A/41/PV.57 General Assembly

26.  THE SITUATION IN AFGHANISTAN AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY (a) REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL UV41/6l9-S/l8347) (b) DRAFT RESOLUTION (A/4l/L.12) (c) REPOR'l' OF THE FIFTH COMMITTEE (A/41/792) Mr. JACOBOVITS de SZEGED (Netherlands): Every day the Soviet Union persists in its military occupation of Afghanistan, which began almost seven years agoi it is violating international peace and security and is further endangering the stability of the region. The exposure of the Afghan people to overwhelming Soviet military might has brought about an exodus of refugees of unprecedented magnitude to neighbouring countries and, as its corollary, an' authentic, fierce and courageo1us popular resistance. This shows clearly that the people of Afghanistan are not prepared to acquiesce in the Soviet domination of their country~ on the contrar~', they are prepared to fight for their independence, for the territorial integrity of their country, and for their freedom, even if that means a great deal of suff(~ring and heavy loss of life. (Mr. Jacobovits de Szeged, Netherlands) As the representative of the United Kingdom has rightly stressed in his statement on behaLf of the 12 members of the European Community, this large-scale military intervention by the Soviet union is livi~g proof of the determination of the Soviet Union to pursue its own ends by the massive and sustained use of military power. We cannot accept the Soviet claim that its troops entered Afghanistan at the express invitation of the legitimate Government in Kabul. This is irreconcilable with the first ~cts at Kabul after the intervention, i.e., the killing of the then President and the installation of a new and compliant regime. There is no legitimate basis whatsoever for the aggressive actions of the SOviet Union. on the contrar.y the fact is that this traditionally non-aligned country, with its own distinctive history, was overrun by its large neighbour to the North. The Heads of State of the Non-Aligned Movement at their recent meeting in Harare expressed their particular concern - and my Government shares this concern - with the situation in Afghanistan and its serious implications for the peace and stability in the region. They reiterated their urgent call for a political settlement based on the withdrawal of foreign troops and on full respect for the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-aligned status of Afghanistan and the strict observance of ~je principles of non-intervention and non-interference. My Government also regards the SOviet occupation of Afghanistan as an impediment to global detente. In successive years, since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the General Assembly has passed by an overwhelming majority resolutions calling for the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Afghanistan and for a political settlement. The implementation of this resolution is long overdue. The Soviet Union is refusing to recognize the competence of the Assembly. The overwhelming majority by (Mr. Jacobovits de Szeged, Netherlands) which the successive resolutions on this subject have been adopted in this Hall show that the international community - just like the majority of the Afghan people themselves - is not prepared ever to accept the massive intervention ana occupation of Afghanistan by Soviet troops. The wholesale destruction and devastation visitec upon the country also has serious repercussions beyond Afghanistan's borders. Pakistan has suffered incursions of its airspace and attacks and bombings upon its territory, resulting in the loss of many lives. The Netherlands has unequivocally condemned these violations of Pakistan's sovereignty. The neighbouring States of Pakistan and Iratl have had imposed upon them the enormous burden of sheltering millions of Afghans, for whom seeking refuge across the border was and is tite only way to escape the continuous war.fare. The Netherlands wishes to pay tribute to the efforts made by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Committee of the Red Cross (IcaC) and other international agencies to alleviate the situation. They have been aided in their work ~ the nations of refuge and by many foreign countries, including the Netherlands, that have provided humanitariun assistance to those people. Inside the country popular resistance is repressed with a callous disregard of the most elementary principles of human rights. AB stated in the report on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan by the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Ermacora, the situation of human rights has not changed for the better. The number of refugees is still rising and in February 1986 reached a total of 5 million; the practice of torture continues and more death sentences have been carried out. The report details massacres of the civilian population, the use of anti-personnel mines, looting, the methods of retaliation used and the disproportionately heavy (Mr. Jacobovits de Szeged, Netherlands) bombardment of villages, and it is critical of the prison conditions of political prisoners. Th~ Soviet Union, as the occupying force, carries a heavy share of the responsibility for the appnlling human ri~hts situation in the country. The endeavours by the SecretarY'-General and hiS Personal Representative, Mr. Cordovez, to bring about a negoUated settlement on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions are firmly supported by the Netherlands. We have noted in the report of ti~e Secretary-General that tangible progress has been made during the past year and that substantive problems could be tackled. At the same time the Secretary-General observes that a sense of urgency and a readiness to conclude a negotiated settlement is lacking. The Netherlands Government wishes to stress the fact that it is prima~ily the Soviet union that ~ould break the present impasse by clearly stating its intention to withdraw within the shortest possible time from Afghanistan. The withdrawal of six regiments, as announced in Vladivostok by General secretary Gorbachev, cannot be regarded as the unequivocal demonstration of political will fundamentally to restore the independence and integrity of Afghanistan that the international community called for in previous years. It is not even a first step, when one realizes the fact that over 110,000 Soviet troops remain in Afghanistan perfectly able to continue their oppression in the same way they have done until now. The way the withdrawal of the six regiments is reported to be implemented only strongly confirms this observation. It is high time for the Soviet Union to show the international community that it respects the united Nations Charter and the purposes and principles embodied in it, not only by words, but by effectively co-operating with the Secretary-General with a view to an early settlement in accordance with the successive resolutions (Mr. Jacobovits de Szeged, Netherlands) of the General Assembly and by withdrawing all its troops from Afghanistan within months from now. Mr. BUCC~ (Italy): In his statement the representative of the United Kingdom has already presented the views of the 12 member States of the European Community on the situation in Afghanistan. The position of my Government is fully reflected in that statement. If I am intervening in this debate it is to reiterate and emphasize the extent of my Government's concern about the continuation of a situation which is unacceptable by all standards of international conduct, a situation which has negatively affected international relations well beyond the region over the last seven years. We are conce~ned about the implications of the Afghan crisis for international as well as for regional security and stability. We are concerned about the immense human suffering which has resulted from the war waged against the Afghan people. We are concerned about the burden this war is imposing on Pakistan, a friendly country whose sovereignty and territorial integrity are being systematically violated and whose development is jeopardized by the appalling economic consequences of the refugee problem. We are also deeply disturbed by the negative effects that the prolongation of the crisis has on the authority and the credibility of the United Nations. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was a major violation of the United Nat~ons Charter and of established norms of international law. Since then the General Assembly, through resolutions supported by overwhelming majorities, has called repeatedly for the withdrawal of foreign' occupation troops from Afghanistan and for the return of that country to its original independent and non-aligned status. Yet seven years later the occupation and the war continue in open defiance of the clearly expressed wishes of the General Assembly and of the international community. (Mr. Succi, Italy) When such' a protracted and major violation of the Charter occurs, when General Assembly resolutions are so disregarded, the Organization as a whole is weakened and all of us stand to lose a lot, including those who bear the responsibility for this situation and whose credibility in addressing world affairs is severely affected as a consequence. It is for those reasons that my Government firmly supports the efforts of the Secretary-General and of his Personal. Representative, to find a just and lasting solution to the question of Afgh~nistan. We regret that progress in the proximity talks has so far been limited and slow, particularly on the key issues of the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan and the implementation of an agreement. There is in our view an urgent need ~or major policy changes on the part of those who bear responsibility for the current situation. We have noted with interest that a number of such significant changes have recently occurred in well-established positions concerning other problems, particularly disarmament problems, and we hope that the same will take place in regard to Afghanistan, because we are convinced that a solution to that question cannot be found by military means and must therefore be sought through a political settlement in accordance with the principles of the Charter and the relevant united Nations resolutions. Meanwhile the General Assembly has the duty to maintain the political pressure which complements the mission of good offices of the Secretary-General. Accordingly my delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution contained in document A/4l/L.l2 and we hope that, as has happened in previous years, the vast majority of this Assembly will continue to support it. Mr. RAVI (India): The General Assembly is once again considering the situation in Afghanistan and its implications for international peace and security. (Mr. Ravi, India) Friendship between the peoples of India and Afghanistan is rooted in history, in geography, in culture and in commerce. The people of Afghanistan are the inheritors of an ancient civilization which has made courage and self-respect the hallmarks of Afghan nationalism. The Afghan people nuat pursue the path of progress suited to their own genius, so that they may contribute effectively to the security and prosperity of their people and of the region as a whole. The Government of India's position on Afghanistan has been made clear on several occasions in the past. In his address to t.he United States Congress on 13 June 1985 Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi stated: "Afghanistan and SOuth-West Asia are on all our minds. Outside interference and intervention have put in jeopardy the stability, security and pro~ress of the region. We are opposed to both foreign presence and pressure. The one is advanced as a justification for the other. We stand for a political settlement in Afghanistan that ensures sovereignty, integrity, independence and non-aligned status, and enables the refugees to return to their homes in safety and honour. Such a settlement can only come through dialogue and a realistic consensus among the parties directly concerned. The united Nations Secretary-General has taken an initiative in this direction. We fUlly support that initiative." Our concern over Afghanistan, and indeed over the region as a whole, is inextricably linked with our own security interests. We are particularly concerned at the introduction of sophisticated weaponry into the region, which not only fuels the arms race but also results in the diversion of the scarce economic resources of the countries of the region away from development. We believe that the only solution to the problem in Afghanistan and South West Asia lies in following a policy of restraint and moderation and pursuing a comprehensive approach. The situation there can be resolved only through an overall political settlement based (Mr. Ravi, India) on the principles set out at the Cor-ference of Foreign Ministers held in New Delhi in February 1981 and reiterated at the seventh and eighth summit meetings of the non-aligned States. We have read with interest the report of the Secretary-General on the situation in Afghanistan (A/4l/619). My delegation is pleased to note that the Secretary-General has pursued with determination his efforts to promote the search for a political solution. The Secretary-General notes in his report: WThere is no doubt that tangible progress has been made during the past year. Procedural questions have been laid aside to enable all substantiv~ problems to be tackled. The four instruments that will comprise the. settlement are virtually complete. Agreement has been reached on a very large number of extremely complex issues, anyone of which could have become a major obstacle to th.e finalization of the settlement. Moreover, as they approach the conclusion of the drafting of the instruments that will comprise the settlement, the interlocutors have become increasingly convinced that it is essenti~ to ensur& that the settlement is broadly supported and effectively implemented - and they are actively engaged in the consideration of practical measures to that end. It should also be recalled that, on the eve of the August round, General Secretary Gorbachev, in a move which he described as designed to speed up a political settlement, announced in Vladivostok the withdrawal of six regiments from Afghanistan, stressing the expectation that this unilateral step would be answered by a curtailment of outside interference. Further, General Secretary Gorbachev supported the efforts of national reconciliation in Afghanistan, including the setting up of a government with the participation in it of political forces ,which find themselves outside the country's borders. w (A/41/6l9, para. 12) (Kr. Ravi, India) we commend the efforts of the secretary-General and those of his Personal Representative, Mr. Diego Cordovez, and we support. their endeavours. It is our understanding that their efforts have the support of the international community. It is in that context that my delegation feels that the approach contained in document A/41/L.12 is less than fUlly constructive and supportive. The draft resolution is along the lines of those adopted in earlier years and ignores the efforts and progress made in the meanwhile. My delegation therefore cannot support the present draft resolution. Mr. LEWIS (Canada): On 24 September last, Mr. Eduard Shevardnadze, Foreign Minist~r of the Soviet Union, addressed this Assembly. In the course of his remarks, to which all of us listened respectfully, he said: "The time has come to learn to call things by their own names. with regard to Afghanistan, a national democratic revolution has taken place there." (A/41/PV.6, P 58). He was immediately followed to this rostrum by sir Geoffrey Bowe, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom, spea~ing on behalf of t~e European Community. At the poillt in his remarks wh'.!n Sir Geoffrey was dealing with the question of Afghanistan, he departed abruptly and spontaneously from his text, fixed his eyes on the seats of the delegates from the Soviet Union and said: R ••• I cannot refrain from observing that ••• the Foreign Minister of the Soviet Union said that IThe time has come to learn to call thirags by their proper names. I I cannot refrain from expressing my astonishment and dismay that the facts which I have just described - the events which have taken place in b~~ past six years in Afghanistan - ware described by the Soviet Foreign Minister as la national, democratic revolution'. If that be their view, then it is not a view that can be shared by the rest of the world." (A/4l/PV.6, p. 72-73) Sir Geoffrey Bowe then returned to his text. And I remember sitting in the Canadian delegation and thinking that it was one of those rare, fleeting moments when the issue was joined with simple, irrefutable clarity. To call what has happened in Afghanistan "a national democratic revolution" is to take language and SUbject it to a kind of Orwellian mutation, so that words are render~d meaningless. It is a linguistic mask designed to hide the brute face of oppression. (Mr. Lewis, Canada) And we all know it. The United Kingdom knows it, Canada knows it, the vast majority of nations in this chamer know it. But nothing changes. And that is the suffooating dilemma of this debate. What can be said tbat has not been said before, by all of us, year after year, in elaborate and angry repetition? Bow do we get these speeches to diminish the tragedy? Bow do we make of this United Nations forum a crucible where progress is real? Canada last year - and indeed, in the five consecutive ye&s before - put its feelings of concern, frustratioin and rage unequivocally on the record. We could do so, in similar terms, again. But perhaps there is a way of coming at the SUbject slightly differently; perhaps in brief recapitulation, it is possible to achieve a slightly different synthesis. To begin with, let us be clear and precise in the use of language. Let us not engage in verbal defoUation. Yesterday, the Soviet Union characterized the events of the last seven years as ml "armed intervention" against the sovereign State of Afghanistan. The mere use of that phrase sets the mind reeling. Whose armed intervention? The Afghan people, the Afghan rebels have engaged in no intervention. You cannot take history and stand it on its head; it is an insult to every country in this Rall. When we speak of "armed intervention" we are talking about December 1979, when the Soviet military Juggernaut rolled into Kabul to instal a puppet fiefdom and subdue an entire people. Yesterday, as well, by the same delegation, we were told that mere discussions of Afghanistan constituted a violation of the United Nations Charter and the rules and principles of international law. I suppose that that is meant to refer to interference in the internal affairs of a Member State. It is exactly the kind of argument which'South Africa makes. But we do not give it any credence in that case; why should we give it any credence in this case? (Mr. Lewis, Canada) We are talking about a premeditated act of military subjugation. How does that harmonize with international law, or with the words in the Charter which instruct Member States to •••• refr~ \ in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or ••• independence ot any State ••• "1 The Charter, when last read by Canada, had no encouraging chapter on territorial amalgamation by force of arms. And yesterday again, to take this question of stra~gled language but one step further, it was argued th~t this debate is designed to destroy the fruits which the revolution has brought to the Afghan people. That was the very phrase: "The fruits". Well, Canada does not know what the Soviet Union has in mind; but for us, as for so many other nations, the fruits of the revolution mean one million Afghans dead. And we must ask, with anguished desperation, for what crime? By what right? What is the end that justifies such means? What revolutionary fruitfulness transforms an entire country into a killing field? I guess that is what makes such an overwhelming majority of nation States so frantic about the horror of Afghanistan. The liquidation of the country and its people knows no end. Every year the situation deteriorates; every year the chronicle grows more grim. Let me try to explain. Last year at this time we knew of the use of booby-trap bombs shaped as butterflies, and the terrible mutilation they inflicted, priiaarily on children. One year later, we have documentary evidence of these devices concealed in pens, cakes of soap, snUff-boxes, match-boxes, even a bundle of bank notes. It is almost inconceivable that in 1986, any invading army, no matter wft the circumstance, no matter what the provocation, would use such weapons against innocent children. But it is being done. It suggests a sickness equivalent to depravity. (Mr. Lewis, Canada) Last year at this time, we had a report from our Special Rapporteur on human rights violatiops in Afghanistan which was a profoundly distressing document, but still tentative in parts. One year later we have a report which is uniformly appalling. In paragraph 78, the Special Rapporteur concludes that the armed conflict n ••• has given rise to so much human suffering that every effort must be made to, end it" (E/CN.4/l986/24). And in paragraph 124, as others have pointed out, the Special Rapporteur comes to the conclusion that a continuation of the military solution "••• will lead inevitably to a situation approaching genocide". Canada cannot think of another report on human rights violations in any individual country which raises the spectre of genocide. Last year at this time we had rumours and impressions of the use of torture. One year later, we have from the United Nations Special Rapporteur concrete evidence of the torture of women in ways which make the blood run cold. Last year at this time, I quoted from Red Cross reports to give a sense of how savage was the military conflict. One year later, the little Red Cross hospitals at Peshawar and Quetta, just insice the Pakistan border, have shown themselves to be consistently packed with the dying, the wounded, the permanently maimed. Peshawar has only 100 beds, Quetta only 60 - very small hospitals. Yet they have been the sites for literally thousands of surgical operations, not to mention servicing some 50 to 70 thousand out-patients. Last year at this time, we heard of the practice of transporting young children - including orphans - abroad for what was appropriately termed ideological education. Now, one year later, we know, categorically, that at least 1,000 children a year, probably more, are sent to the Soviet Union for va~ous periods of time. There is every reason to believe that this is frequently done without either the knowledge or consent of the parents, where parents there are. (Mr. Lewis, Canada) More than that, the United Nations Special Rapporteur has established to his satisfaction that much of the education provided in those areas of Afghanistan within the control of Soviet and government forces, rejects traditional religious, cultural and moral values. As such, it is an explicit and dreadful violation of the international human rights Covenants. Last year at this time, all of us had seen and read the extraordinary, if despairing, Helsinki Watch publication, entitled "Tears, Blood and Cries·: Human Rights in Afghanistan Since The Invasion". One year later, in the interim, we have seen the supplementary volume, entitled "To Die In Afghanistan·, containing a remarkable number of eye witness accounts, all of which attest, unanswerably, to an ugly, inhuman war - a war which has indiscriminately devastated the countryside, decimated the population, and driven thousands more each month out of their own land into Pakistan or Iran. We now know that the day is fast approaching when the nUmbers of refugees outside Afghanistan, and the numbers of uprooted and dispossessed inside Afghanistan, will total more than 50 per cent of the entire popUlation at the time of the invasion. It is beyond human comprehension. Last year at this time, we knew that Pakistan's borders were intermittently violated by selected acts of infiltration and aggression. One year later, today, we know that the pattern has escalated dramatically, as documented in the eloquent speech of the Foreign Minister of Pakistan yesterday when he opened this debate. Canada, along with so many others, expresses full solidarity with Pakistan, as well as our enormous admiration for the humanitarian response to millions of refugees and the stoic resistance to intimidation and subversion. Last year at this time there was no talk of troop withdrawal. One year later, we have witnessed the departure of six Soviet regiments, as announced in the July speech of the Genera! Secretary. It matters little whether this is an elaborate military sleight of hand, or an adroit reshuffling of tanks, or the actual removal (Mr. Lewis, Canada) of men and machines whose presence in Afghanistan mayor may not have been helpful and useful. to them. What matters is that ~ver 110,000 men and all of their collective apparatus of war, remain behind for the systematic purpose of pacification. The world needs BOre than tokens as evidence of good faith. Finally, last year ~t this time, the negotiations conducted by Mr. Diego Cordovez, ~oder ae aegis of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, had not yet reached the moment of truth: the precise question of troop withdrawal. But in the intervening year, with a magnificent and gifted tenacity which we honour and support, the United Nations team focused the parties on the issue. And what happened? Despite the completion of most of the details of the other items of negotiation, the soviet Union would not give a reasonable time-frame for troop withdrawal. It took them only 72 hours to get in. It need take no BOre than a week or two to get out. But if the political will is absent, tillC!n the military might remains. The Afghanistan tragedy is one of the most difficult and gloomy realities of contemporary international politics. When one looks at it, year over year, it presents an unbroken facade of intractability~ \ In Canada, a joint committee of the House of Conunons and Senate, represen~~tiveof all three political parties, recently issued a report on internatior.al relations. In the section devoted to Afghanistan there appears the following unanimously adopted paragraph: "This wholesale destruction of a people is being carried out by the Soviet Union and its puppet regime in Kabul for no other reason than crude geopolitical ambition. The Soviet Union has dispatched over 100,000 of its troops with the immediate aim of violent repression and the longer-term objective of reducing Afghanistan to a SOviet colony. As has happened so often in the history of colonialism, the imperial Power failed to reckon with (Nr. Lewis, Canada) the national spirit and independence of the people. Despite the terrible slaughter, the Afghan people have not been subjugated. Tiley are continuing to fight.- It is the het'oism of that fight which brings us to this draft resolution and our imminent vote. There are two tests confronting the General Assembly. One is for the Soviet union. When the new General secretary of the Soviet Union came to power, we all wanted to believe, and he wanted all of us to believe, that there would be a new face on Soviet foreign policy. Afghanistan scar~ the countenance. The Soviet Union would do itself an enormous favour and do the international community an incalculable boon were it to accept the reasonable contents of this draft resolution, the precepts of the Charter, the clamour of nation States, the cries of the people of Afghanistan, and get out of that country. The second test, however, is for the rest of us. If we can do no more in this arena than to keep the issu~ alive, to keep t1u...J pressure on and to keep the Soviet Union aware of the monumental ignominy of its position until one day that position is changed, then at least let us continue to do it overwhelmingly. There are a few issues in this world which unite virtually all of us. SOuth Africa is one of them, Afghanistan should be another. Even those in nominal ideological alliance with the Soviet Union should on Afghanistan break ranks. It probably will not happen, but it should happen. We are talking about a relatively small country, a terribly vulnerable country, a country which, given any chance, would return to the solidarity of the non-aligned. It is also a country in agony - in agony for no reason, conceivable or defensible, that has ever been plausibly advanced in this Assembly. (Mr. Lewis, Canada) During the course of our intervention last year, I said on behalf of Canada that if we were back again at the same time this year, it would be because the Soviet union continues to believe that nihilism is preferable to negotiation; that butchery is preferable to bargaining. Harsh words, I concede. But we are back again. Hr. IAUTENSCHLAGER (Federal Republic of Germany): The position of the 12 member States of the European Community on the situation in Afghanistan and its implications for international peace and security have been outlined by the Permanent Representative of the united Kingdom in his statement of 4 November. My delegation fUlly shares that position. Nearly seven years have passed since the Soviet Union first occupied Afghanistan. Ever since, Soviet military forces have been present in this neighbouring country of the Soviet Union. For seven years the people of Afghanistan has been courageously defending itself against a well-equipped, highly armed intervention force. (Mr. Lautenschlager, Federal Republic of Germanyj Seven years of Afghan resistance against psychological and physical pressure exerted on the Afghan people to accept a regime installed by force make it abundantly clear that the Afghan people is not willing to submit to a regime which it has not chosen by its own free will. Nevartheless, in flagrant violation of fundamental principles of international law and of its obligations under the united Nations Charter, the Soviet Union continues to station its troops in Afghanistan, thus intervening with military force in the domestic affairs of Afghanistan in order to impose its will on an Islamic country which desires to be an independent, non-aligned State. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany supports the Islamic and non-aligned countries in their efforts to achieve a speedy solution to the Afghan problem which respects the wishes of the Afghan people and puts an end to its long suffering and hardship. Year after year the General Assembly has adopted, by overwhelming majorities, resolutions calling for the immediate withdrawal of the foreign troops from Afghanistan and for an early peaceful political solution to the problem. The Government of the Federal Republic of Germany continues fully to endorse this demand, also taken up recently by the eighth summit meeting of the non-aligned countries, in Harare. The second report on the human rights situation in Afghanistan by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights brought home to us the suffering and plight of the Afghan people. Also, our humanitarian ideals and duties call on us to stand up for the people of Afghanistan. The votes cast in the Commission on Human Rights and on the fortieth General Assembly session's resolution on the human rights situation in Afghanistan speak a clear language. The Federal Government shares the profound distress and alarm of the overwhelming majority of the States Members of the united Nations at the widespread, massive violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms resulting from military rapression and the presence of the foreign forces in Afghanistan. The States neighbouring Afghanistan have accomplished an enormous humanitarian task by accomnK~ating the millions of refugees. Pakistan, which has accepted more than 3 million refugees, bears the brunt. Moreover, it is confronted with armed violation of its frontiers as well as other provocations, to which it has reacted with moderation and prudence. We wish to pay a tribute to Pakistan for this stance. In this context, I should like to state also that my GOvernment, in view of its long-standing friendship with pakistan, and in accordance with the appeal made by the General Assembly in its successive resolutions on the situation in Afghanistan, is providing exclusively humanitarian relief assistance - I stress: humanitarian relief assistance - with a view to alleviating the hardship of the Afghan refugees~ and it will continue to do so. The Federal GOvernment noted with great interest the report of the SecretarY-General, presented to the General Assembly on 18 September, on the mediation efforts of his Personal Representative, Mt. Diego Cordovez. The Federal Government welcomes and supports these efforts, which at present seem to be the only promising way to find an acceptable solution. My GOver.nment shares the SecretarY-General's view that the political will to reach a solution is of the essence and should be forthcoming seon. It calls upon the Soviet Union to act accordingly. My Government noted with interest the recent proposals of the Soviet Union concerning the principles of the non-use of force and a comprehensive system of international security. It is to be hoped that the Soviet union will apply these lofty principles to its own policy in Afghanistan, thus proving by deeds its willingness to respect the independence of smaller, sovereign States, so often invoked by it in other contexts. (Hr. Lautenschlager, Federal RePublic of Germany) The publicly announced withdrawal of six regiments from Afghanistan would, ~~~n if it has been fully car~ied out, constitute only a reduction of about 5 pez cent of the remaining - probably more than 110,000 - Soviet troops. In accordance with the consistently repeated request of the international community of states, we once again call upon the Soviet union to withdraw all its troops from Afghanistan. Finally, we wish to reiterate our hope that all Afghans will soon exercise their right of self-determination in full freedom so that they may lead a life in peace and freedom in that area of the world, where a non-aligned, ind~~endent Afghanistan has an important role to play. Mr. KASEMSRI.(Thailand): The military invasion and occupation of Afghanistan by Soviet forces, in blatant violation of the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of a Member State of the United Nations, pose a serious threat to international peace and security. The situation prevailing in Afghanistan is therefore a matter of grave concern to the international community. That is why the General Assembly has adopted seven resolutions by overwhelming margins calling for immediate withdrawal of the foreign troops from Afghanistan and the urgent achievement of a political solution. Furthermore, the serious concern of the international community over this matter has been reiterated at other international forums, especially the sixteenth meeting of FOreign Ministers of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, held in Fez, MOrocco, in January 1986, and the summit meeting of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries held in Harare, Zimbabwe, in September 1986. At the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly, my delegation stated from this rostrum that the basic principles which have been violated "must govern the orderly conduct of relations between States. They form a vital part of international law, to be regarded as jus cogens and not open to (Mr. Kasemsri, Thailand) selective interpretation. No State can remain indifferent in the face of open and continued ~iolations of those principlese When a Member State of this Organization, particularly one that bears special responsibilities as a permanent member of the Security Council, disregards those princip~es and the resolutions of this Assembly, it seriously undermines the very foundations of this Organization and its ability to maintain and foster international peace and security. "Moreover, the tragic events unfolding in Afghanistan constitute a serious impediment to any improvement in the international climate, and to the restoration of a sense of confidence among the major Powers that is necessary to the process of arriving at common solutions for other pressing global problems." (!L39/PV.60, p. 68-70) (Mr. Kasemsri, Thailand) It is all the more regrettable, therefore, that the repeated demands of the international community have not yet produced the desired result. soviet troops continue their illegal occupation of Afghanistan, thus thwarting the exercise by the Afghan people of their legitimate right of self-determination. The plight of the heroic Afghan people is thus similar to the sUfferings of the peoples of Namibia, Palestine and Kampuchea. The ferocious onslaught by the superior force has killed and maimed one tenth of the population and left a trail of desolation and devastation. While it has not cowed the b~ave resistance fighters, it has brought death and sUffering, particularly among civilians, including women and children. By the same token, Pakistan, as the front-line state, has been compelled to shoulder a heavy burden. The Foreign Minister of Pakistan informed us in his statement yesterday that "During the past year, the air and ground violations from across the border have intensified. In 1986, there have been over 600 air violations and over 100 major ground violations against Pakistan as compared to 197 air violations and 20 ground violations during the previous year. This has been accompanied by a campaign of sabotage and terrorism against innocent Afghan refugees and against innocent Pakistani citizens." (A/4l/PV.55, p. 13) The influx of Afghan refugees to neighbouring Pakistan and Iran has created a gigantic humanitarian problem for those countries and for the international community. Approximately one third of the Afghan population has sought refuge in the two neighbouring countries - over 3 million in Pakistan - thus constituting, in the words of Pakistan's Foreign Minister, "the single largest refugee concentration in the world" (~). Thailand, as a country of first refuge for Kampuchean and other lnde-Chinese refugees and displaced persons, well understands the magnitude and dimensions of the refugee problem now confronting Pakistan and Iran and wishes (Mr. Kasemsri, Thailand) to pay a well-deserved tribute to them for their steadfast commitment to rendering humanitarian assistance to the uprooted Afghang. At the same time, my delegation wishes to express its deep appreciation to the donor countries and the various United Nations bodies and agencies, as well as other humanitarian organizations, f~r their active role in this regard. Thailand's position regard~ng the situation in Afghanistan has been firm and consistent. It is predicated on Thailand's commitment to the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, in particular the principles of respect for the sovereign equality of States, the non-use of force, the peaceful settlement of disputes and the right of peoples to self-determination. Thailand is therefore insistent in its demand for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan and is desirous of seeing a comprehensive political settlement of the problem. Such a settlement should be based on the following elements: the immediate withdrawal of foreign troops~ the exercise of self-determination~ respect for the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-aligned status of Afghanistan~ and the safe and honourable return of the Afghan refugees. MY delegation notes with appreciation the re~rt of the Secretary-General on the situation in Afghanistan (A/4l/6l9). Thailand welcomes the positive deve!opments in the process of negotiations during the past year. We are deeply appreciative of the continuing efforts of the Secretary-General and his Personal Representative, Under-Secretary-General Diego Cordovez. In his report, the Secretary-General makes the following concluding remarks: "The negotiations have at times lacked a sense of urgency and the readiness to conclude the settlement has not always appeared entirely transparent to either side. Mutual confidence, which is important now, and which will be indispensahle if the settlement is to be effectively implemented, will only be (Mr. Kasemsri, Thailand) promoted if the pending provisions are finalized with resolution and without further delay. Bold and decisive steps of national reconciliation will indeed be needed to ensure that the settlement commands the support of all segments of the Afghan people. There ought to be a wider realization in all the concerned auarters that their overriding need is to live together in peace. For that same reason, and as a means of restoring good-neighbourly relations, the Governments of the region should promote the ~inalization of a settlement. All of the above leads m~ to conclude by repeating again that political will is of the essence. The international community undoubtedly expects that it will be forthcoming in the months ahead." (A/4l/6l9, para. 13) We hope therefore that all parties concerned, particularly the Soviet Union, will redouble their efforts to expedite solutions to the most crucial auestions of the time-frame for and modalities of the withdrawal of the foreign troops. Failure or delay in reaching an agreement on these auestions will not only prolong the agony of the Afghan people but also increase the danger to peace and stability in the region and beyond. My delegation has joined with other delegations in sponsoring draft resolution A/4l/L.l2, which was introduced by the Foreign Minister of Pakistan in his eloquent statement yesterday, because Thailand is convinced that the draft resolution provides a reasonable framework for a just and lasting political settlement of the Afghanistan problem. The draft resolution, inter alia, reiterates that the preservation of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence and non-aligned character of Afghanistan is essential for a peaceful solution of the problem. It reaffirms the right of the Afghan people to determine their own form of government and to choose their economic, political and social system free from outside intervention, subversion, coercion or constraint of any kind whatsoever. (Mr. Kasemsri, Thailand} It calls for the immediate withdrawal of the foreign troops from Afghanistan and calls upon all parties concerned to work for ~he urgent achievement of a political solution, in accordance with the pr.ovisions of the draft resolution~ a~ the creation of the necessary conditions which would enable the Afghan refugees to return voluntarily to their homes in safety and honour. We wish to urge the Assembly to adopt the draft resolution by an overwhelming margin in order to stress once again the imPOrtance that the international community attaches to the underlying principles and the urgent necessity of finding a political solution to this tragic problem. Mr. FERM (Sweden): The Swedish Government stands firm in its clear condemnation of the Soviet invasion and continued aggression in Afghanistan. Some time ago a withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan was widely broaacast. Unfortunately, it turned out to be a withdrawal with little significance for the Afghan people and the tragedy of their country. A few thousand Soviet troops le~ving Afghanistan can be regarded only a~ a token gesture. The Soviet invaders are still firmly entrenched in Afghanistan. The world community and the Assembly will therefore be compelled to call once again for their immediate withdrawal. My delegation will vote in favour of the draft resolution before us. We do this because it contains the elements necessary for a peaceful and fair end to the conflict: first, all foreign forces must be withdrawn from Afghanistan; secondly, the right v~ the Afghan people to determine their own form of government must be respected; thirdly, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Afghanistan must be upheld; and, fourthly, the millions of Afghan refugees must be able to return to their hom&~ in safety and honour. It is on the basis of these principles that the Secretary-General has undertaken efforts to achieve a negotiated settlement of the conflict. He has the full support of my Government in these endeavours. I am convinced that the AL~embly will adopt t~e draft resolution by an overwhelming majority, as it has similar draft resolutions in the past. Time and again the General Assembly has taken a clear stancl when countries have viQlated the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of ~ther States. The Assembly indeed serves as the world's conscience in this respect. (Hr. Ferm, Sweden) The Afghan people have been subjected to enormous suffering during the last seven years. Why hav~ they not been able to exercise their right to live in peace and determine their own future? Why are foreign invaders despoiling the Afghan people, the nation's economy' and its very culture? We are still waiting for straightforward and honest answers to these questions. It seems to my Government that the only mistake on the part of·the Afghans is that, because of the course of history, their country is next to a powerful neighbour that flaunts its military superiority without regard to international law or humanitarian considerations. That neighbour was one of the founders of the united Nations and took part in writing the very same Charter the principles of which are now being so flagrantly ignored by the soviet Union. Moreover, the Soviet Union is a permanent member of the Security Council, and the permanent members have been entrusted with a special responsibility for upholding international peace and security. The world has the right to expect such a country to live up to its legal and moral obligations instead of violating the fundamental rules of international relations by resorting to military intervention and invading a small, peaceful neighbouring country under the most artificial of pretexts. The Soviet Union has in the past actively participated in creating and codifying international conventions containing principles designed to prevent certain forms of indiscriminate warfare, such as aerial bombardment and the use of certain weapons that are deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects. The Special Rapporteur has repeatedly reported on the use of aerial bombardment, anti-personnel mines and so-called toy bombs and the wilful destruction of crops in Afghanistan. The world has watched in horror when Soviet troops have committed serious violations of the humanitarian principles embodied in conventions to which the Soviet Union itself is a signatory. (Mr. Ferm, Sweden) Th~ Special Rapporteur has also, in several reports, described gross violations of human rights in Afghanistan, including torture, summary executions and other forms of victimization of the civilian population. My GOvernment condemns these practices. They have added to the sUfferings and hardship to which the Afghan people have been subjected. The scope of the Afghan tragedy is enormous. The vast number of refugees bear testimony to this. perhaps as many as one third of the Afghan population have been forced to flee their homes and their country and take refuge in neighbouring countries. Pakistan and Iran have had to deal with a refugee problem of gigantic proportions and have done so with great generosity. Pakistan has also had its territorial integrity repeatedly and seriously violated as a result of the conflict. The Swedish GOvernment has been a firm supporter of various humanitarian activities carried out by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and by non-governmental organizations to assist the refugees and the neighbouring countries. We have given substantial contributions to some of these efforts. It is paramount that the international assistance to the victims of the conflict be continued, in partic~lar to the most vulnerable groups of the Afghan people. The havoc wrought on the Afghan people and their nation will have repercussions for many years to come. It would be unrealistic to believe anything else. But the process leading to peace must start now. In order to lay the foundation for a gradual return of peace and stability to Afghanistan, the withdrawal of all soviet troops is more urgent than ever. There is no other way. Mr. SIDDIKY (Bangladesh): Last year we observed the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations. There was a glittering gathering in this Hall, where deep commitment to the Charter was reiterated by all with vigour and verbosity. How hollow those words must have sounded in the streets of Kandahar. How empty those (Mr. Siddiky, Bangladesh) utterings must have appeared in the bazaars of Kabul. Should we not stop to reflect on this for a moment? In the mountains of Afghanistan today the blissful refrain of the muezzin's call to prayers has been replaced by the rude explosions of grenades and bomb~. The freedom-loving Afghans, with their carefree ways, have been shackled in bondage and suppression. Are these not melancholy commentaries on our existing value system? The Afghan tragedy has several facets. First, there is the painful presence of a vast foreign military machinery suppressing the freedom of the peoples; secondly, there is a Government in Kabul that does not command popular support or even approval; and, thirdly, there is the harrowing experience of 5 million Afghan refugees, constituting over 30 per cent of the entire [~ig~}&n population, who have sought shelter in neighbouring Islamic nations such as Pakistan and Iran, which have so generously hosted the uprooted mUlti~ude. On this question, the position of Bangladesh has always been a firm and principled one in consonance with our deep and abiding commitment to the values embodied in the United Nations Charter. We have always unequivocally declared our support for the principles of the sovereign equality of States, their territorial integrity, the non-use of force between States, non-interference in the internal affairs of others and the right of every nation freely to choose its own destiny. We do so again now. (Mr. Siddiky, Bangladesh) To that end we lend our full support to the draft resolution before us contained in document A/4l/L.12, which we have also sponsored. Ir. our view it addresses the problem most effectively and obj~tively and points the way to the most acceptable concl~dion for this tragic issue. My delegation joins others in the expression of sincere appreciation for the endeavours undertaken by the Secretary-General, Mr. Perez de Cuellar, in the search for a political settlement. We commend the efforts of his Personal Representative, Mr. Diego Cordovez, for facilitating the dialogue among the parties directly concerned. While the recent withdrawals of foreign troops are heartening, these have been minimal in proportion to their total presence and have not substantially altered the situation on the ground. We emphasize the need for complete withdrawal within an agreed time-frame. We fervently hope that all Afghans will soon be able to determine their own destiny like free peoples everywhere. The year 1986 has been designated the International Year of Peace. But have this year and the six others preceding it been peaceful for our Afghan Muslim brethren? DO they not have the same right to peace as we all have? Let those who respond to that auery take note. Freedom always comes to those who ardently strive for it, as it will to the Afghans. Mr. MOUMIN (Comoros): Seven years of military occupation have gone by, seven years of military subjugation and oppression of the people of Afghanistan by occupying forces have passed, and yet the heroic struggle of the Afghans has not been quelled by the intensive, merciless, fearsome fire-power of the invader. For seven years they have courageously resisted the war machine of the occupying Power by waging an epic resistance struggle with unflag9ing spirits, indomitable faith (Hr. Moumin, Comros) and determination. For seven years these unfortunate people have endured untold sUffer in9; thousands have been Itilled, tortured or mutilated, and millions have been forced to flee their beloved country by the brutality and cruel treatment of the invader, to seek refuge in neighbouring countries, thereby causing hardship to those countries of refuge. In Pakistan alone there are over 3 million Afghan refugees, constituting the greatest concentration of refugees in the world, placing a heavy burden on the limited resources of the host country and creating security problem for its citizens. This is the eighth debate on the situation in Afghanistan and its implications for international peace and security, an issue brought about by the Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan on Christmas Eve in 1979 in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and international norms of State behaviour. By intervening militarily in Afghanistan, the Soviet Union has violated not only the cardinal principles of the Charter but also its responsibility, as a super-Power, to maintain peace and security in the world. The international community has seven times expressed its dismay at this intervention by massively voting in favour of resolutions calling upon the occupying Power to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan. Seven times the General Assembly has called for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan, and yet the military occupation continues. However, since last year some positive signs have been perceiVed, such as the Soviet offer to seek a dialogue with Afghans who find themselves beyond the frontiers of Afghanistan. The Soviet Union has also announced the withdrawal of six anti-aircraft regiments from Afghanistan. These are gestures not to be ignored or spuLned. They should be assessed for what they are worth. The international community will have to judge whether they are purely symbolic acts or substantial. (!,r. Moumi", Comoros) My delegation for its part welcomes thil3 token withdrawal as the first step towards the total withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan, which is a necessary condition for any meaningful settlement of the Afghan problem. However, we have to point out at this juncture that a solution of the problem that has preoccupied the international community for seven years cannot be achieved through token or partial withdrawals. What is required is an acceptable time-frame for total withdrawal, without which the Soviet commitment to a negotiated settlement will lack credibility and its token withdrawal will appear to be a public relations exercise to dissipate international pressure. We call upon the Soviet Union to seize the mome.~*:um of the Geneva talks and take seriously the observation of the Secretary-General that all attention must now be focused on the question of withdrawal with a sense of urgency if these efforts are to bear fruit. It will be regrettable if the Geneva process is allowed to be undermined now that its success is in sight. Delay could not but damage the credibility of the process and could invite the criticism that it is being exploited as yet another means to ~ecure political and military advantage. It is necessary, if international peace is to be maintained in the region, that the tragedy that is being enacted in Afghanistan be brought to an early end. The Soviet Union must be made to understand in clear language that its intervention and its unholy actions in Afghanistan are morally and politically indefensible and will continue to be universally censured until it withdraws its occupying forces from that country. I cannot conclude my statement without commending our Secretary-General and expressing my delegation's support for him and his Personal Representative, Mr. Diego Cordovez, in their unceasing efforts in the search for a comprehensive solution in line with the seven resolutions already adapted by this body. (Mr. fobumin, Comoros) Regrettably, the diplomatic process has been stalled since Decemb~r 1985 because of Kabul's insistence on having direct negotiations with Pakistan before it could discuss the ~)urth instrument concerning the time-frame for the withdrawal of foreign troops and its in~errelationshipwith ~e other three instruments. We call uPOn all the parties concerned to show moderation in reconciling their differences so that a solution to this painful pr9blem can be found in the immediate future. Mr. ADENIJI (Nigeria): The Nigerian delegation has studied very carefully the report of the Secretary-Gene~alon the situation in Afghanistan (A/4]j619). We have noted the progress made so far, especially in breaking the impasse, which, for a period of two years, has stalled the United Nations diplomatic process. In this regard I should like to join numerous speakers by reaffirming Nigeria's support for the efforts of the Secretary-General and his Personal Representative, Mr. Diego Cordovez. I believe that the best way of achieving the objective of a viable political settlement in Afghanistan is for all those concerned to adhere strictly to the purposes and the principles of the United Nations Charter, by showing not only their resolve for the peaceful settlement of disputes, but also their respect for the sovereignty and ~erritorial integrity of States. It is pertinent at this juncture to recall that the original resolution on the situation in Afghanistan, adopted by the General Assembly in January 1980, clearly set out the requirements for a peaceful settlement of the problem in that country. Subsequent resolutions on the subject have followed the same trend. Those resolutions called for, among other things, the immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from Afghanistan, the restoration and preservation of the country's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, the right of the Afghan people to determine their own destiny and the creation of conditions necessary for the voluntary return of the Afghan refugees to their homeland. (Mr. Adeniji, Nigeria) Unfortunately, those requirements have not been fully met and respected; hence there is a wide gap that still remains to be bridged in the search for a political solution to the problem in that country. Conse~ently, the Afghan refugees are unable to return to their homes; peace and security are still disturbed; and the country has not been able to concentrate on the promotion of the economic and social progress of its populace. As the record will show, Nigeria has demonstrated consistently its opposition to external interference in the internal affairs of any country. We have subscribed consistently to the inalienable rights of all peoples everywhere to determine their own destiny, free from outside interference, coercion or intimidation, because those rights, in our view, represent the highest attributes of sovereignty. The proud people of Afghanistan, who had enjoyed those attributes prior to the present crisis, must be enabled again to resume their independence of action. Nigeria subscribes fully to the position adopted by the recent Eighth Summit Conference of the Non-Aligned Countries in Harare, where the movement reaffirmed the inadmissibility of foreign military intervention and the imposition of a foreign will or system on traditionally non-aligned Afghanistan. My country does not support any doctrine that seeks to justify armed intervention and the violation of the integrity of any State in the name of defending the gains of a revolution. Similarly, we do not support any intervention or violation of the sovereignty of any State in the name of the preservation of the status quo. As we do not accept the concept of spheres of influence, so we do not believe that any State has the right to determine the leadership of another State on poli~ical, ideological or any other grounds whatsoever. We shall remain faithful to our conviction that all sovereign States must be left to solve their (Mr. Adeniji, Nigeria) internal problems themselves. That is why we call for the total and speedy withdrawal of all foreign forces from Afghanistan. Nigeria supports the efforts of the united Nations to end the crisis in Afghanistan. We appreciate the role being played by the Secretary-General to get the support of the Governments concerned to solve the problem. We are gratified to hear the Secretary-Generales remarks that, in conse~uence of extensive consultations, it was possible to work out understandings that had the effect of breaking the impasse, which for almost two years had slowed down and crippled diplomatic efforts. We are also gratified that the diplomatic process has been supported by positive expressions of intent by the Governments of the United States of America and the union of Soviet Socialist Republics. However, greater political will needs to be shown in order to resolve the crisis that has engulfed that hapless country. Notwithstanding the criticisms of the United Nations in certain auarters, it provides the most appropriate instrument for settling problems of this nature. We should all therefore encourage the Secretary-General to persevere in his efforts. My delegation will - as it has done with similar draft resolutions - vote in favour of draft resolution A/41/L.12. Mr. MAHBUBANI (Singapore): In preparing our statement for this debate, we encountered a problem, which, I suspect, some other small delegations may also have encountered. Small delegations, like that of Singapore, are guided by the documents issued by the united Nations. We do not have the resources to conduct independent investigations, and so we rely upon United Nations documents. We consider them as authoritative. However, after reading the documents on Afghanistan, we were somewhat puzzled. (Hr. Mahbubani, Singapore) First, we read carefully tha ~eport of the Secretary-General (&/41/619) dated 18 September 1986. We were particularly encouraged to read in paragraph 12 of the report that: -There is no doubt that tangible progress has been made during the past year. Procedural auestions have been laid aside to enable all substantive problems to be tackled. The four instruments that will comprise the settlement are virtually complete-. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) However, the report also states that on the main outstanding question - the time-frame and modalities for the withdrawal of troops - there is still a wide gap in the positions of the two parties. Reading the report one is left with the clear impression that a political settlement in Afghanistan is close to being achieved. However, When we turn to another United Nations document - E/CN.4/1986/24, dated 17 February 1986 - we become somewhat puzzled. That is the report of the Special Rapporteur, Professor Felix Ermacora, on the situation concerning human rights in Afghanistan, prepared in accordance with resolution 1985/38 of the Commission on Human Rights. That is probably one of the most painfUl documents to be released by the United Nations, for it describes in vivid detail the continued SUffering of the Afghan people. Even in the past 12 months, while political negotiations have been taking place, the sufferings of the Afghans have increased. In fact, if one is to believe the report, there is no sign that the war in Afghanistan is diminishing. It suggests that the occupying Soviet Army, perhaps in desperation, has resorted to more brutal measures. In his report, Professor Felix Ermacora, noting that the armed conflict in Afghanistan has now entered its seventh year, states: "new elements in the human rights situation Which occurred during the sixth year of the conflict have come to light and must be taken into account in this report." (E/CN.4/1986/24, para. 21) Among the new elements that he identifies are the continuation of the outflow of refugees, the changes in the demographic composition of the country and the continued brutality of the warfare. He also documents in careful detail how all the major international covenants and conventions have been violated in Afghanistan. These are listed in paragraph 27 of the report. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapqre) In many ways it is impossible to summarize Professor Ermacora's report without doing it an injustice, so I urge all Members of the united Nations to read it carefully, for it is the result of painstaking research and study by an independent and objective scholar. He tells us, for example, that since the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in December 1979 one third of the population has fled the country. In the face of this overwhelming outflow of refugees, can we still accept the description of the invasion as "a liberation"? The real strength of Professor Ermacora's repor~ lies in the details he provides. He notes, for example, that in one prison alone, the Pol-i-Charkhi prison, death sentences were carried out on 30 to 40 people everyone to three days in the Polygon Field. That is surpassed by the reports of torture, which are truly gruesome in their description. Professor Ermacora notes that for the first ttme during his mandate he was able to interview women who had been tortured by the Khad of~icials during interrogation and he says, in what is probably the most painful passage in the entire report: "Severe forms of torture have been reported: sticking needles in the fingers, deprivation of sleep, burning of the lips with cigarettes, hanging by the hair for prolonged periods, as well as psychological torture, such as reference to the execution of family members (which subsequently proved untrue) or to children being sent away." (para. 57) The Special Rapporteur notes in a co~ent that he would have thought those reports exaggerated had he not been in a position to attest to their truth personally. Furthermore, in the face of the Kabul regime1s failure to win much popular support from the population, the age of conscription for children has been lowered to 15 years. At the same time, Afghan children between the ages of 8 and 12 years have been forcibly sent abroad for - and here I quote again from Professor Ermacora's report - (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) Ra general introduction to Marxism and Leninism, Russian language classes, musical education and, according to certain witnesses, training in propaganda techniques". (para. 65) Ris estimate is that about l5~OOO children have been sent abroad. Yet, in what is perhaps a cruel irony, these children may be the luckiest children of Afghanistan, because those who stayed behind, especially those who lived in the countryside, have suffered from the bomba~dments, shellings and mass killings. Professor Ermacora waa able personally to see and speak 'to wounded children whose injuries had been caused by anti-personnel mines and booby-trap toys. Be therefore concludes that ·systematic brutality characterised the conflict in 1985·. The Professor stresses that since his last report he has Rreceived new information about the brutality of the troops, and witnesses stressed that foreign troops were responsible for this brutality, which is widespread in military activities in different provinces". (para. 93) 1 have quoted at great length and in a great detail from Professor Ermacora's report because we have to be guided not only by what Governments are saying but also by what Goverrunents are doing. Deeds, we believe, are more important than words. We are 91ad to note that that specific point has been endorsed by the General Secretary of the Central'Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet union, Mr. Gorbachev, for last year, in an interview published in ~ magazine on 9 September 1985, he said: "There should be no difference between words and deeds. Deeds should match words.· Be reiterated that crucial point in the statement that he delivered in Vladivostok on 28 July 1986, an important statement that was read with great (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) interest in all Asian capitals. In it he made some concluding remarks about Afghanistan. Re said: "In conclusion, about Afghanistan, it was declared from the rostrum of the XXV!Ith Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union that we are ready to bring home Soviet troops stationed in Afghanistan at the request of its Government. As you know, the Party now firmly adheres to the principle that words sbould be followed up by deeds." We are encouraged by that statement that words should be followed up by deeds and we are also encouraged to learn that some units of the soviet armed forces will be returning home before the end of 1986. Howeve£, we are also troubled by reports that the withdrawal of those troops is only part of a covert process of ~otation. What is needed in Afghanistan is a process of international verification of the situation. Yet so far even Professor Ermacora has been refused entry to study the situation there. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) We are also troubled by the suggestion in Mr. Gorbachev's statement that the Soviet troops stationed in Afghanistan would be returned only at the request of nits Government w• What Afghan Government are we talking about? This is a very critical question because the sole rationale given by the Soviet union for its presence in Afghanistan is that it entered Afghanistan on 24 December 1979 at the invitation of the Government of Afghanistan and in accordance with the 1978 Treaty of Friendship, Co-operation and Good-Neighbourliness concluded between Afghanistan and the Soviet Union. The critical question here is who issued the invitation on behalf of the Government of Afghanistan? It could not have been President Hafizullah Amin, the then President and Head of the Government of Afghanistan, because he was killed by Soviet troops on 27 December, three days after the Soviet invasion began. was the invitation then issue~ ?Jy Mr. Babrak Karmal? The fact is that on 24 December 1979 Babrak Karmal was not a member of the Government of Afghanistan and, therefore, had no author;":.y to act on its behalf. He was then living in exile in Eastern Europe, and was brought back to Kabul and installed as President by the Soviet Union on 27 December when Hafizullah Amin was killed. We face the same situation today. Since the Kabul regime has been completely under the c:ontrol of the Soviet Union since December 1979, how can it possibly request the withdrawal of Soviet troops? Knowing the fate that befell President Hafizullah Amin when he angered the Soviet Government, would any regime in Kabul have the temerity to ask for such a withdrawal? Is it conceivable? This is the reason why the General Assembly meets every year to discuss the situation in Afghanistan. As long as the people of Afghanistan are deprived of the opportunity to express their wishes freely, we in the international conununity have a moral obligation to speak up for them and to demand that all Soviet forces leave (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) Afghanistan and stop this brutal carnage that has created so much misery, destruction and suffering. And yet it is not only the Afghan people who have suffered from this tragic conflict. The Soviet Union has also paid a heavy price for its involvement there. It has been costly for the Soviet Union in many ways. First, it has been costly to the moral of the Red Army. We hear reports from time to time that soviet soldiers are defecting to the ranks of the Mujahidin because of their unwillingness to fight an unjust warJ secondly, the war in Afghanistan has been costly to the Soviet Union in economic terms, and these are obviousJ thirdly, it has been costly by damaging relations between the Soviet Union and the non-aligned countries, to which the SOviet Union has historically attached great importance. The overwhelming majority of the non-aligned countries have condemned the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan and only recently they reiterated this condemnation at the summit meeting held in Harare. They have also supported united Nations resolutions on AfghanistanJ fourthly, it has been costly to the Soviet Union's relations with the Islamic countriesJ fifthly, and perhaps in some ways most crucially, it has been costly to the reputation and prestige of the Soviet Union. The whole world has long acknowledged that the Soviet Union is a super-Power, but after its invasion of Afghanistan, we cannot, however, call it a great Power. For these reasons, we believe that it is as much in the interests of the Soviet Union itself as it is in the interest of the Afghan people for Soviet troops to be withdrawn from Afghanistan. The Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan would restore Soviet prestige in the whole world. But internally, even inside the Soviet Union, we hear reports that Soviet society has been demoralized by this war as more and more Soviet casualties are sent home from Afghanistan. We note that Soviet press coverage of the war has abandoned early descriptions of dedicated Soviet soldiers providing purely humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) Soviet press accounts today admit that harsh combat missions and pitched battles are being fought in Afghanistan. The Soviet Union has also officially acknowledged e,'~t the first tiMe that Soviet casualties are on the increase. And inevitably, as thousands of Soviet youths have been wounded and killed, high school seniors in the Soviet Union have begun to compare notes on ways to beat the draft, while lIDthers talk openly of their fears. Everyone tries to avoid the draft. This was confirmed by a report in the Soviet military journal, Red Star, which admitted on 11 July 1986 that a number of senior officials of the Uzbekistan military district tried to prevent their sons from being conscripted. Clearly, the war is unpopular even among senior officials in the Soviet Union. In the meantime, the armed forces of the Kabul regime, which used to be strongly prO-Soviet before the Soviet Union invaded the country in 1979, have become progressively more and more disillusioned. This army, which used to number 90,000 has been reduced to 30,000. Collaboration between this army and the MUjahidin resistance has become so great that we hear reports that the Soviet high command in Kabul gives the Afghan army only four hours' notice c.,f any troop movements to prevent this information from leaking out to the Af.ghan resistance forces. Surely, after seven years of experience, the Soviet Union should by now be convinced that a military victory in Afghanistan is not possible. Even the scorched earth policy of recent years has failed to dampen the fighting spirit of the Afghan resistance forces. If I have spoken at length about the situation in Afghanistan, I have done so only in the hope of persuading the Soviet Union that it is not in its interest to prolong its stay in Afghanistan. Both the Soviet and the Afghan people have suffered as a result of this tragic war, and the time has come to say that enough is enough. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) Until this war ends, the countries in Asia cannot accept the Soviet Union's claim that it is committed to co-operate with all Asian and Pacific nations, "for the sake of peace and securitya, and here I am quoting from the Vladivostock statement again. We agree with Mr. Gorbachev when he said in that statement: "Today, more than ever before, it is important to mobilize the potential of common sense existing in the world, the partnership of reason, in order to arrest the slide towards catastrophe." And we believe that the place to begin this process of "moblizing the potential of common sense" in the world is Afghanistan. Finally, while we have a moral obligation to the Afghan people, the States Members of the United Nations also have an obligation to defend certain cardinal principles of international law. The Afghanistan issue is, after all, the only contemporary example of a small nation suffering from invasion and occupation by a neighbouring super-Power. This in itself is a remarkable historical fact when one remembers that throughout man's recorded history, as nations have grown in strength, they have almost inevitably evolved into empires. Today, with the advent of the United Nations and the acceptance of the Charter by 159 Member States, which has decreed, "••• the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members •••", the international community no longer allows any nation, no matter how strong or how powerful, to invade or occupy its neighbour - a right that the super-Powers of the past arrogated to themselves. If we here in the United Nations fail to reverse the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, it will only help to turn the clock of history backwards. Therefore, each and every State Member of the United Nations, especially the smaller States, has a powerful vested interest in the outcome of the United Nations efforts to free Afghanistan. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) The draft resolution that we have before us today has been crafted gently and carefully to provide the Soviet union a diplomatic way out of Afghanistan. It only includes elements based on the principles enshrined in the united Nations Charter, namely: it calls for the withdrawal of foreign forcesJ it calls for the restoration of Afghan independenceJ it asserts the right of the Afghan people to determine their own futureJ and it guarantees the right of the refugees to return to their homes. Finally, it also provides a renewed mandate for the Secretary-General and his Special Representative to continue their constructive efforts to find a solution to the Afghanistan problem. We hope that more nations will vote for the draft resolution this year. The larger the vote for this draft resolution, the more likely it is that Afghanistan will regain its freedom and independence and the more likely it is that we will have a safer world for the smaller nations in the next 40 years.