disarmament that India had been championing for 40
years. Yet, unfortunately, India chose to veto the Treaty
in the Geneva Conference on Disarmament, and it
opposed the Treaty at the United Nations General
Assembly just last month. So now the world can see the
reality.
Let me state that just as we are prepared to sign any
and all nuclear treaties if India simultaneously signs with
us, any step in nuclear escalation by our neighbour will
find a response from us to preserve our national security.
I should like to take this opportunity to propose to
this Assembly that it endorse the convening of a
multilateral dialogue for peace and security in South Asia,
with the participation not only of Pakistan and India, but
of the five permanent members of the Security Council
and other major Powers, such as Germany and Japan.
This multilateral conference could cover three critical
areas: first, the resolution of the Kashmir dispute and
other bilateral problems between India and Pakistan;
secondly, the promotion of conventional arms control and
confidence-building measures; and thirdly, measures to
promote nuclear restraint and avert the danger of a
nuclear-arms race in South Asia. I believe that such
multilateral talks offer a framework for genuine
negotiations that can lead to a resolution of disputes, avert
the nuclear threat and promote prosperity in South Asia.
I hope this proposal will receive the support of this
Assembly and of India.
A clear distinction has been made by the United
Nations between terrorism and the legitimate struggle for
national liberation. We in Pakistan will always be at the
forefront of the effort to combat terrorism because we
have frequently been victims of these crimes from across
our own borders. This year alone we faced a series of
cross-border terrorist attacks, but, by the grace of God,
we were successful in arresting different rings of cross-
border terrorists.
However, I should like to take this opportunity to
express deep concern, on behalf of one billion peace-
loving Muslims, at the propaganda from certain quarters.
Some quarters are trying to present terrorism as peculiar
to the followers of Islam; this is wrong. There is no place
in Islam for acts of terrorism. However, let us
acknowledge that in the post-cold-war period we are
witnessing the rise of extremist fringe groups in the East
3

and in the West. Whether it be Hindu fundamentalism,
Islamic militancy, Judaic extremism, Le Pen’s racism in
France, or the Oklahoma bombing in America, a number of
youth are turning to acts of violence. We who believe in
the policies of moderation, accommodation and tolerance
must unite against this new threat of violence and terror.
International mechanisms and systems to check the agents
of terror need strengthening, and we must condemn
terrorists and extremists with one voice, irrespective of their
race, religion or creed.
Pakistan is the second-largest Muslim country in the
world. It is a democracy, and the Government I lead is
determined to turn Pakistan into a fortress of enlightenment,
emancipation and social advancement. This is no easy task
given our recent history. The Afghan war led to the
proliferation of arms and militancy in our region, and to the
rise of ethnic, sectarian and separatist forces in the country.
It spawned a drug culture and failed to equip our youth for
employment in the modern world.
Today we face, along with other countries of the
world, the dangers of debt, deficit and demography. I am
proud to say that we in Pakistan have brought down our
population growth rate from 3.1 per cent to 2.9 per cent.
We hope to reduce it further, to 2.6 per cent. In the last
three years, we have brought down our deficit by three
points, and a billion dollars of debt has been retired.
However, the cost has been heavy.
Each year we have had to present a harsh budget to
pull our country out of the quicksand of debt, deficit and
demography. This year alone, out of new budgetary
measures of PRs. 40 billion, PRs. 22 billion went to debt
servicing. The example of Pakistan shows why increasing
numbers of the world’s population live in poverty and
squalor, without access to clean drinking water, sanitation,
schools or hospitals.
These bleak realities of debt servicing breed a despair
and frustration that often manifest as random violence and
terrorism. Despite this grinding poverty, the aspirations of
the marginalized keep rising due to the communications
revolution sweeping the world.
The world needs to devise a system under which
Governments adopting international standards of trade and
human values get proportionate relief in their debt.
Shrinking aid flows have forced countries such as Pakistan
to borrow capital at commercial interest rates. Indeed, debt
servicing now accounts for 47 per cent of our budget. The
negative impact of such reverse transfers needs to be
redressed.
Similarly, it is time to renew and implement the
pledge of the developed nations to devote at least 0.7 per
cent of their gross national products for assistance to the
developing countries. Even this target has now dwindled
to a level of 0.3 per cent of the gross national product of
the developed world.
We in Pakistan, committed to the dream of our
founding fathers, have chosen the path of a federal
parliamentary democracy wedded to the concept of social
equality. Under a democratic Government, Pakistan has
played a responsible role in combating terrorism and
narcotics, promoting the rights of women and children,
and working on non-proliferation issues such as the
Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. We have done
this while confronting the forces of ethnicity,
sectarianism, separatism and militancy that were tearing
at our social fabric. Those who sought to undermine our
country’s unity by undermining peace in our port city of
Karachi have been defeated.
We have a clear agenda as we move towards the
twenty-first century: a Pakistan dedicated to the rule of
law and to safeguarding the rights of its women, children
and minorities; a Pakistan providing equal opportunity for
the advancement of its citizens by investing in health and
in education; a Pakistan that has already attracted over
$22 billion in investment pledges.
I speak to you, Mr. President, in the twilight of a
century that awaits the dawn of a fresh one. As I speak,
I dream of a third millennium in which the gap between
rich and poor evaporates; in which illiteracy, hunger,
malnutrition and disease are at long last conquered; in
which every child is planned, wanted, nurtured and
supported; and in which the birth of a girl is welcomed
with the same joy as that of a boy. I dream of a
millennium of tolerance and pluralism, in which people
respect other people, nations respect other nations, and
religions respect other religions.
That is the third millennium I see for my country
and others — for all children. Let the United Nations be
the infrastructure for making this dream into a reality.


My country is especially pleased at the
President’s election to lead the General Assembly. He
represents a great country that plays an important role in
the Non-Aligned Movement and the Group of 77 and I
am glad that he is to preside over our work during this
crucial period for our Organization.
17

I should also like to endorse the remarks made by
Ireland’s Foreign Minister in the name of the European
Union.
Last year, we celebrated the first half century of the
United Nations existence, during which its energies were
devoted, with a success universally acknowledged, to the
organization of international society. A mammoth collective
undertaking has been accomplished and the United Nations
has become the keystone of an international system founded
on law and the peaceful settlement of conflicts. This
collective undertaking owes much to the determined action
of successive Secretaries-General, and I should like to pay
a special and warm tribute here to Mr. Boutros-Ghali,
whose determination, vision of the future and firmness have
given our Organization a presence and vitality rarely
achieved. He deserves our confidence.
Today, as the century reaches its turning point, the
Organization is confronted with another major challenge:
globalization. In every sphere, the ideas and realities to
which we were accustomed are changing at a pace
unequalled in human history. The movement of people, of
ideas and images, and of goods is accelerating as distances
shrink. At the same time, the standardization of cultural
practices — and the legitimate reactions this provokes —
the general spread of low-cost high technologies and
intensified competition bring into question the positions that
have been achieved and the functioning, if not the very
foundation, of international society. At the same time, the
production of wealth is increasing tenfold and scientific
progress is growing rapidly, while unexpected opportunities
for development are being given to new nations.
But these benefits have adverse effects. The control
fragile States have over their development is being eroded,
national legislation is becoming inapplicable and the notion
of territorial integrity is changing in meaning. In short,
national authorities are too often reduced to powerlessness
by transnational phenomena over which they have only
scant control. If we are not careful, we are going to be
living in a world without criteria, without values, without
references, in which some — the strongest and the
richest — will be in a position to decide alone on the future
of the planet. It should come as no surprise that, in these
circumstances, the United Nations has many detractors.
Our Organization is in effect a privileged forum in
which the framework of a genuine international society can
be built, a framework that frees the forces of creativity and
development and represses the forces of violence and
oppression. It is up to all of us present here to enable the
United Nations to play that role and to ensure peace,
security and progress in these new circumstances and in
keeping with its mandate. Rest assured that France, a
founding Member of the Organization and permanent
member of the Security Council, will devote all its
energies to this task and will be in the front ranks of this
new fight.
Our world is confronted today with terrible problems
that know no borders and, sadly, spare no population:
terrorism, crime and drugs. The fight against these
scourges is foremost in our concerns and high on the
international agenda. Accordingly, an uncompromising
fight against terrorism, whatever its forms, perpetrators
and motives, constitutes our priority. This is why I
convened a conference on terrorism in Paris last July that
brought together the G-7 countries and Russia. We
adopted 25 practical, specific recommendations. They will
be implemented by each State and will strengthen
international cooperation against terrorism. Therefore,
today I make a solemn call on the entire international
community to join wholeheartedly in this fight.
We must also react without weakness to the
challenge of organized crime, in the knowledge that it
knows how to make the fullest use of the possibilities that
have been opened up by the liberalization of trade. For it
is the very foundation of our societies and institutions that
it endangers today.
International cooperation is indispensable to stem
this phenomenon. France, pursuing the path mapped out
by the Canadian presidency, has drafted a corpus of legal
and operational recommendations with its G-7 partners
and Russia to improve the effectiveness of the fight
against this scourge. These should guide in particular the
action of the States most affected by transnational
organized crime. France recently strengthened its financial
legislation against money-laundering. All States should
pay particular attention to this phenomenon, which is one
of the hardest forms of organized crime to counter.
One of the most loathsome aspects of organized
crime is that which targets our children. A world summit
on combating the sexual exploitation of children was
recently held in Stockholm. That is good, but it is still not
enough. Everyone must now make a commitment to
implementing effective measures for immediate
application. I urge all States represented here to act
quickly and with determination in this area which, more
than any other, affects our future. The Assembly may rest
assured of France’s political resolve.
18

Drugs are a formidable threat today because of the
ravages they inflict on young people. International
cooperation must be solid. The producer and consumer
countries must recognize their shared responsibility. The
international community must therefore continue to pursue
convergent policies to reduce the supply of illegal
substances and the demand for them. The European Union
has chosen such a global policy and has launched large-
scale actions in close coordination with international
institutions, in particular the United Nations International
Drug Control Programme. France strongly supports the
proposal to convene a special session of the General
Assembly devoted to drugs in 1998.
These new perils do not supplant the traditional
challenges, which our Organization must address with
sustained vigilance and unwavering firmness. Peace-keeping
remains the central function of our Organization under the
terms of the founding Charter. The mission of the United
Nations to soothe tensions, separate combatants and resolve
conflicts remains fundamental.
The panoply of available instruments is becoming
more diversified. Recent additions to conventional peace-
keeping missions include activities to consolidate peace,
preventive diplomacy measures and even regional
conferences — such as I hope will soon take place with
regard to the situation in the Great Lakes region.
Sanctions constitute one of these instruments. They are
a useful weapon, but they penalize populations and must
therefore be used with prudence and moderation, follow
strict criteria and — I stress this — always be limited in
time. Only under those conditions can sanctions, which are
sometimes necessary to prevent something worse, continue
to be used by our Organization with the required
legitimacy.
Of course, we cannot refer to the traditional challenges
to peace without speaking about current regional conflicts.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, where my country has paid a
heavy tribute, France is pleased that elections could be held,
imperfect though they were. That represents an essential
stage in the return to peace provided for by the agreements
signed in Paris in 1995.
But peace still has to be consolidated, devastated
territories be reconstructed, refugees encouraged to return
and a civilian society rebuilt. To that end, France has
proposed a plan of consolidated action by the international
community with a time-frame of two years. With this goal
in mind, we will very shortly be hosting an international
conference in Paris to examine, and I hope adopt, this
proposal.
Similarly, the peace process in the Middle East
seems to be at a crucial stage. I wish here to express my
anxiety about it. I certainly believe the process to be
irreversible, but I am also aware of the precariousness of
the gains and the urgency of the need for long-term
solutions. We are half-way there. I say “we”, because this
process concerns not just Arabs and Israelis but all of us
here.
For France, peace in the Middle East is built upon
dialogue between equal partners, respect for the identity
of each and the right of peoples to the free determination
of their destiny, the affirmation of their independence, and
security. That is why — and I wish to emphasize this
point — France believes that there will be no lasting
peace in the region, based on an exchange of land for
peace, unless the right of the Palestinian people to self-
determination is respected, together with their legitimate
aspirations for a State.
We believe that a just and balanced agreement
between Israelis and Palestinians cannot avoid the issues
of Jerusalem, refugees and the settlements in the
Palestinian territories. Finally, a lasting peace presupposes
that Israel is assured of its existence within secure and
recognized borders.
France believes that complete withdrawal from the
Golan Heights in exchange for total peace constitutes the
basis of an agreement between Syria and Israel, and that
Lebanon must regain full and complete sovereignty over
the whole of its territory.
Based on these principles, France intends to have a
greater and more active presence than ever in the Middle
East, with which it has close and long-standing relations.
It will pursue this policy in close consultation with its
European partners. Furthermore, Europe must have a
place, alongside the two sponsors of the peace process,
commensurate with the major contribution it is making to
the region’s development.
While we are endeavouring to build peace in areas
in crisis, our efforts are no less ambitious for the entire
European continent. In building step by step what we call
an “architecture of security“, we are really offering the
international community a pillar of peace. France is
making an important contribution to the establishment on
19

the European continent a system of global security that
leaves no one out on the edge.
The construction of peace in Europe began with the
construction of European institutions. It is being continued
by deepening the Union. The intergovernmental Conference
represents a decisive stage in this process, the forerunner of
expansion, which is vital to the stability and prosperity of
the continent.
France wishes to see the Union go still further by
giving substance to the European identity in security and
defence matters. To that end, we would like to see a
strengthening of the Western European Union and its
gradual rapprochement with the European Union.
The European identity is also based on the reform of
the Atlantic Alliance. France, after taking a decisive step,
is now working actively with its allies on the adaptation of
structures. This should allow the emergence of a genuine
European security and defence identity within the Alliance
and make it possible in practice for the Western European
Union, and therefore the European Union, to use the assets
of the Alliance for military action that Europeans decide to
undertake themselves. This reform is also the key to the
process of expanding the Alliance, with which France is
ready to assist. That expansion must naturally go hand-in-
hand with in-depth dialogue and cooperation with Russia.
The third and last aspect of the structure is the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
(OSCE), which is the sole forum for security in which all
the European States are represented on an equal footing.
That is why France believes that it is necessary to
strengthen the organization. We hope that the Lisbon
summit will provide the occasion to move towards the
drafting of a charter or treaty linking all the States of the
continent.
Important events therefore await us on the path that
we have mapped out, including the OSCE summit in
December and the NATO summit next year. The latter
should bring together all the European States for a
“pan-Europe day”, demonstrating the community of security
interests of all the countries on the continent, including
Russia and our North American allies whose role in
European security remains decisive. That is our ambition
for a Europe of security that leaves no one out and is safer
and more stable for the entire international community.
In this changing world, it is for the United Nations to
bring out the common values that will be the foundations
of civilization in the twenty-first century. It is thanks to
its actions that we hope to build a safer, less harsh world
for its inhabitants. First, we hope it will be a world in
which the spectre of nuclear war has faded. For many
years, public opinion called for a complete ban on nuclear
tests. It was a hope and a plan that was certainly worthy,
but remained blocked by the reality of East-West
confrontation.
France welcomes the signing of the Comprehensive
Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which I had the honour to sign
yesterday. This Treaty marks a major turning-point in the
world’s strategic balances.
It puts an end to the possibility of the nuclear-
weapon States’ developing new types of nuclear weapons,
and it makes a decisive contribution to the fight against
nuclear-weapon proliferation.
The Treaty thus opens the way to a more stable,
safer world which will cease to be haunted by the twin
dangers of the nuclear-arms race and the proliferation of
these weapons.
There is another development which I find
remarkable: the endorsement of human rights as a major
principle of international relations. And the United
Nations is at the centre of this development.
I should like in this regard to pay tribute to the
remarkable work done by the Commission on Human
Rights. In often difficult circumstances, it has pursued
with pragmatism and tenacity its patient efforts to awaken
consciences, to galvanize energies and to promote the rule
of law in concrete ways.
Our aim must not be to pronounce
excommunications or establish a blacklist, generally to no
effect. Rather, it must be to promote the protection of
individuals and the progress of law with due respect for
differences.
I should also like to reaffirm France’s determination
to see crimes against humanity punished. The
condemnation they warrant cannot brook any exception.
Together with others, France took the initiative of
proposing the establishment of the international criminal
Tribunal and the international Tribunal for Rwanda. I
wish to reaffirm France’s unqualified support for their
founding work, and its backing in order that the tribunals
might carry out their work in full.
20

Lastly, France is pleased that the foundations that have
thus been laid have helped to speed up the debates on the
establishment of an international criminal court, which we
earnestly desire and to which we attach a high priority.
There are other important areas which we have begun
to consider.
At this time when workers, money, factories and
commerce operate at a heightened pace, it is essential to
develop dialogue among the partners of economic life. This
is really the only solid basis on which to build social
protection that preserves the interests of all without harming
the growth of economies.
The fiftieth anniversary of the International Labour
Organisation (ILO) provided the opportunity to recall the
essential role of this organization in defining these minimal
norms, without which the economic world is but a vast
jungle.
Universality, however, must not lead to uniformity.
The definition of common values, accepted by all, is based
on respect for the identities that underpin the cultures of the
world. Our values will thus command all the more respect
for being expressed in all our respective languages.
Accordingly, we welcome the fact that the General
Assembly last year adopted a resolution on multilingualism
by a very large majority. Our civilizations, languages and
cultures, inherited from an often turbulent history, but of
irreplaceable richness, are a precious legacy for humankind.
The importance that my country ascribes to the
French-speaking community reflects its determination to
maintain the specificity and richness of the profoundly
original world view of several hundreds of millions of
people. We will not give this up.
The search for a new world ethic is not limited to
human rights but extends to the whole of international life.
Since 1945, international trade has been a powerful growth
factor, contributing to a large extent to the expansion of the
industrialized economies and to the success of the so-called
emerging countries. But here too we must have rules of the
game, acknowledged at the world level, so as to develop
and regulate trade, ensure that it is fair and prevent
unilateral conduct.
I should like to mention here the dangers of
unilateralism. Unilateralism: behind this technocratic word
lurks the temptation to impose the law of the strongest at
the expense of dialogue and negotiation.
France and Europe cannot accept that one country,
even if it is the most powerful, attempt to regulate world
trade by itself by means of decisions that have extra-
territorial scope. The World Trade Organization does not
allow it, and no one should doubt the firmness of French
and European reactions were such measures actually to be
implemented.
The globalization of the economy and the
liberalization of trade and investments have opened up
unprecedented prospects. However, we must take care not
to allow the gap to widen between the nations that trade,
invest and derive profit from this new factor and those
that remain on the sidelines of this new prosperity.
Each nation is responsible for itself and must create,
through rigorous public management and compliance with
its legislative rulings, optimum conditions for freeing
private initiative, a factor in economic and commercial
progress. But I do not believe that one can leave to
market forces alone the care of ensuring the development
of the poorest nations.
Here, too, the United Nations has an important role
to play. By its side, the wealthiest States must affirm their
solidarity in a tangible way: actively and effectively, this
solidarity must assist the developing countries without
becoming a substitute for them. On the threshold of a
new century, poverty and exclusion cannot constitute the
sole prospects for two-thirds of humankind. France, for its
part, will not accept this.
This commitment concerns Africa in particular,
where real prospects for progress are beginning to
emerge.
Africa has embarked with courage and perseverance
on the path to readjustment and recovery, which will
enable it to find its place again in the great flows of
world trade.
For the first time in a long time, Africa’s growth
rate has been on the order of 5 per cent these past two
years, higher than its demographic expansion, very high
though it is. This is a reassuring sign, attributable to the
efforts made by the African States themselves. They have
been able to cut public deficits, establish realistic
monetary parities, open up their markets and move
towards regional integration and democratization. Such
21

achievements, which are the result of structural reforms,
seem to us to justify our confidence. France believes in
Africa’s future.
Still, official development assistance must be
maintained and strengthened, but this assistance must be the
subject of many initiatives. France has taken such
initiatives within the European Union, the African
Development Bank, the International Development
Association and the International Monetary Fund.
Recently, at the summit of industrialized countries
held in Lyons, my country reaffirmed the need to increase
aid to the poorest countries, asking for more generous
treatment of debt for them, and for a new global partnership
to be defined between the developing countries and the
multilateral institutions.
In this new world context, we have to consider the
progress that the United Nations needs to make to be able
to meet its responsibilities for the next century.
France approves of the current discussions on
improving the representative character of the Security
Council, in particular with respect to Germany, Japan and
the States of the South.
Similarly, under the decisive impetus of the Secretary-
General, the Organization has embarked on a vast effort for
structural reform, the first results of which are beginning to
show.
It is not a matter of changing everything but of seeing
that every institution is in a position to make a useful
contribution to the collective work in its own sphere.
That is why the members of the G-7 have proposed
putting the savings realized through reforms into
development projects.
France would like to see the reform of the United
Nations economic and social sector concluded quickly so as
to strengthen the overall coherence of the Organization. To
that end, the roles and mandates of the specialized agencies
and commissions in particular should be better defined, and
waste and duplication eliminated.
These proposals are dictated solely by the wish to help
the United Nations better fulfil its mission of fighting
poverty and exclusion on a global scale.
In the case of the United Nations budget, many of us
are worried about the financial crisis that threatens to
paralyse the United Nations. The European Union has put
forward concrete proposals for overcoming this crisis. It
is now up to all States that have let their arrears
accumulate to assume their responsibilities.
Whatever some may say, the United Nations is still
one of our best chances for building a better world. Let
us not spoil it.