A/33/PV.35 General Assembly

, I call on the Chairman of the Committee Established under General Assembly Resolution 32/174, Mr. Idriss Jazairy of Algeria, who wishes to introduce the Committee's report /A/33/34]. 2. Mr. JAZAIRY (Algeria), Chairman of the Committee Established under General Assembly Resolution 32/174, (interpretation from French): For the first time the General Assembly in a regular session has decided to deal directly in plenary meeting, as a priority item, with the state of the dialogue concerning the establishment of a new inter- national economic order as it emerges from the work of the Committee Established under General Assembly Resolution 32/174, sometimes known as the Committee of the Whole. That resolution entrusted the Committee with a central task in this matter. 3. The task entrusted to the Committee, as we know, results from the general disenchantment felt at the slowness of the international negotiations designed to translate into terms of commitments the principles of the new order for which the sixth special session of the Assembly and the Charter on Economic Rights and Duties of States [reso- lution 3281 (XXIX)] had laid the foundation. Thus, with a time-lag of almost two years it responded to the appeal of the third world for the joint establishment of new international relations. What has been the development of the dialogue since that time? 4. The industrialized countries, as early as the seventh special session, in order to promote a fruitful dialogue, gained acceptance for an approach to the problems involved which they represented as a concrete approach to be limited to certain sectors of joint action. A consensus was arrived at which elicited some praise at the time, at the session in question, for its realism. In fact, this was only a commitment to negotiate, which, however, was to pave the NEW YORK way towards concrete agreements or forms of binding commitments. 5. The same approach was adopted at the Conference on International Economic Co-operation,l except that, for the sake of efficiency, the subjects were dealt with by a limited number of countries. 6. Although the course outlined at the seventh special session was clear, the infrequent negotiations that followed did not produce the expected results. Few new decisions were adopted at the Conference, while the adoption of important resolutions was shuttled back and forth between various international bodies and the Conference. The only outstanding decision of the latter, ~oncerning the principle of the establishment of a common fund relating to commodities, did not, as a matter of fact, prevent a suspension, shortly afterwards, of the Conference convened by UNCTAD in order to formalize that agreement.2 7. After the attempt at the Paris Conference, the dialogue was brought back to the United Nations, which had never ceased to be its natural framework. The establishment of the Committee of the Whole, which then became the main forum, indicated the recognition of the central role of the General Assembly with regard to global economic nego- tiations at the international level. .. 8. And yet, one year after the adoption of resolution 32/174, we are obliged to recognize that no concrete result has been achieved within that framework, and the Com- mittee, which was to hold three sessions during the year 1978, was not even able to bring to a conclusion the first of those sessions, as can be seen from its interim report [A/33/34]. 9. The immediate cause of this highly regrettable situation was the profound and persistent disagreement on what should have constituted the two pillars of the dialogue: namely, the ri~t of the Committee to negotiate and its right to adopt decisions. 10. According to certain developed countries, that .body was not to enter into any negotiations but was to limit itself to serving as a framework for exchanges of view among the officials responsible for co·operation policies for the purpose of bringing about a better mutual under- standing of global economic problems. Encouraged by the new ideas emerging from this debate those officials could draw upon them in preparing their respective national 1 Held at Paris from 30 May to 2 June 1977. 2 United Nations Negotiating Conference on a Common Fund under the Integrated Programme for Commodities. A/33/PV.35 1]. This approach is based upon the view that the deliberative and negotiating functions should 'be separated. The former, which are sometimes unduly identified with dialogue, would be performed by centnu political organs for international co-operation, and the latter by specialized bodies. 18. It would be difficult in the circumstances to see how the Committee could truly help to resolve, as it was required to do under its mandate, the negotiating diffi- culties encountered precisely in those other bodies. 12. It nevertheless seems that such a thesis runs the risk of reversing the hierarchy between these entities by setting apart the central political organs. In fact, what appears to distinguish the respective functions of the two types of forum is the predominance of either the global or the specialized approach within a negotiating function which ought to be common to both of them.. 19. In the face of such objections, the Chainnan, in agreement with all the members, defined the way in which the Committee was to discharge its mandate and negotiate the adoption of the gUidelines for the policy of inter- national co-operation and the solution of the key questions which underlay problems not solved elsewhere. 13. Without challenging the usefulness of the deliberations and exchanges of views advocated, the developing countries wished to emphasize that, as a result of the prolonged debates of the special sessions devoted to the new inter- national economic order, as well as to the Conference on International Economic Co-operation, the positions of all concerned were well known even if their assessments were , not always shared. They therefore felt that a central place should be given to the process of narrowing the gap between divergent positions in the Committee, in other words to negotiation in view of the overlapping of economies and sectors of activity. 20. Subsequently, however, certain interpretations threat- ened the balance of the compromise. 21. The reiteration of restrictive interpretations through- out the general debate of the Assembly made it impossible to clear up the misunderstanding at that time. However, consultations which have taken place since then lead us to believe that an early solution to this problem is in sight. 22. While we welcome this possible solution, we cannot overlook the fact that a whole year has thus been lost at a time when development problems are urgent and those of the most impoverished peoples have reached a critical stage. 14. The opposition to recognizing the function of the Committee as a negotiating body was to lead the pro- ponents of that thesis to object to any form of decision- making which would commit the States members of the Committee. Some developed countries, however, while recognizing that the Committee had the authority to make recommendations, wished to restrict its recommendations to the preparation of the special session of the Assembly in 1980. 23. In the circumstances, bodies such as the Committee of the Whole, which were established to help solve such fundamental problems, should not, in my opinion, cause the international .;ommunity to neglect such problems in favour of fictitious esoteric matters. 24. Some might view this as a matter of conflicting views on procedure, but can that still b~ argued? 15. The developing countries, pointing out that under resolution 32/174 the Committee would submit recom- mendations to the General Assembly, emphasized that it was accordingly for the Committee to take its own decisions. They nevertheless agreed to make every effort to achieve a consensus on agreed conclusions, not in the sense of a specific procedure applied elsewhere but in the sense of a submission, perhaps less fonnal than a resolution which, on the initiative of any of the members concerned, would be adopted by the Committee. T~ey felt moreover that it would be wrong to limit the scope of these decisions to the preparation of the special session in 1980, since the Committee was a high-level political body and not a technical preparatory committee. 25. Some developed countries have criticized the turn taken during the discussions at the sixth special session and claim that this is why its practical scope was limited. However, the third world had agreed in turn to a scale of priorities for their demands, in order to take into account the constraints on the developed countries, to exchanges of views and comprehensive analyses in order to achieve a better understanding of each other's positions, to a search for an "authentic" consensus through negotiation and to a restriction of the debate to a limited number of countries. All these were points which, in the eyes of the developed countries, provided the ingredients for a constructive, action-oriented dialogue. 26. Yet as the developing countries were proceeding towards the adoption of the rules laid down by their developed partners, the latter subtly moved in the opposite direction. 16. Underlying the question of the power of the Com- mittee to take decisions was the question of the division of powers between this central political body of dialogue and other negotiating bodies, since there was persistent mis- understanding about the real meaning of what was called the "dangers of duplication". 27. No sooner had the developing countries comm~tted themselves to a dialogue than a move was made to create 29. Will they give their unqualified support to the adop- tion of a decision consensus when the very principle of the adoption of decisions is questioned in various bodies in which international economic policies are drawn up and co-ordinated? 30. While the developing countries have thus subscribed to the methods proposed to them, it is difficult to believe, in the light of the persistence of this impasse, that it is the result of simple disagreement concerning procedure rather than of a fundamental divergence regarding goals. 31. In the circumstances, it is not surprising that the dialogue has hardly promoted the establishment of the new order. Even measured in terms of the simple aim of marginal redistribution by the developed countries of accrued wealth rather than in terms of the restructuring of the world economy that this concept implies, the results cannot be described as positive. In particular, the theme of the transfer of resources, which is based upon such an approach and which was chosen as the starting-point for the work of the Committee, has not led to any drawing together of the respective pcsitions. 32. In his opening statement the Secretary-General [see A/33/34, part one, annex IJ, Mr. Kurt Waldheim, to whom I wish to pay a tribute for his valuable contribution to the solution of the problems encountered by the Committee, called upon the Committee to translate into concrete measures the goal clearly defined by the international community some years ago in regard to financial assistance, and I myself expressed the wish in my opening statement {ibid., annex IIJ that our Committee would not limit itself to confirming solutions that were already found elsewhere. But such concrete measures were not drawn up. Moreover, at a time when it is recognized that official aid for development has fallen to its lowest level since the 1950s, and when the developed countries are proclaiming that they wish to increase the volume of such aid substantially, not only has the Committee been unable to confirm the commitment already assumed by those countries to achieve, in the ways provided for at the seventh special session, the goal of 0.7 per cent in 1980, but the com- mitment itself has been explicitly called in question by some of them. 33. Even the idea of non-reciprocity laid down in the Tokyo Declaration3 and the need for &n improvement in the terms of trade of the developing countries, which was reaffirmed by resolution 3362 (S·VII), has been challer.ged. 34. The erosion of the Committee's powers of decision and the calling in question of the bases upon which \ l 3 Declaration of 14 September 1973, approved by the Ministerial Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade held in Tokyo. ~: I Estab}j~hment of the United Nations Industrial Develop- ment Organization as a Specialized Agency, and in the negotiations within the framework of GATT, as well as the freezing of the question of conditionality in IMF. This development shows quite clearly that, while the Committee was not the only forum in which dialogue was taking place, the slowing-down, indeed the deadlocking, taking place within it has become generalized at all international negotiating levels. 35. This casts a shadow over the dialogue. Increasingly the question arising is not so much whether the goal of the dialogue should be to achieve further heights of North- South co-operation, or even to translate into fact what has been decided upon, as whether there is a possibility that dialogue can halt t}- ~ erosion of the common positions already adopted. 36. Of course, much has been made of the recognition by the Committ1ee of the real interdependence of nations~but one must acknowledge the obvious: although that inter-' dependence has been much vaunted in political speeches, there has also been an obstinate refusal to draw the true implications from it, including, in the first place, the need for a redefinition and widening of the concept of mutual interest. It was, indeed, legitimate to expect that the recognition of the potential of the third world, which is truly opening a new frontier for world economic activity, might lead to the relegation to the museum of history of those limited interpretations which would reduce the concept of mutual interest to a simple equation between the guarantees of supply and private inve3tment on the one hand and counterparts in the form of transfers of resources on the other. 37. Perhaps we should seek in the fact that all have not yet been converted to this new approach one of the principal explanations for what you, Mr. President, have called "the depressing way in which initiatives which should have brought us closer to a new economic order have been rendered ineffecfive" [1st meeting, para. 54J in the re- markable speech with which you opened the general debate at this session of the General Assembly. 38. Indeed, in 1974-1975 a new dimension seemed to have been opened up in international relations by the apparent substitution of a policy of co-operation for a policy of - power. Once the immediate danger of an economic crisis had passed, the world relaxed into torpor. Does that mean that the dialogue was purely a matter of the moment or that in our ethnocentricity the crisis of dialogue can only be cvercome through tne dialogue of crisis? The impli- cation would be serious indeed if the universe had to be shaken by a succession of increasingly more serious crises for progress te· be made in dialogue. 39. In any event, the experience of the last few years shows that the elaboration of new formulas or organi- zational structures for dialogue constitutes nothing but ~ derivative of our impotence. Should we not finally admit, 40. Never has political debate on the problems of eco- norm~ development been as intense as it is in the present decade; never has mankind had at its disposal so many means of solving those problems; yet never has it sheltered so often behind what some describe as impotence and others as rejection. The will to break the deadlock already shown by certain developed countries during the present session of the General Assembly may perhaps, after all, provide the long-awaited impetus°to dialogue. May the efforts of the Committee of the Whole not have been in vain. May they above all bring the international community to strengthen its resolve so that the conclusion of the multilateral trade negotiations, the great negotiations that are to take place under the auspices of UNCTAD and the United Nations Conference on Science and Technology for Development, may be milestones on the way to, and guarantee the success of, the special session of ~:le General Assembly in 1980.

I now call on the representative of Tunisia, who win speak on behalf of the Group of 77.

At the end of the thirty-second session of the General Assembly, the spokesman of the Group of 77 came to this rostrum to express the developing countries' relief at the improvement in the prospects for a resumption of the dialogue with the developed countries.4 That feeling of relief seemed justified at the time because of the establish- ment of new machinery within the General Assembly, machinery which, because of a lack of agreement on an appropriate name, was called the "Committee of the Whole" or The Committee Established under General Assembly Resolution 32/174". 43. Our relief was all the more justified because on the eve of the last session of the General Assembly there was almost total stagnation in the international negotiations on the major economic problems, and there was fear in each of our countries that confrontation would prevail in inter- national economic relations. Indeed, the Paris Conference- in which many of us had, rightly or wron31Y, pla<eed great hopes-had just concluded its work with a balance-sheet which was, to say the least, disappointing. The resumed thirty-first session of the General Assembly,5 during which we had tried to save the dialogue, had succeeded only in confirming the inertia. That is why the feeling of relief and encouragement among the developing countries at the end 4 See OfficUzI Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-second Session, Plenary Meetings, 109th meeting, paras. 16-38. 5 Ibido, Thirty-first Session, Plenary Meetings, 108th and 109th meetings. 44. Those have been the basic principles behind the attitude of the Group of 77 during the past year, in all the international negotiations. However, almost no decisive progress was made in the negotiations in various inter- national bodies. That only aggravated the already extremely grave problems in the world economic situation, par- ticularly in the situation in the developing countries. 45. The Committee of the Whole was established for the purpose, amm,g others, of "resolving difficulties in nego- tiations" and "facilitat.ing and expediting agreement on the resolution of outstanding issues" [resolution 32/174, para. 4 (b) and (c»). But from the very outset the Com- mittee was confronted by difficulties that prevented it from discharging the functions assigned to it by the General Assembly. First, it was argued that there was a lack of high-level representation from the developing countries and that this could make the Committee's work less effective. Then, the moment there was even a semblance of progress in the Committee's work, several of our partners-and not the least important-began systematically to question the Committee's terms of reference, going so far as t( challenge the methods of work normally used by all subsidiary organs of the General Assembly. 46. It was clear, however, that the real problem was not the level of representation-although the presence of high- level representatives would certainly have been desirable-or the terms of reference, or even the methods of work that had very wisely been proposed by the Chairman of the Committee. Rather, the basic problem was the refusal of most of the developed countries, and particularly the principal industrialized countries, to commit themselves seriously to the path of the restructuring of international 47. In fact, these events in the Committee of the Whole were another reflection of an attitude that is evident everywhere else and that, regrettably, is only too familiar to the developing countries, which have been struggling against it for decades. How else can one explain the ease' with which the international community was made to lose a precious year through these efforts to ensure that the Committee's work did not "infringe" the "competence" of certain institutions, instead of using this valuable time for the purpose of "facilitating and expediting agreement on the resolution of outstanding issues", as the General Assembly clearly requested the Committee to do when it established this highly representative Committee, whose special nature the developed countries were the first to recognize. How can the developing countries be expected not to believe that this concern was the result of a desire to keep the bulk of the international negotiations within the structures where the third world plays a rather limited role? How can the developing countries be expected not to believe that the basic motive of that attitude is a desire to avoid the adoption of fundamental reforms in the world economic system, with the genuine participation of the third world? And, fmally, how can we be expected not to believe that the acceptance by certain industrialized coun- tries of the establishment of the Committee of the Whole was based only on a desire to cover up their true intentions by agreeing to a framework which, it is true, would involve the participation of high-level officials but which would result in sterile deliberations because it would not be able to come to any conclusion that would entail responsibility on the part of anyone? 48. In those drcumstartces, it is not surprising that the Group of 77 refused to go on ~t~cepting a situation whose prolongation could only delay serious negotiations, not only in New York but also in such technical bodies as UNCTAD and UNIDO. 49. The Committee, thanks to the resolute efforts and skill of its Chairman, Mr. Idriss Jazairy-to whom we wish to pay a special tribute-and thanks also, we must recog- nize, to the spirit of compromise shown by the large majority of its members, was on the point last month of clarifying the pressing question of its terms of reference and, thus, of being able to pursue its discussions on substance. Unfortunately, the delegation of the United States was not able to confirm its acceptance. That led necessarily to the sm:pension of the Committee's work and recourse to the authority of the General Assembly to clarify the Committee's terms of reference once and for all. The Group of 77 also wished the Assembly to debate this question in its plenary meetings in order to place the emphasis on the highly political importance of the North- South economic negotiations and to draw the attention of Governments and world public opinion to the great dangers that would result from the failure of the efforts to breathe new life into the dialogue. 50. We are happy to note that, with the goodwill of all, intensive consultations have made it possible to find \ ) 1 - t II : 5i. The Assembly will nevertheless note that the con- sensus will not bear only on the terms of reference of the Committee. The resolution advocated by the Group of 77 will serve in particular to confirm the intention of all States Members to make determined efforts to enable the Com- mittee to make real progress on the questions submitted to it, because that ultimately is the essential condition for the success of the dialogue and the negotiations which we expect and which should bring us out of the stagnation that at present prevails in the world economic situation. 52. Indeed there is stagnation. It is caused by economic structures established by the industrialized countries, in particular by the countries with market economies. Some wish to attribute the present situation to certain circum- stantial events, but it remains true that the structural imbalances that have been inherited from the colonial era, are being perpetuated by the policies pursued by the developed countries, which affect not only tht ir own economies but equally, and in most cases most setiously, those of the developing countries. 53. Many develQped countries are expressing concern at the low growth rate of their economies, economies to which they do not dare to give sufficient impetus because they fear that that would aggravate inflationary trends. They have come to attempt, with unclear success, to inject small doses of buJgetary, fiscal and monetary reform measures internally and to find a remedy to the extremely prudent and suspicious attitude of pr'vate investment. 54. Internationally, the main industrialized countries with market economies try to set up medium-term "scenarios" for what is called "co-ordinated growth" in the hope of introducing a certain "order" into their economies. Those countries maintain that the beneficial effect will auto- matically be transmitted to the developing countries. 55. 1n the meantime the industrialized countries deem it justifiable and indeed necessary to ensure recovery of their growth and lessen unemployment, to impose increasingly heavy restrictions on imports from the developing coun- tries. They thus lose sight of the fact that those imports affect only very slightly, not to say infmitesimally, their-· employment market and are certainly not responsible for the stagnation in their production. Rather, that stagnation is due to the structure of their production and the economic policies they follow. 56. The industrialized countries with market economies adjust to an international monetary situation that is increasingly confused, which means that speculators make enormous profits, and this further aggravates the im- balances in trade, thus benefiting the strongest and in- creasing uncertainty as to the revenue the developing countries may expect from the sale of their products, and in particular their raw materials. 58. Nevertheless the developed countries should perhaps begin to ask themselves whether the third world, which at present abrorbs 25 per cent of their exports, will be able or willing to continue to increase its indebtedness to support their economies and ultimately the present economic order by contributing to circumstantial remedies when it is above all a crisis of structures. 59. In the meantime, and as one of the most urgent remedies, all protectionist measures must be removed, particularly those imposed on trade coming from de- veloping countries. This action must be accompanied by adequate industrial adjustments in the developed countries so that they will stop protecting non-competitive sectors, which is contrary to all economic laws and to the harmonious development of world trade and is detrimental to the recovery of the growth rates of the developed countries themselves. 60. It is also urgent and necessary to introduce more order into the international monetary system so that it will be an instrument of growth for all COUI~tries and not an instru- ment for domination in the hands of a very small minority. 61. It is essential to ensure for the developing countries remunerative prices for their products, and in particular for their raw materials. It is also essential to allow the developing countries to play their proper role in world industrial and agricultural production. It is no less essential to increase the transfer of real resources to the developing countries in accordance with internationally defined objec- tives and to implement adequate action to resolve the specific and urgent problems of certain categories of developing countries. 62. Those are only some of the most important aspects of the complete programme that must be applied energetically and promptly. 63. This complete programme was defined at the sixth special session and was later elaborated in several inter- national conferences and meetings. It is a programme that advocates structural solutions for structural problems. It is a programme which, when applied, will reflect the true sense of interdependence so frequently evoked in our debates: interdependence among nations equal under the law, evolving in a world governed by an economic system that is not intended to favour the strong to the detriment, of the weak, but will give all equal chances for harmonious development. 64. That would give interdependence its real meaning. That is why the developing countries have for years, and in 65. The Committee of the Whole, to which we hope to give new life with clear -and unchallenged tenns of reference, is only one of the forums in which the dialogue can take place. But that forum should be important. Its work should be considered complementary to the valuable work being cune in other bodies, which should therefore assist the Committee, from which they know they have nothing to fear. 66. it is progress made in all international forums, including the Committee of the Whole, for the establish- ment of a new international economic order, that will ensure the success of the special session of 1980. That session, at which we expect to adopt a new international development, strategy, should constitute, not the beginning of joint action, but an extension of that action, because the problems are too urgent to be allowed to suffer from continual postponemep is from one international strategy to another. A strategy is not an end in itself but a coherent instrument laying down measures with definite deadlines and scope. Those measures should be included within the general framework of the principles and objectives of the new international economic order and should not serve to define other principles and global objectives the effects of which on the readjustment of international economic relations may be questionable. In any case, such global objectives cannot gain the necessary credibility as long as the objectives of the new international economic order are ignored. 67. At the same time, the objectives of this order cannot be attained by partial, limited and often vague measures or by measures tied to numerous conditions which are decided upon under the pressure of events and of the international situation, and are sometimes presented as major changes in the position of one cr other important developed country. While giving those decisions the attention they deserve, we continue to appeal to the industrialized countries to enter into serious negotiations and an honest dialogue with us in order to restructure international economic relations, for the benefit of all. International conferences will not be lacking in the coming year. Let us hope that what we have lacked so far, the political will of those who have the power, will be present this time. 68. Mr. President, this debate under your guidance-consti- tutes a step in the right direction because it opens up prospects of substantive work and it reveals an evolution in the political attitude of the developed countries. 69. I should like to end my statement on that optimistic note.

The General Assembly has decided to bring 71. No less significance should be given to this debate, because in this lofty forum where it is held our action cannot be circumscribed to dealing with a mere procedural incident. We must deal with the substantive problem, of which this is only the most recent and most disquieting expression. 72. Because this so-called procedural accident has served to bring to light in the loftiest international forum the crisis of a situation which is faced ever more openly by developed and developing countries, it must accordingly be assessed in the perspective of its historical context so as to give the Committee of the Whole the exact dimension of the responsibility entrusted to it by the General Assembly. 73. Far from being an isolated and independent fact, the problem we face is the climax of a succession of failures and frustrations which clearly reveal that the political commitments entered into since the sixth and seventh special sessions of the General Assembly are not being honestly complied with, and that the historical course which the General Assembly thought it had set is being distorted so as to prevent at all costs the introduction of the structural reforms necessary for the establishment of the new international economic order, which is the key and unavoidable element of that commitment, but which today it would appear that we only agree to use as headings for the preambles of rhetorical resolutions. 74. Since then, as has already been stated by the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole and the Chairman of the Group of 77, far from any progress being made in complying with those commitments, there has been a collapse, suspension or stagnation of the various stages in which, according to those special sessions, deeds should have reflected our words, for we had indicated "Qur united determination to work urgently for the establishment of a new international economic order" {resolution 3201 (S-VI)] and to set in motion a set of urgent and effective measures to achieve that purpose, as the Secre- tary-General said at the beginning of the work of the Committee. 75. Indeed, after two sessions which were characterized by a constant absence of results, the negotiations on the common fund had to be suspended in December last. Individual negotiations on the 15 products agreed on after difficult discussions at the fourth session of UNCTAD in Nairobi have made scant progress and only one agreement, the International Sugar Agreement, has been renegotiated with the well-known practical effects. The resumed thirty- first session of the General Assembly convened especially for that purpose could not even reach agreement on the evaluation of another great failure: the deadlock in the Paris Conference. The United Nations Conference on the 76. It is not our intention to try to ascribe responsibility for this situation to any given country because, with a few honourable exceptions, the statements made by the indus- trialized countries in the general debate at this thirty-third session of the General Assembly have been neither as clear nor as forthright as they s}l.ould have been regarding the necessary recognition of the genuine characteristics of the Committee, nor has there been acceptance of the political powers vested in it by the General Assembly. 77. We therefore appreciate the intellectual honesty of those who have stated their reservations frankly and sincerely and have put forward their positions clearly, however contrary they may be to our own, because this attitude is sounder and more honest in a debate of this kind, and it is required of all-and I repeat all-since in this struggle for international justice no one can be neutral, in our view, but must make a clear and defmite pronounce- ment on the nature and functions of the Committee of the Whole. 78. It is essential to know with certainty where we stand, what ground we are on and, finally, what we are to expect from a negotiation which, baitered by failure and dis- appointment, is increasingly seen with growing distrust and suspicion by our own peoples and is an endless delaying and evasive game, which, as has been incessantly repeated here, is arousing bitter feelings of frustration, hatred, and disenchantment. 79. This game has been taking various forms. At one time it is argued that no political decisions can be adopted because the problem had not been sufficiently studied by the technical exp~rts. May I say in passing that this is an argument which has been repeated for 20 years, but when the matters are brought to technical forums, they have not the political capability to decide. 80. At another time the pretext is that the item cannot be decided in one forum because it is within the competence of another where, naturally, no decision is taken either. 81. We are told that this.time or that time is regrettably, not the right time because it coincides with the elections in some developed country and the outgoing Government cannot adept decisions which, of course, may not be accepted by the incoming Government. 82. At other times the economic recession is blamed for the inability to take the measures that are called for.by the developing countries, but they are exactly the same measures which no one wished to take at times of extreme prosperity. 84. Only the adoption of certain measures of the moment, l:.Jch as the partial and selective debt canceHation, alleviates this negative balance of structural measures, although we still have not the participation of the major creditor countries, a fact which further emphasizes the courage of the gesture of the countries which did take this initial step. 85. I know that the professionals of self·interested optimism will say that this is L very negative view. But I also know that in the conscience of each reprf~sentative the objective realism of this situation is beyond question. It has been the unaltering characteristic of the long and painful North-South negotiation, for-and may I quote, Mr. Presi- dent, from your brilliant speech of last year, when you addressed the General Assembly as ForeiJn Minister of Colombia- "While international organizations devise, without in- surmountable difficulties, important concepts in matters of political democracy-as in the case of the protection of human rights, the struggle against racial discrimination, or thl: equal representation of States-on the other hand obstacles systematically arise whenever the powerful vested interests of a small group of affluent societies are involved, as for them the concepts of equality, equity and human rights are subjects that can be, and in fact are, excluded from the economic sphere, deemed by them to be a reserved area inequalities, the predominance of power and the maintenance of the privileges and advan- tages acquired under the old international economic order."6 86. Therefore, our peoples-who increasingly and more clearly perceive how scant are our results, which are fragmentary, partial, tardy and lacking greatness-know as well as we that what is at stake is not a technical procedure to bring the Committee of the Whole out of its present deadlock. 8? The substance of what is before this Assembly is to face its own responsibility in conducting and supervising negotiations for the establishment of the new order in accordance with the politiCal commitment entered into. This requires recognizing that the Committee of the Whole, which the Assembly established to that cnd, has the power which will enable it to discharge this task and reaffirming its terms of reference as the body conceived and established to give dynamism to, supervise and monitor the glo~al development of that process-in other words, to be a bod¥ for political impetus and evaluation in the North-South dialogue, and therefore its central political forum. 6/bid., Thirty-second Session, Plenary Meetings, 21st meeting, para. 205. 89. This is where there arises the question of the terms of reference of the Committee of the Whole and its rules of procedure, which cannot depart from those which normally govern the other bodies of the General Assembly. It is obvious that, as in the other bodies, we should strive to arrive at a consensus as long as it is honest and fruitful. But we cannot renounce our exercise of political respon- sibilities, which are inherent in our capacity as repre- sentatives of our peoples, which has been conferred upon us by our peoples and which we owe solely to them. 90. It is high time that we should denounce the dangerous trend in this Organization to convert our right to vote into a bad word and the exercise of that right into an incorrect, reprehensible action. We fail to see why we should automatically accept the need for unanimity, which in fact extends to other bodies a veto which we rightly try to eliminate here. 91. On this basis we must recognize the true nature of the Committee of the Whole as a boay for political control and monitoring in order to give effective impetus to the global march of the North-South negotiation. The Committee must therefore have the necessary powers and be governed by the normal rules of procedure. Only thus will we find it possible to reach an agreement which will enable us to proceed along the difficult road of no return on which we have embarked. 92. Let us not think, however, that if we resolve this incident we will over.come the problem, nor that we shall always be able to solve it by procedural means. If we here believe that our ardent efforts to find the saving formulas of consensus are brilliant and successful diplomatic exer- cises-althoug.h frequently those exercises are purely gram- matical-the fact remains that at the cost of diluting our positions to accommodate the other side and by combining ambiguity with generality in the search for compromise, we end up by approving innocuous texts having no substance or content. Those documents as our people see them-and they follow this interminable debate anxiously in the light of their ever-growing needs-are devoid of all meaning and are virtually blank pages, formulas that cannot advance us towards effective solutions, and that year after year are repeated in one form or another but can in no way contribute to improve the precarious living conditions or brighten the sombre perspectives imposed on the sub- sistence of those people by a world order still based on exploitation and injustice. 93. I should like to add that the arduous work which is being done to prevent the interpretation of the terms of reference from being part of the consensus which was in the 95. Let us trust that the historical sense and political vision required by the reality of interdependence will prevail and that the Assembly will be equal to the responsibilities which it placed upon itself by entrusting to the Committee of the Whole, not the functions of a more or less academic talking forum, but the transcendental role of giving impetus to the process of introducing profound changes, of making the urgent corrections of a situation which the impatience of the world will not tolerate because it has been subjected to economic oppression for too long. It is necessary to preserve the prestige and authority of the United Nations that are essential if it is to fulfil its true mission in this field. 96. With this hope the delegation of Peru reaffirms its desire to arrive at understanding and co-operation, and in this spirit we are prepared to participate in a consensus that will immediately solve the procedural problem and open new opportunities for concerted and fruitful action within the Committee of the Whole, and thus make it possible for the General Assembly, which established the Committee for that purpose, to discharge its central role in the political supervision and evaluation of the North-South negotiating process and in implementing the political and moral commitments entered into for the establishment of a new international economic order which will ensure prosperity and justice for all nations.

I call on Mr. Anwar Sani of Indonesia, who will speak as Chairman of the Asian group of States.

I should like at the outset to thank the Chainnan of the Committee of the Whole, Mr. Jazairy of Algeria, for his informative statement on what has taken place in the work of the Committee since its establishment. We deeply appreciate his construc- tive leadership and his dynamic contribution to the work of the Committee during a very difficult period. 99. The Chairman of the Group of 77, Mr. Mestiri of Tunisia, has eloquently elucidated the underlying consider- ations of why we are meeting today in this plenary meeting of the Assembly. We are indeed deeply concerned at the slow pace with which the North-South dialoguf'i is pro- ceeding. We are firm in our belief that the United Nations should be provided with a central body whi~h would have the right to bring together the various elements involved in order to move towards the creation of a just and equitable international economic system through the establishment of the New International Economic Order. 100. We are meeting today in an international environ- ment beset by an aggravation of adverse trends in the world 101. It should be recognized that the present adverse situation is structural in nature and can only be solved through fundamental structural changes in the international economic order. This perception found its expression in the' Declaration and Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order [resolutions 3201 (S- VI) and 3202 (S- VI)]. The various negotiations and dialogues that were undertaken since the seventh special session of the General Assembly have produced only limited results and at the present stage give us cause for serious concern. The whole series of the North-South negotiations is moving at a painstakingly slow pace and seems to be inconclusive. , 102. The Negotiating Conference on a Common Fund, despite nearly two years of intensive efforts, had to be suspended because of lack of agreement on the funda- mental elements of the fund. The negotiations on individual commodities has been disappointing. The time~limit set in UNCTAD resolution 93 (IV)8 for the conclusion of the negotiations for individual commodities had not been met and therefore had to be extended. Meanwhile, no adequat( measures have be~n taken to address the problem of access to markets of the developed countries for the manu- facturing products of the developing countries. Instead, a wave of new protectionist measures by the developed countries is surging, hampering the ability of the d~veloping countries to the exports of semi-manufactures and manu- factures in which they have a comparative advantage. 103. The multilateral trade negotiations, which were aimed at securing additional benefits for the international trade of the developing countries through specific and differential treatment, have yielded only limited results in terms of securing tariff and non-tariff benefits for the developing countries. 7 See World Development Report, 1978 (Washington, D.C., The World Bank, August 1978), p. 33. 8 See Proceedings ofthe United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, Fourth Sesfdon, vol. I, Report and Annexes (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.76.II.D.I0 and corrigendum), part one A. 105. The problem of debts, partiCularly for the poor developing countries, has become increasingly acute in recent years. The W01:1d Economic Survey indicates that service payments alone amount to almost $35 billion in 1977 for the developing countries as a group.9 106. In view of the magnitude of the debt service burden, particularly for the least developed among the developing countries, the provision of financial resources on terms and conditions commensurate with the structural rigidities of their economies has assumed critical importance. The reorganization of debts and the retroactive adjustment of debts as agreed in principle at a special session of the Trade and Development Board has not yet been fully imple- mented. 107. We would like, however, to welcome in this con- nexion the action taken by several developed countries in providing debt relief in the form of grants, and so forth. Solutions for the problems I mentioned earlier should be seen within the framework of the many links between the present world economic problems and the existing disequi- librium in international trade, international finance and the international division of labour. 108. It is becoming more apparent that the rapid progress of the developing countries has a positive impact on growth and employment in the developed countries. The export of manufactures from developed countries to developing countries accounted for a substantial part of the total exports of the developed countries. According to the latest figures available to my delegation-that is for 1975-it was 30 per cent of their total exports of manufactures, namely $123 billion, in comparison with exports of $26 billion from the developing countries to the developed countries. Interdependence has become an inescapable reality. 109. It is therefore urgent that the imperatives of inter- ' dependence should be translated into policy measures of operational significance. The Ministers for Foreign Affairs 9 SCe World Economic Survey, 1977 (United Nations Publication, Sales No. E.78.II.C.l), p. 5. 110. It is the fervent hope of my delegation that this session of the General Assembly will be able to ensure that all members of the international community will demon- strate the requisite political will to enabie those conferences to be concluded successfully and the' Committee of the Whole to function effectively. 111. Mr. Justice Abdur Rahman CHOUDHURY (Bangla- desh): Following the abrupt suspension of the resumed first substantive session of the Committee of the Whole, which was established under General Assembly resolution 32/174, the deCision to discuss the interim report of the Committee [A/33/34] directly in the plenary meetings of the Assem- bly as a priority item reflects the overriding importance the international community attaches to the work of this Committee. 112. It was only a year ago that the General Assembly established the Committee after hard and long negotiations extending over weeks. The resolution establishing the Committee clearly affirmed that the Committee should not only evaluate progress towards the implementation of decisions taken by the international community in various forums on the establishment of the New International Economic Order but also make an active search for the concrete solution of problems still outstanding, and as far as possible seek new avenues. to promote development and international economic co-operation. In view of its global scope, the measures recommended by the Committee in various interdependent fields of co-operation would rein- force one another and thus. set in motion irreversible dynamics of progress. The Committee was designed to bring together various elements in the process of establishing the New International Economic Order and to work in close collaboration with all other institutions at the international ievel and to support and supplement their efforts. 1.13. In the negotiations leading to the establishment of the Committee last year, we could discern a certain evidence of resistance to having such a body entrusted with real responsibility for monitoring progress on the imple- mentation of agreements and for negotiating the conclusion of agreements on outstanding issues for an expeditious establishment of the New International Economic Order. However.. the consensus that emerged in the end was interpreted by my delegation as a constructive reaffirma- tion by the member3hip of the United Nations of the supreme role of this Organization in this most cruGial area of our concern and of the shared determination to place the Paris~ in which only a handful of developed and developing countries, none from the socialist bloc, participated- designed to bring the discussions back to the United Nations. The resolution establishing the Committee decided to devote a third special session to international economic issues in 1980, with a view to elaborating the international development strategy for the 1980s. The importance attached to this event was reflected in the decision by the Assembly to entrust the Committee of the Whole with the preparation of that special session. It was also the first time in United Nations history that a Committee composed of all Member States was charged with working continuously on the issues of development and international economic co-operation. That decision indeed imparted to the North- South dialogue a truly universal character. 115. It did not, however, take long to L.nd out that an underlying divergence of a fundamental nature persisted in dividing the international community regarding the func- tions and competence of the Committee. The divergence came to the surface during the first substantive session of the Committee~ held in May of this year, and the consensus that seemed to have emerged in the deliberations at that session on the seriousness of the problems confronting the world economy was vitiated by an inconclusive debate on the question of the Committee~s functions and resulted in the suspension of its work. The efforts to deal with the vital subject of the transfer of real resources to the developing countries was frustrated. Subsequent intormal endeavours by the Chairman of the Committee to overcome the differences also did not bear fruit. It was evident that some developed countries were not prepared to engage in meaningful negotiations or to take fundamental decisions. Against that background, it was not possible even to resume the inconclusive first session of the Committee in Septem- ber-and hence~ to the regret of us all, the interim report. 116. We are grateful to the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Idriss Jazairy, for his comprehensive exposition of the work of the Committee in his introductory statement. We should like to place on record our sincere appreciation of the great qualities of leadership and dedication which he brought to bear on the conduct of the affairs of the Committee, both during its sessions and in the intervening period. We pay him an unqualified tribute. In the face of extreme difficulties he has been unswerving in his con- fidence in the role and purpose of the Committee and has justified the trust the members reposed in him. 117..The Committee has failed to achieve the results expected of it. Let us now bury the hatchet and proceed afresh. Perhaps we expected too much of th~ Committee too soon. Perhaps we failed to appreciate thai, for those who were used to administering unilateral injunctions in their dealings with other countries, the concept of demo- cratic decision making that the functioning of the Com- mittee entailed was too revolutionary. We for our part~ 118. We appreciate the fact that the existence of a dialogue between the developed and the developing coun- tries demonstrates an awareness of the community of interests generated by global interdependence. At the same time~ we also realize that the majority of the developed countries came to the negotiating table~ not so much moved by the plight of the poor nations~ as'driven by the plight of their own economies and by the unprecedented dislocations in international economic relationships. That is why the developed countries were inevitably preoccupied with safeguarding the flow of supplies of raw materials and oil. The developing countries~ however~ refused to discuss that problem independently of fundamental institutional re- forms involving the transfer of real resources from the developed to the developing countries~ the restructuring of the world monetary system and of international trade~ the stabilization of commodity prices at eqUitable levels and the linI,..ing of those prices to prices of ,he manufactured goods produced by the industrialized countries~ the elabo- ration of a code of conduct for the transfer of technology from the rich to the poor nations and the right of n:"tions to control and expropriate foreign-owned property and enterprises in accordance with their own laws. 119. The Declaration and Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, adopted at tI sixth special session in 1974, incorporated all those elements, and more, of the demands of the developing countries. The Charter of Economi<rRights and Duties of States, adopted by the General Assembly at its twenty-ninth session, laid the foundations of the New International Economic Order. Subsequently at its seventh special session~ convened the following year, the General Assembly unanimou~ly set in motion the process of the implementation of agreed measures in important areas of development and international economic co-operation for the establishment of the New International Economic Order~ an order to be shorn of the elements of exploitation and to be based on equity ~ justice ~ sovereign equality, global interdependence, shared aspirations and genuine co-operation among all nations. We welcomed the results of the sixth and seventh special sessions as expressions of the collective resolve to reinterpret North-South relationships in the context of the legitimate demands of the third-world countries and a commitment to proceed on the basis of that -. interpretation. The programme indeed broke ground in the active search for a new system of economic relationships that would provide improved opportunities for the world's millions who now live on the margin of absolute poverty and for over 100 Member States having serious economic difficulties and an otherwise sombre future. 120. Today, more than four years since the adoption of the Programme of Action~ the international economic scene suggests more or less the same deplorable state of affairs as at the beginning of the dialogue. The developing countries continue to suffer from the adverse effects of fluctuations 121. The need for the New International Economic Order is real and urgent. Today, as much as 40 per cent of the world's growing population subsists in conditions of depri- vation, undernourishment, poor sanitary conditions insuffi- cient or non-existent employment opportunities, a polluted environment and less than minimal health and social services. Two thirds of mankind subsist on less than 30 cents a day. Seventy per cent of the children in the developing world suffer from malnutrition. The world's resources are used so irrationally ·that industrialized coun- tries consume about 20 times more resources per capita than the developing countries. Precious food-stuffs are wasted, others left unexploited. The world community must create a new equitable and just order embracing all peoples and all societies. 122. The pressing, unparalleled problems confronting the rich and the poor of the world are not separate and cannot therefore be solved in isolation. The present crisis in the world economy and in relations between nations is a crisis of international structures. Marginal changes will not suffice. What is required is fundamental institutional reforms based upon the recognition of a common end and mutual concern. What is required is a new international economic order that will benefit all. 123. The New International Economic Order is the item that is most intensely debated by the international com- munity today. Judging by the number of major inter- national policy statements, declarations, resolutions, studies, reports and activities of various United Nations agencies, programmes and organs, it is the number one issue for negotiation and resolution by the world's policy- makers. Important issues such as the transfer of technology, energy, food, the oceans, outer space, water and habitat all come under the general umbrella of the New International Economic Order when they are actually being negotiated. All the United Nations world conferences held in the past few years or scheduled for the near future have direct relevance to the New International Economic Order. 124. In the field of human rights, of so much concern to the world community on this thirtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the United Nations, the concept of the New International Economic Order is of the utmost relevance, for it is a direct challenge launched by the international community against the intolerable perversion of social justice reflected in the prevalence of poverty, illiteracy, disease and hunger af- flicting a vast segment of humanity, thus denying them the most fundamental of all human rights-the right to live at a minimum level of human dignity. 125. These years have seen an intensification of discus- sions on issues relating to the establishment of the New 126. Herein we believe lies the crux of the problem. The Foreign Ministers of the 115 States members of the Group of 77, in their declaration less than a month ago [A/33/278J, expressed regret at this continued absence of political will on the part of the developed countries to engage in meaningful negotiations and to come to grips with indispensable structural and other changes in new international economic relations with regard not only to the interests of the developing countries but, indeed, to the future of the world community also. 127. The issues and the stakes are clear. We cannot afford the luxury of protracted deliberations without a definite direction. The Secretary-General, speaking before the Inter- national Chamber of Commerce in Florida, on 1 October, issued a warning to all concerned. He said: "It will certainly be at our peril if we enter the new decade of the 1980s no nearer to a resolution of the fundamental issues than we are today." 128. The process that has been initiated cannot, and must not, be forsaken at this crucial phase of our deliberations. The Committee of the Whole must reconvene at the earliest possible date and take up the substantive issues. We are confident that the necessary will and resolve to proceed together will be forthcoming. 129. Two thirds of mankind, the hungry and impov- erished millions living below the subs2stence level, are looking to this great Ass.embly in the hope that the rich and developed countries that can do so will take practical steps to alleviate their misery. Let us not fail them. Let us not m·inimize the gravity and urgeI\cy of the problem that stares us in the face. 130. We have had enough of discussions, condemnation and sympathy. We must now move forward from dialogue to negotiations, from general principles to specific agree- ments,. from rhetoric to action. If I may say so, we are suffering from an inflation of pious hopes and platitudes and a recession bf concrete actions and results. The pitiable plight of the vast mass of humanity is an affront to hllman dignity and is shocking to human conscience. The widening gap between the rich and the poor nations represents the greatest challenge to the internati(;:'lal community. If peace is indivisible, then the economic prosperity of the world as a whole is also indivisible. If the rich and the developed countries decide to hold on to what they have and to enjoy it in utter disregard for the effect of that policy on others, then I am.afraid this narrow self-interest may well prove disastrous to them in the not-too-distant future. The economies of all countries are now so closely interlinked that none of us should hope to live for ever in splendid isolation while some of us are condemned to inhuman 131. The world is now becoming an increasingly complex place. There are many competing interests to be accom- modated and conflicting philosophies and approaches to be reconciled. We can accommodate and reconcile them only by being honest, understanding and fair with f; ....;h other- the more so with those with whom we disagn'". If we can work as a world community in a spirit of co-cpr~ratiol1and partnership, we can, I believe, if not solve all our problems, at least reduce them to manageable dimensions. For its part, my Government pledges itself to work with others in this spirit and to this noble end.

Speaking on behalf of the European Community and its member States, I wish to state that we take part in this debate and in the consideration of item 58 (a) with a constructive and forward-looking attitude. We share with others the awareness of the importance and Lite delicacy of the matter before us. 133. Let me, at the outset, reaffirm the readiness of the Community to continue to participate in the ongoing North-South dialogue and in meaningful negotiations with the developing countries here in the General Assembly and elsewhere in the United Nations system. In this dialogue, to which we are all committed, the Committee of the Whole has a unique and important role to play. Indeed, when we established the Committee last year, we felt the need to create a new body, a focal point, which would act, with universal involvement, as a key instrument in international economic co-operation and help us to find new ways to broaden the areas of agreement on basic questions. 134. Looking at the report before us, I wish to repeat our regret that the Committee was unable to carry its substan- tive work any further, despite intensive efforts made on all sides before and during its last session to overcome divergencies of views on certain aspects of its mandate. Let me renew our unqualified tribute to the great efforts which, in particular, the Chairman of the Committee undertook in this respect. 135. However, I also wish to repeat our conviction that the work of the Committee so far has not been in vain. Its very existence, indeed, has had a seminal effect on thinking on the North-South dialogue. This can be seen not only from the very high level of the preparations for the Committee's meetings and of the discussions that took place at them, but also from the outcome of such gatherings as the ministerial meeting in June of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and the European Council meeting in Bremen in July. Let me mention in this context important announcements 136. The search for progress in the improvement of the structure of international economic relations is complex and difficult. We believe that the Committee of the Whole can help us in this process. Therefore we sought, during its September meeting, to make our contribution to the efforts to bring all participants closer and to enable the Com- mittee's work to proceed. We firmly stand by the under- standing that was so close to being reached on that occasion. 137. We look forward, Mr. President, to your being in a position to clarify, at the end of our consideration of this item, the mandate of the Committee in order to enable it to carry out its tasks and to exercise a responsible influence on the dialogue and on the ongoing process of strengthening' international economic co-operation.

The circumstances which have led to this debate in plenary meeting, as well as the complex of issues which inform the debate on item 58 (a), to wit, the report of the Committee of the Whole established under resolution 32/174, provide a timely and important opportunity to examine a number of funda- mental questions bearing upon the current dialogue on change in the international economic.system. 139. Four years ago this Assembly, during its sixth special session, and against the background of an impending crisis in the international economic system, adopted the Decla- ration and Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order and thus embarked on a bold and innovative path of international economic co- operation. The Declaration and Programme of Action, quite apart from the iil}portance of their content, also marked a significant development in the perception of the role of the United Nations system itself, since they dared to place faith in the capacity of that system to negotiate fundamental changes in the traditional structure of international eco- nomic relations with a view to the creation of a rational world economic order from which all countries would derive increased economic benefit. 140. Sadly, the results of the negotiations that have taken place in the period that has elapsed since the sixth special session have not borne out this faith in the capacity of the international community to respond positively to that challenge. The recent impasse in the Committee of the Whole, which has provoked the present debate, was merely symptomatic of that larger failure. 141. In the light of the continued failure of the current dialogue to produce positive results, we must seriously examine the validity of the assumption implicit in the 142. It is true that even before the sixth special session there was explicit recognition of the need for the inter- national community to address itself to the problem of under-development and to seek to promote, in the words of the Charter, "social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom". 143. Early recognition was given to that fmportant pur- pose in the three Development Decades that have been proclaimed by the Assembly and in the international development strategies formulated during the second and third. However, it is also true to say that this concern with development and economic progress was based largely on the assumption that the question could be dealt with in terms of incr~mentalmodifications of the existing structure of international economic relations, in which the developed countries exercise an unquestionable dominance and in which the developing countries, largely as a result of past colonial relationships, are confined to the periphery. On the basis of that assumption, the search for consensus on the development issue within the United Nations system, though at the best of times elusive, presented no difficulties of a fundamental character. 144. However, the introduction of the notion of structural change in the international economic system as a pre- condition of development radically altered the frame of reference within which the United Nations system was required to function; and this is at the heart of the difficulties now facing the international community. 145. The problem was, of course, further compounded by the decision of the thirty-second session of the Assembly not only to centre the negotiations on international economic issues within the United Nations system but also to reassert the competence of the Assembly itself as the highest superintending authority in that system through the creation of the Committee of the Whole under resolution 32/174. 146. It is against that background that the options facing the international community must be understood and evaluated. 147. Let us not deceive ourselves. There are two funda- mental issues underlyil!g the present debate: first, the unwillingness of some developed countries to accept the necessity for fundamental structural change in the present order; and, secondly, their reluctance to acknowledge the competence of the General Assembly, and by implication of the Committee of the Whole, to negotiate such changes. 148. Viewed in this perspective the dialogue on funda- mental structural change in the international economic system on which the international community has embarked has, in my delegation's view, tended to ignore the fundamental underlying reality of power, or, more pre- cisely, the present situation of unequal power between the developed and the developing countries. in other words, 149. However, in whatever way that fundamental question is tackled and resolved, it is relevant to note that continued failure on the part of the Members of this Organization to negotiate meaningful structural changes in the present order will almost certainly induce instability in international economic relations which would threaten the well-being of both developed and developing countries. We therefore believe that this in itself is a sufficiently persuasive argument in favour of change. 150. Beyond this, there is the question of the role and competence of the General Assembly as regards dealing with the critical economic issues confronting the inter- national co"mmunity. Though drafted in a comparatively undemocratic age as far as international relations are concerned, the Charter clearly asserts the untramelled competence of the General Assembly in the economic sphere since, unlike the veto-ridden Security Council, which imposes limitations on the powers of the Assembly in the political and security sphere, there is no corresponding limitation on the powers of the Assembly in respect of the discussion of economic issues. This does not mean that the Assembly should abrogate the legitimate functions of other bodies; but in the economic sphere the Assembly stands at the pinnacle of the United Nations system and is the highest expression of the will of the international com- munity in thiS area. 151. Indeed, it would be a retrograde step if we were even to contemplate a departure from this situation which would impose limitations upon the poWers of the Assembly in this sphere at a time when the Organization is striving towards a genuine universality in its membership, and in the light of the critical relevance of economic issues to the very survival of the developing countries. ! 52. Needless to say, the principles which apply to the Assembly apply in large measure to the Committee of the Whole, which was specifically created by this Assembly for the purpose of executing the important functions described in paragraph 4 of resolution 32/174. 153. For this reason, my delegation is encouraged by ·the fact that the Assembly has been able to arrive at a solution that would permit the Committee of the Whole to continue its important work. But even this would be a meaningless achievement unless it is accompanied by a clear and unequivocal.commitment on the part of developed coun- tries to make real progress in the negotiation of funda- mental structural change in the present international economic system, both as an historical imperative and ~s an inescapable moral necessity. 155. In recent years there have been moments for reflec- tion on international economic relations, but never before as during this year, with its climax here in the United Nations General Assembly, the supreme political forum for action by the international community. This is of particular significance for various reasons: first, because it comes immediat\~ly after fruitless efforts to seek agreement be- tween developing and developed countries; secondly, be- cause, while this sterile process was under way, the world economic situation inexorably continued to deteriorate, thus thwarting the improvised recovery plans. 156. Actually, it is not a matter of recovery: the dreams of returning to the "golden era" of the 1950s and 1960s are but dreams. We must wake up. The concept of the new international economic order is neither the result of a theoretical disquisition nor a proposal stemming from a narrow political view; it arises from a perception of the need for change which will brook no delay. It is not the change of one order for another; the present growing international disorder is obvious to everyone, and one would have to be blind or short-sighted not to see that ff the present inertia continues we will quickly fall into chaos. 157. Awareness of this critical situation has become widespread, but we still clearly perceive not only attach- ment to privilege but its abuse as a senseless and false defensive reflex in response to the gravity of the situation. These are vain and counter-productive efforts. The rich countries cannot continue to live beyond their means, squandering their own resources and those of others. 158. It can no longer be claimed that this situation can be overcome, without a concerted effort by all; nor can one ignore the need for the participation of the developing countries. 159. We cannot lay the foundations for effective con- certed action without the decisive factor of confidence. We need to clear the air of invisible but no less disturbing obstacles. The developed countries can no longer appear to be resistant to change; neither can we, the developing countries, appear to be willing to rush headlong into it. 160. Meanwhile, the new international economic order- for that is what is at issue-must harmonize all legitimate interests involved, with particular emphasis on those of the developing countries, in its pursuit of justice and equity. The new international economic order is not a restrictive framework, nor have all its constituent elements been elaborated. It lays down bases and guidelines which provide sufficient leeway for agreements satisfactory.to all parties making up the international community. 161. Moreover, we realize that a transif.onal period is needed, one that we have already embarked upon, in fact, 162. I hope that ultimately ..the determination-which I hope will be confirmed-will prevail that dialogue is preferable to confrontation. But one cannot engage in dialogue for its own sake; the only way to keep dialogue alive is by timely and effective action. Our Foreign Minister, Mr. Simon A1berto Consalvi, emphasized this unequivocally in this very Assembly. The United Nations is the natural framework for dialogue and negotiation to promote the new international economic order. 163. The Committee of the Whole must emerge strength- ened from this trial and fully discharge its mandate. The effectiveness of thr.t organ depends on the political will of its members, which indeed has been lacking in some powerful industrialized countries. In th~ trying period, which we trust we have left behind, the Committee of the Whole demonstrated, despite its universal basis, or perhaps because of it, that it could provide a suitable framework for negotiations. The deadlock of the Committee can in no way be attributed to procedural matters; nor can the question of the respective terms of reference of the Committee of the Whole and other United Nations bodies be considered . critical in this context. They have their own terms of reference in important negotiations regarding the new international economic order, and the action of the Committee could hardly hamper them. On the contrary, the General Assembly, as the central organ of the main forum of the system, should facilitate and strengthen them, in this world-wide negotiation which will ultimately lead to jts special session in 1980, and which we all hope will be a decisive milestone in international cc-operation. It should not give rise to any "game of the forums". 164. The international community cannot afford to fail in this effort. Internal problems are no ground for postpcr.ling international action, without which there would be no real solution to domestic problems. They all have to be dealt with in a concerted and coherent manner; stop-gap meas- ures are not enough. 165. Structural changes are needed. Public. opinion must be fully informed"of the need for them, particularly in the developed countries. For people to understand, the choices are as clear as they are disturbing. To defer the solutions we urgently need would be to incur a far higher sodal cost for each country than the political cost a Government may try to avoid today. 166. Soon we shall have a critical opportunity, which we shall follow most closely, to demonstrate a position consistent with what each of us has been claiming; namely, respect f0r the commitment, entered into at the Conference on In'.ernational Economic Co-operation more than a year ago, to lay the foundations for the common fund, which is a key part of the Integrated Programme for Commodities contained in UNCTAD resdution 93 (IV), to begin to function. 167. Only through specific advances of this kind will it be possible to dispel the malaise and uncertainty prevailing in the international community. 170. The time for action is now. Only together can we counter the threats that loom over all of us and march resolutely towards the new international economic order that the international community so urgently demands. 169. The most serious political problem, and potentially the :nost dangerous, confronting our tormented world is The meeting rose at 5.45 p.m.