A/42/PV.26 General Assembly

Tuesday, Oct. 6, 1987 — Session 42, Meeting 26 — New York — UN Document ↗

The President on behalf of General Assembly #8670
On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Zambia and Chairman of the Organization of African unity for the important statement he has just made. Mr. Kenneth Kaunda, President of the Republic of Zambia, was escorted from the General Assembly Hall. AGENDA IT~M 9 (continued) GENERAL DEBATE Mr. VAN LIEROP (Vanuatu): Sir, I have tne honour of extending to you the congratulations and best wishes of the Government and people of Vanuatu on your assumption of the presidency of tne General Assembly at this forty-second session. Your unanimous election is both a personal tribute and a token of esteem for the country you represent. I take pleasure also in thanKing your ~redecessor, Mr. Humayun Rasheed Choudhury, Foreign Minister of Bangladesh, for the manner in which he guided us dur ing the forty-first seSSlon of the General Assembly. In addition we join in thanking the Secretary-General for his tireless efforts. His work and that of his staff and the entire Secretariat are sources of pride to us all. In this regard we commend the addition to his team of Ambassador Josepn V. Reea as Under-Secretary-Genera1 for General Assembly Affairs. He has a rather large pair of shoes to fill, but all who know him have no doubt that he is equal to the task. Taking the floor immediately after Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, President of ~ambia·and current Chairman of the Organization of African Unity, is a great honour and at the same time a great responsibility. It is not easy to follow to the rostrum of this body one so eloquent and so universally admired as is President Kaunda. He looms large in history as a spokesman for those who cher ish manldna' s highest ideals. Today he has spoken not only for the people of Zambia and the continent of Africa but also for all who believe in tne United Nations. It is always a great honour ana rare privilege to speak before the United Nations General Assemo1y. Today the honour is greater and the privilege rarer because of the presence of President Kaunda and his penetrating words. We, like others, applaud his wisdom, his dedication and his sensitivity. We also concur with his vision of a world in which humanity is perlnitted to blossom to its fullest potential. The ability to communicate through the medium of the spoken or written word, . so movingly demonstrated by President Kaunda today, is one of mankind's greatest achievements. Occasionally that ability is taken for grantea and neither appreciated nor properly utilized. Those few who - because of their e~onomic or military strength - hold in their hands the power of life or death over so many other human beings, often do not feel the need to listen to the woras ot those of us who do not command vast fortunes, powerful armies or large armadas. When they do listen they tend to listen mechanically, with their ears rather than with their hearts. They then frequently fail to heed the poignant messages addressed to them. Thus, year after year, speaker after speaker walks to this rostrum, stands before the nations of the world and states the case for independence for Namibia, an end to apartheid in South Africa and comn~n decency and Justice for the Palestinians. Speaker after speaker pleads for justice and peace for the people of Central ffiaerica and South-East Asia. Speaker after speaker calls for an end to the arms race and the recurring nuclear nightmares of small children everywhere. Were these words to be listened to, and heeded, they would be almost magica.L in what they could achieve. Words are like magic. They can transport one to another time, another place, or another dimension. They can express the full range of human experiences and emotions, from charity to greed, from forgiveness to indignation, from humility to arrogance, from hope to despair, from love to hatred. Words can be instruments of enlightenment or revelations of ignorance. worus can stir, ins~ire and move listeners to action or lull them into indiffereence, boredom and inactivity. Words are capable of opening minas or closing them. They are capable of expanding horizons or restricting them. They can bring us together or drive us further apart. Words are potentially more powerful than any military weapon known to mankind. They have been known to make tyrants tremble and dictatorships decay. That is why some fear the written or spoken word as much as they :tear anything. That is why eighteenth and nineteenth century slave holders in the western hemisphere made it" illegal" for the hUlllan beings they neld in bonaage to learn to read and write and forbade them to communicate in their own languages. That is why well past the mid-point of tne twentietn century, in even the most developed of countries, some parents have had to struggle to see their children get any semblance of a decent education. That is why the apartheid regime of South Africa has spared no effort to stifle the voices of that country's bravest sons and daughters. That is why in so many lands, large and small, ueveloped and aeveloping, north and south, east and west, so many generations of courageous human beings have pleaded, petitioned, marched and agitated for the r~gnt to be educated and the right to be heard. That is why today we search for words which will, as a renowned enter every house liKe tne wind and fall like red hot Mozambican poet wrote, " " embers on our people's souls With all that words can do, none can do more than words of candour and sincerity. The late Amilcar Cabral once encouraged his colleagues, in the African Party for the Independence of Guinea (Bissau) and Cape Verde, to hlde nothing from the masses of the people and to tell no lies, claim no easy victories. That admonition is as appropriate to us here, at tne Unitea Nations today, as it was 22 years ago to those struggling to bring freedom to two small west African countr ies. Truth is a mighty weapon. It is in fact the greatest weapon possessed by those who would feed the hungry, house the homeless, heal the sick, educate the illiterate, end senseless violence and generally help create a more equitable world. In none of those areas will the international community be able to claim an easy victory; not one of these things will be easy to achieve. Then, again, that which is worth working for, that which is worth struggling for, seldom is easy. We would be guilty of the worst form of naivety were we to suggest otherwise. Words alone, no matter how beautiful, are not sufficient to resolve the many issues on the agenda of the United Nations. If they were, Namibia woulet be a .cull Member of the United Nations, Palestine would be a Member of the United Nations and south Africa would be represented by a legitimate Government and would be seated in this Hall today. If words alone were sufficient, the questions of Cyprus, Kampuctlea and Afghanistan would no longer appear on our agenda. If words alone were sufficient, the peoples of Western Sahara, East Timor and New Caledonia would already have been permitted to assume their rightful places within the community of nations. Words, however, no matter how articulate, how truthfUl, how forceful, now insightful or how well-intended. are never enough. They probably will never be enough. Frederick Douglas, a leader of the anti-slavery movement during the nineteenth century and a great orator, expressed that best when he said: "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never dia and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to ana you have found out the exact measure of injustice ana wrong which will oe imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted witn either words or blows, or with both. 11 Every year the General Assembly passes a stream of resolutions. The words of those resolutions, taken together, comprise some of the most noble thoughts and theories known to mankind. What is far less noble is the lack of resolve by some Members of the United Nations when we leave this hall and it is time to implement our collective decisions. It is not enough merely to denounce apartheid. It will not disa~pear without a struggle. How long and how violent a struggle is up to those who imposed apartheid on South Africa's people and then on Namibia. We, the rest of tl:le worla, must in a real sense support those who struggle against apartheid ana adopt for ourselves values which differ from the values of those wno pract1se tnis onerous creed, as well as the values of those whO profit from it. (Mr. Van Lierop, Vanuatu) The values we embrace should be the values of those who respect the genuine universality of every human being. Those values must be embraced at all times, in all places, and not merely when and where the world happens to ne looKing or listening. Silence, or inaction, in the face ot a known evil in one corner of the globe can be taken as acceptance of other evils in other corners of the globe. We, the international community, must be consistent and unremitting foes - no matter the price - of anyone who would assign a second- or third-class status to any person because of his or her race, religion, sex, language or economic status. The essen tial need to secure and hold the higher ground dur ing any engagement of hostile forces is a well-known axiom of military science. In mankind's roral engagement to determine the future destiny of our planet, we should apply the same axiom and secure and maintain the higher ground. No person held in slavery should aspire to be a slave-holder. No person who has known the bi tter taste of discr imination should himself, or herself, discriminate against another. No person who has been victimized should look for other s to become his, or her, victim. It pains us deeply to see some former colonies fail to understand the legitimate strivings of others for their own independence. Interruptions in the process of decolonization are even more tragic when the intruding State is itself a former colony which might have helped a neighbour's first tenta tive steps on the path to reclaiming its own identity. Vanuatu's position on this question is based on what it perceives as what is right and what is wrong, rather than on what others might perceive as either convenient, expedient, safe or a fait accompli. Thus, it is Vanuatu's hope that the people of Western Sahara, the people of East Timer and others similarly situated will be allowed to realize their dreams also. Their rights are as sacred as those of anyone else represented here today. If there is no room at the inn for them, then very few of us should feel secure about our own places. We are similarly saddened by the tragic spectacle of intercommunal strife which plagues every corner of the earth. There is no need to recite the names, the dates or the places. Everyone is already painfully familiar with them. Much of this intercommunal strife has its roots in a shared colonial history. Some pre-da tes colon ialism and is the result of antagonisms that go back many centuries. Understanding the roots of a problem should help us to combat it. Unfor tunately, demagogues are always willing to exploit and man ipulate existing social contradictions for their own selfish ends and carry others down a destructive path. We, the int.ernational community, must maintain the higher moral ground. We should address these social contradictions and try to resolve them. How we go about it is the impor tant ques tion. We should let our actions signal to others the type of world we would like to see. The dignity and majesty of the victims of the apartheid regime of South Africa are, we believe, an example for the rest of the world. The African National Council (ANC) and the South West Air ica People's Organization (SWAPO) have consistently maintained the higher grol1nd by steadfastly refusing to adopt the values of the Pretoria regime. We have great faith in their vision of the future. They struggle for their people and against a system, rather than against fellow human beings. To secure the future of this planet, it rests with all of us to learn from them and stop waging war against each other and against each other's children. It rests with us not to adopt the discredited values of immoral regimes. It rests wi th us not to act as proxies for others who are only too willing to divide us by seductively whispering in an ear how bad one ethnic group or ano ther is. The tr agic war between I ran and Iraq is an example of a confl ict which involves a complex web of historical contradictions. Like most other countries, Vanuatu was appalled by the outbreak of this war and is appalled by its continuation. Vanuatu has never taken sides on the antagonisms that exist between these two States and will not do so now; we consider both friends. However, one must ask this: does there come a point beyond which one wages war against a neighbour and begins to wage war aga inst one' s own professed values, and onels own people, and the rest of civiliza tion? We do not hCive' answers to the questions pased by this tragedy. Like so many others, we merely address an appeal to the decency and common sense of both parties to the conflict. We ask them please to try to reason together and arr ive at some mutually agreeable formula. Let there be neither victors nor vanquished~ let there simply be peace. The war between Iran and Iraq, the loss of life it. entails and its economic consequences br ing to mind the relevancy of the recen tly concluded International Conference on the Relationship between Disarmament and Development. Although the result of the Conference was not completly satisfactory, the consensus that was arrived at was an important step on the path we must all walk together. None of us can welk that or any other road alone. The economic si tuation faced by developing coun tr ies has been discussed at length. We will not at this time expand further on wha t has already been so adequately said by others similarly situated. However, we cannot help but observe that when developing countries wish to build a railroad, a port facility, an airport, a communications network, schools, health clinics or other parts of a national infrastructure all sorts of financial obstacles are encountered. But, when a developing country wishes to bUy weapons, credit can always be arranged. This. is true no matter how poor or how small the country, regardless of its other needs, and no matter how ill prepared its military might be to absorb certain equipment. Some seem to confuse the business of selling weapons wi th the art of diplomacy. For them, the way to win fr iends and 1nfl uence people is to mar ket the means of mass destruction. In most instances, the friends that are gained are many times fewer than those that are lost. The recent agreement in principle between the United.States and, the Soviet Union to dismantle intermediate-range nuclear forces is a positive, although tentative, step. There are, of course, a great many more complex issues to be addressed. Therefore, the proposed upcoming meeting between the leaders of those two countries is another welcome sign. President Reagan and General secretary Gorbachev will carry with them the prayers and hopes of the entire world when they meet. The prospect of a productive dialogue between them is a harbinger of a better international climate. The world cannot help but be encouraged by the example of these two great nations learning to live with each other. Certainly Iran and Iraq should be able to find as much common ground as have the united States and the Soviet Union. After years of harsh and bitter fighting, it appears that common ground may now exist in another part of the world. The recently concluded agreement between five Central American Presidents is a positive step worthy of international support. Peace, and the opportunity to pursue j~stice without fear, may finally be at hand for the people of that troubled region. In this connection, Vanuatu also joins in suppor ting appeals for the normalization of relations between Belize and Guatemala. Recognition of the national iden ti ty, digni ty and territorial integr ity of all six nations of Central America is an essen tial element in the prol'lOtion of peaceful coexistence and economic developnent for the people of that region. Few areas of the world cry out as much for adherence to the basic values of human decency as does the Middle East. When all is said and done, the fact remains that in that part of the world the fundamental contradiction, the fundamental problem, the fundamental wrong, is the systematic effort to deny the humanity of the Palestinian people. Their homes, their hopes and their futures were sacrificed to establish the sta te of Israel. Now, neighbour ing Lebanon faces a doubtful fu ture. Its children's dreams have also been sacr ificed. Is there no limi t to what the wor ld expects the people of that region to endure? This is a matter tha t has vexed and plagued the international community for longer than anyone cares to remember. OVer the years, there have been a great many heroes and villians on both sides. Certainly, nei ther side is pure but, here again, each must reach out to the other. It makes as much sense today to ignore the Palestine Liberation Organization as it did earlier to attempt to deny the existence of the people it r epresen ts. (Mr. Van Lierop, Vanuatu) This is a problem that the international community helped to create. Thus, it is a matter that we must help to resolve. We can begin by convening the 'much discussed international conference on the Middle East. Wi11iam Shakespeare once aptly stated that the past is the prologue. We believe that solutions to many of the items on the agenda of the united Nations reauire that we look to the future rather than be prisoners of the past. Today the united Nations affords mankind an opportunity to avoid many of yesterday's mistakes. However, like Shakespeare, we believe that truly to comprehend the nature of some of the current problems and the motivation of some of the principal actors on the world stage, we must also have knowledge of the past. In this regard we note regrettably that some, notably the apartheid regime of South Africa, live so far in the past that they are incapable of comprehending the lessons of history. South Africa's slave-State conditions are not historically uniaue. In recent years those conditions have been modified in form but not in substance. Thus, South Africa remains fundamentally as uncompromisingly racist as other parts of the world were in the nineteenth century. The changes that have occurred resulted in part from the impact of the rapidly changing world of the twentieth century. However, the most important catalyst has been, and continues to be, the efforts of the people of South Africa who have simply refused to be docile. Apartheid ranks with slavery, the inhuman excesses of the colonial era, the holocaust of the Second World War era and other acts of genocide, among the most significant crimes ever committed against humanity. Apartheid is not always discussed in the same context as slavery. However, for many reasons we believe it should be. The commercial traffic in human beings known as the trans-Atlantic slave trade, like its lesser known counterpart in the South Paclfic, earned universal condemnation for its evil nature and the horror it created. That sinful behaviour cost millions of lives and destroyed entire societies. It wrenched families a~art and eventually became the genesis of colonialism. The depth and magnitude of the human suffering caused by the slave trade is incalculable. Similarly, the financial wealth accumulated by an assortment of kidnappers, hijackers, thugs and terrorists - yes, terrorists - as a result of the traffic in human beings can never be calculated. Some may have forgotten. Others, no doubt, would prefer to forget this important page of history. We make this reference today not out of bitterness. There is no rancour in our hearts and no recrimination is intended. We merely wish every nation represented here today to remember and comprehend the past so tnat we wl.il understand the true context of South Africa, the nature of numanity's foe in Pretor ia and what the international comnlUnlty must do to overcome that foe. South Africa has not yet learned the lessons of history. Therefore the rest of the world must strive harder to bring the message of those lessons home to South Africa. We must become better interpreters and instructors of history than we have been to date. Despite circumstances and conditions which would test the patience of a saint, Nelson Mandela has maintained the moral higher ground we spoke of earlier. he and his colleagues have taught their gaolers a most important lesson. Indeed, in a sense, he and many of his people are freer than those who placed him in prison and who fearfully stand guard over an entire aroused nation. It is our ho~e that by the end of this session of the ueneral Assembly all of us will be standing with Mr. Mandela and no one will either apologize for, or ~rotect, his gaolers. govern South Africa. Both value material wealth over human life and moral decency. Both sell the false dream of a mindless form of existence. Both offer nothing more than modern-day slavery in different forms. Both deserve nothing but the sternest concerted international action to eradicate them from the human experience. The International Conference on Drug Abuse and Illicit Trafficking held in Vienna this past June under the able presidency of the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mr. Mahathir bin Mohamad, was an important milestone. Vanuatu is pleased to note the increasing international realization that not a single region, not a single nation, not a single community, not a single individual is untouched, or immune, from the scourge of drug abuse or the curse of drug traffickers and what they bring with them. However, no nation, not even the richest and most powerful among us, can feel that it is doing enough to address this major challenge to civilization. The evidence of this fact surrounds us, unfortunately, and threatens to drown us all. Terrorism also threatens to drown civilization. This is as true of the type of terrorism practised by those who appear at a door in the middle of the night wearing official uniforms, armed with the blessings of a State apparatus and who have perfected techniaues of torture, as it is of those individuals who take it upon themselves to kidnap and cruelly traffic in human beings much as slave traders and pirates did in an earlier era. It is also as true of the type of terrorism that holds all of humanity captive to the very real danger posed by nuclear arsenals, as it is of those who commit random acts of violence using more conventional instruments of death. Terrorism is wrong. It is wrong morally. It is wrong tactically. It is wrong politically. There are not exceptions and nO qualifying conditions. One cannot use criminal tactics without becoming a criminal. The values of an organization or a movement are, like the values of an individual, determined by how that organization or movement lives and how it values life - all life. That is true whether the life being valued is that of one who is black, white, brown or yellow; whether it is the life of one who is Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, atheist or agnostic, whether it is the life of one who is gifted or disabled; or whether it is the life of one who is wealthy or one Who lives in poverty. We now turn to a subject we wish we did not have to turn to. In the forty-second year of the existence of the United Nations, 27 years after the adoption of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, this body should not still have before it the question of Namibia or the question of New Caledonia. Despite the obvious obstacles to its independence, there is no lonyer any question as to whether Namibia1s people have the right to their own iaentity and their own country. Even if South Afr ica were tomorrow so!oenow to 'Cransfer large numbers of whites into Namibia - many of them military personnel and civil servants - and enough people from neighbouring countries to make the Namibians a minority in their own country, no one would be deceived and question Namibials right to become an independent nation. South Africa, by its intransigence, has managed to delay the inevitable, but it cannot at this stage rewrite history. In New Caledonia, the administering Power is attempting to defraud the colonized people and deceive the international community through a policy of demographic engineering. Through its dellberate actions in encouraging migration to New Caledonia, it has now succeeded in turning that Territory's people into a minority - although still the largest community nUlIlerically - in their own land. The auestion before us now is, should such actions by a colonial Power be allowed to frustrate the legitimate aspirations of a colonized people and a decision of the united Nations? Common sense and morality, as well as the Charter and many pronouncements of the united Nations, clearly indicate that the answer is no. The Government of Vanuatu wishes to make it clear once again that it has no auarrel with the Government or people of France. It wishes France, and the people of that great nation, nothing but continued prosperity and success. These wishes are sincere and earnest. They are not, however, given at the expense of the people of New Caledonia or those of any other territory whose lands and resources may be coveted by a segment of the French population. Vanuatu is New Caledonia's closest neighbour. It is also a country that has a shared colonial history with that of New Caledonia and an affinity for its people that can perhaps only be understood by other peoples who also have so much in common. Last year we, and other cOlDltries of the South Pacific were gratified by the support we received on the question of New Caledonia at the Eighth Conference of Heads of State or Government of Non-Aligned Countries held at Harare, Zimbabwe. We are fur ther pleased that today, New Ca1edonia's colonized people continue to enjoy the support of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries in their campaign to regain that which they never surrendered. We were also gratified by the decision taken by the General Assembly last December to place New Caledonia on the uni ted Na tions list of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Delegations may recall the atmosphere in the General Assembly in the days leading up to that decision and on the particular day the vote was taken. Delegations may also recall the things that were said and the way in which they were said. Some were told that New Caledonia was a part of France and that this matter had no business being discussed at the Uni ted Na tions. SOme were told tha t wha t became resolution 41/41 A was unnecessary because the Committee of 24 was going to consider the question anyway. SOme were told that the countries of the South Pacific harboured irrational ill feelings towards France and did not know what they were doing. That last statement was the most incredulous of the many incredulous things that were said. Looking back one must wonder, if France was so convinced that New Caledonia was a part of France, why it conducted what it termed a referendum on the Territory's future only a few weeks ago. We will not even pose the question how and when New Caledonia became a "part" of France. We will save that question for another day. One must also wonder why if resolution 41/41 A was so unnecessary, France still has not transmitted the information required of it under Article 73e of the Charter. On the basis of the arguments it put forward last year, one might have surmised that France intended to co-operate with the Committee of 24. Instead, the only information that has been forthcoming is the rather inaccurate statement made by the Foreign Minister of France in his address to the Assembly on 23 September 1987. Wi th all due respect to the Foreign Minis ter, we do not considet' a plebisci te organized without due regard for the accepted pr inciples and practices of the United Nations to bea valid act of self-determination. This is particularly true when the colonized people boycott the entire process. The result was predictable, and was predicted. Those who are French chose to remain French. We would have expected nothing else. For the most par t, those who are not French did not vote. Is France now proposing that similar votes be organized in other areas under occupation? Could such a plebiscite turn the Golan Heights, for example, into part of Israel? By extension of this logic, might we permi t South Afr ica to fur ther its claim to an important part of Namibia through a little demographic engineering? In a somewhat similar vein, are we now prepared to accept France's claim to Mayotte? In the future, will we accept any large country's claim to a smaller, less populous land, simply because its people are overwhelmed numerically and, most important, mili tar ily? This is the way the world operated in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and in the early part of th is cen tury before there was a Uni ted Na tions Is this what we wish to return to? What France is now telling the world flies in the face of logic and United Nations precedent. It is also a radical departure from the currently accepted norm of international behaviour, and a very dangerous departure from the accepted practice of decolonization. Furthermore, we do not agree with the Foreign Minister's statement that conditions in New Caledonia during the plebiscite, "••. were calm and beyond dispute" (A/42/PV.8, p36). Through the eyes of television cameras, the world saw how "calm" things were in New Caledonia in the weeks leading up to the vote. we are as pleased as anyone that there was not more violence. However, we attribute this to the patience of .the Kanak people and the intimidating presence of French military forces, which controlled the colonized population very effectively. The French military did its job very well. Now we, the inter national communi ty, have our own mission to per form. We must continue to follow the pr inciples and practices we es tabl ished. We must continue to be faithful to our Charter and to our own histories. The Committee of 24 has recommended a draft resolution which does exactly that. It is balanced and moderate in tone. We hope members will lend their support to this draft and thereby remain faithful to the United Nations' own stated values. We merely ask that the United Nations be allowed to play its customary role. What could be more reasonable? France is an important member of this body. It occupies a permanent seat on the Security Council and in other ways exercises considerable influence within and without the Organization. It should, therefore, be among the first to respect the le..tter and the spiri t of the decisions of the world body. Being fa ir to those who have been colonized in New Caledonia can only enhance, rather than diminish, the prestige and glory of France. We will continue to make this appeal until it is heard by France with its heart, as well as with its ears. If it is ignored, we will continue until it is heeded. Nothing will dissuade Vanuatu from this cause, other than the Kanak people themselves saying that this is no longer their cause. Vanuatu has no ulterior motive in pressing this case. We have nothing to hide, and nothing to gain, save security in the knowledge that the United Nations is still the Organization that the words of its Charter recite. Mr. FARAH (Djibouti) (interpretation from French): Sir, it gives me great pleasure to convey to you our heartfelt congra tula tions on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-second session. Your election to that high office is the best testimony to your qualities as an experienced diplomat. I am convinced that your vast knowledge and experience will ensure the success of our del ibera tions. My delega tion will spare no effort in making its modest contr ibution to the performance of your task. I am also happy to convey the apprecia tion and gra ti tude of my delega tion to your predecessor Mr. Choudhury, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bangladesh, who demonstrated ability and devotion in the performance of his duties as president of the General Assembly at its last session. It also gives me pleasure to pay a special tr ibute to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for the tireless efforts he has made in promoting co-operation and understanding among nations. The economic si tua tion of Africa has become very alarming. It has been marked, inter alia, by a reduction in the gross domestic product, a drop in export earnings, a drop in income, and a high rate of population growth. At a time when the African countries most need it for implementing their recovery programme, we are wi tnessing a net drain of capital from the developing countries to the developed coun tr ies. Many African countries, especially those of sub-Saharan Africa, are facing debts that considerably hamper their development. Inadequate social services in such areas as health, sanitation, education and housing have become sources of constant concern in these countries. The tragic consequences of drought have been exacerbated also by the large number of refugees and displaced persons. All these factors jeopardize economic, social and political stability and undermine the economic reforms that Africa has undertaken since the adoption in 1985 of Africa's Priority Programme for Economic Recovery 19B6-19~O and the adoption by the General Assembly in 1986 of the United Nations Prograouue of Action for African Economic Recovery and Developn~nt 1986-199U. The outlook for increased investment in development projects has become far worse. African countries have undertaken a long-term programme of economic and social development to deal with that economic situation. We are convinced that the international community will support the programmes for the recovery and economic development of Africa, since African economies must achieve a higher growth-rate so that Africa can reverse the current trend ana overcome its underdevelopment. It goes without saying that African countries must promote inter-regional co-operation in all the spheres deemed necessary for improving theH economic and social situation in conformity with the Lagos Plan of Action and Final Act. In this connection, it should be noted that the countries of east Africa - Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, Sudan, Uganda and Djibouti - have combined their efforts to confront the adverse effects of drought and other related natural disasters, and have established the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development. Those countries have adopted a plan of action for financing specific sectoral prograwnes and well-defined projects necessary to strengthen their national and regionaL (Mr. Farah, Djibouti) capability to combat the effects of drought and promote economic and social development. We believe that these programmes can be successful only with the total support of the international community. I wish to inform the General Assembly that the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development held its first conference of donors in Djibouti in March 1987. At that conference the donor countries, United Nations spec1alized agencies and non-governmental organizations recognized the serious work done by the Authority in submitting to them coherent prograwnes and projects in keeping with Africa's Priority Programme for Economic Recovery 1986-1990. The international community showed interest in these projects, which related to food security, water resources, combating desertification, agronomic research and infrastructures. I take this opportunity to express our sincere gratitude to all Member States, agencies and organizations that have contributed and given their assistance at this difficult time, when the countries members of the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development are trying to mobilize the necessary financial, material and technical resources. The nations of the Horn of Africa have always worked to promote regional co-operation. We believe that the establishment of regional intergovernmental organizations will help to create conditions conducive to tolerance and good-neighbourliness, thus making possible the development of real co-operation in commercial and cultural exchanges. Sucn co-operation can help to establish a climate of mutual trust that will enhance the well-being of the peoples of the region. The Republic of Djibouti is situated it one of the most arid regions of the world. The scarcity of rainfall and other adverse climatic conditions continue to be the main obstacles to development and self-sufficiency in food. Poor agriculture and livestock production have made Djibouti a net importer, at extremely high prices, of nearly all the food needed for local consumption. Industry is practically no~existent, owing mainly to the high cost of the electricity available. The Government of Djibouti has given high priority to the development of new and renewable sources ot energy that could form the basis for viable industrial development,' and in particular to exploration for and exploitation of the geothermal eneryy that we believe exists in sufficient quantity to meet a substantial part of the country's energy needs in the near future. But exploitation of geothermal energy requires technology, capital investment and qualified professionals, which at present we lack. Nevertheless, the development and expansion of the service sector, which is now the basis of our national economy, must be lnaintained. However, the maintenance of this sector at a viable level requires structural adjustment, the training of a work-force and major financial resources. In addition to these difficulties, the Republic of Djibouti must deal with the precarious economic and financial situation resulting from several adverse factors caused by the foreign debt, inflation and unemployment. The repercussions of the last drought and the presence of a large number of refugees are a heavy burden on the State budget. In the light of these social and economic difficUlties, my ~overnment hopes that Member States and international agencies and organizations will provide Djibouti with the assistance needed to support its efforts and enable it successfully to carry out its development progran~e. ,The sit;.uationj,n the Middle. Eas~ continues. ,to b.e the mostworryins thr:.eat. to international peace and security., I5~,ael".,whic:::h,isp\J.rsuing an expansionist policy, ;has, constan~ly defied i~ternC!.t,ionalpublic;:opinion and sp,\lrned the relevant resolutions of .the united Nations, the provisions of th,e,Char,tel:: and ttle principles .of interIlational law, which state that the ,acquisi.tiol).of terr.j.tory by force is . inadmissible. According to. Israel, the solutionof the Middle .East problem isnot a just and lasting peace, but rather expansiol) and,the ,a<;:quisition of territory to the detriment of its neighbours, and the de,nialof the inalienable r ignts of the Palestinian people. Ever since its creation Israel has shown by ies actions that it will not give up the expansionist goals set by the zionists. Since the creation of the State of Israel by the adoption of General Assembly resolution l.bl (11), of 29 November 1947, the Zionist regime has waged a campaign of terror, involving massacres of the civilian population, incluaing women and children, and resulting in a massive exodus of Palestinians. Thus, terrorism has been introduced in our time into the /Yliddle :blast as a means of achieviny political goals. Since 1948 Israeli acts of aggression have caused several armed conflicts that have endangered international peace and security. The Palesinian· question is at the core of the Miodle .b:ast conflict. There can be no solution without taking account of the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinian people. That crucial fact was stressed in the Arab peace ~lan adopted at the Fez summit conference. The international community has statea on many occasions that the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and the total, unconditional withdrawal of Israel from Palestinian and Arab territories occupied since 1967, inclUding Jerusalem, are the essential elements ot a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. The international conference on peace in the Middle East, which should be convened in accordance with ·General Assembly resolution 38/58 e, under United Nations auspices and with the participation of all the parties concerned, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, the sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, would be the most appropriate forum for establishing a just and lastin9 peace lnthe Middle ~ast. We commend the Secretary-General for his tireless efforts to speed up the preparations for the conference and hope he w111 overcolue all the obstacles in the way of his initiatives. Israeli intervention in Lebanon, the unjustified massacre of civilians and tne destruction of property continue to worsen Lebanon's economic and social structure which has already been seriously affected by internal conflict. Under the pretext of the so-calLed buffer zone, lsrael continues to occupy southern Lebanon to impede the process of national unity and the country's reconstruction. We call upon the United Nations to ensure implementation of Security Council resolution 509 (l!l82) and to assist Lebanon to regain sovereignty over its entire territory in order to undertake the difficult task of reconstruction and recovery. Notwithstanding resolutions of the United Nations, tne OAU and the Non-Aligned Movement, as well as world pUblic opinion, the ~outh African regime continues to intensify its oppressive practices through acts of violence, intimidation and massacres perpetratea against tne black majority. However, South Africa's campaign of terror, police brutality and violence will only strengthen further the resolve of those fighting tor their freedom ana national inde~endence. We express profound concern at the lack of progress in negotiations to find a solution to the problem of the political, economic and social emancipation ot tne African black majority at a time when atrocities perpetrated against the South African people by the apartheid regillle still continue. We believe that in the circumstances the only way to force the apartheid regime to negotiate is through concerted spec1fic international pressure and the immediate imposition of comprehensive sanctions. ~bere will be no peace and tranquillity in that region so long as the apartheid system has not been totally dismantled and destroyed, and all international efforts likely to disable that regime's repressive machinery must be supported oy all peace-loving countries. International action must also support the efforts ot the South African majorlty to end racism and racial discriminatlon and eliminate tne represslve policy of tne Pretoria regime. The illegal occupation of Namibia by South Africa and the latter's refu~al to recognize the rights of the Namibian peop.le to self-determinat iOl1 and indepenCience, despite United Nations resolutions, are a serious source of concern. As long as the Pretoria regilne continues to occupy Namibia, as long as mllitary and police repression are used to subjugate the Namibian people, and as long as the apartheid system plunders the enormous natural and mineral. resources of toe '.l'errltory in tne interest of the minority and foreign allies, peace in that region will be jeopardized. The acts of violence c~rumitted by the forces of apartheid have gone beyond the borders of Namibia and South Africa. Indeed, a few n~ments ago the Head of State of Zambia and current Chairman of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) referred to the latest events that have occurred in that region. The Pretoria regime has many times perpetrated acts of aggression against the indepenaent front-line l:itates to destabilize and disorganize them. In view of that situation, the front-line States need proper political, material and financial support to enable them to defend themselves against South Africa's repeated attacks. Any negotiations seeking to find a political solution to tne proolem of Namibia should lead to a complete cease-fire followed by the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the 80uth African occupation forces from that Territory, so that the Namibian people can exercise their inalienable rights to self-determination ana independence, in keeping w1 th the Uni ted Nations plan approved in Security Council resolution 435 (1978), which is the genuine basis for finding solutions leading to peaceful independence for Namibia. The international community must give the Namibian people every necessary assistance to deal with South African aggression to enable it to win its legitimate struggle for freedom and independence, under the wise guidance of the South west For seven years·and a few days now a destructi,;Ei conflict has been going on . between Iran and Iraq, two Muslim neignbouring countries - a conflict ~hich, according·.to some estimates, has-resulted in a mUl'ion dead and wound~d and incalculable material damage. 'The conilict is now taking on dangerous dimensions, including the risk of its becoming internationalized.· Aware of those developments, the international community adopted practical measures contained in ~ecurity Council resolution 598· (1987) of 20 July 1987 in an. attempt to end the conflict. Unfortunately, the carnage and destruction continue to be intensified either through bombing civilian centres or endangering international snipping. We urge the international community to increase itseiforts and take the necessary steps to end that conflict. All initiatives undertaken bilaterally and multilaterally must be pursued to bring about genuine peace between the two countries. The recent efforts of the United Nations Secretary-General must be supported so that the two countries can agree to negotiate on the basis of Security Council resolution 598 (1987) of 20 July 1987. We greatly appreciate Iraqis positive response to find a negotiated solution to tue conflict. The mediation ~rocess undertaken by the Ad Hoc Committee of Heads of State of the OAU to find a solution to the Chadian problem deserves support. We must support all efforts likely to lead to peace and security in that region. The international community must give every assistance to the people and the Government of Chad in their reconstruction effort. For almost eight years now the Afghan people has been suffering from occupation by foreign armed forces and several millions of them have been forced into exile to escape massacre. ~hat situation requires an urgent political solution on the basis of the principles of the Charter and the obligation of States to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force againQt , ~.. '. the sovereignty and ,terri,torial. in~~,gr,ity o,f any,State. ,Th~ int.ert)ational. commun i ty' El repeated appeals for, th~ wi thdraw~,1. of for~.j.gn troops, have, stiJ.l not '. been heeded, The;"international ',e,Oll}1lll,1nity mu~t _,redouble its efforts to, relieve the suffering of the ,Afghan: people:byguatanteeingthe w1.thdrawal of. foreign forces to enable that people freely to choose 'its pQlitic::al, economic and social systems~ without any foreign:interference~':' South-East Asia' is 'another region 'of: tension since the foreign"armed intervention against and occupation of Democratic Kampuchea. We hope that1:leace will ne restored to ,that region·byfinding a just poi.itical 601ut1.on to the Kampuchean problem and guaranteeing' the withdrawal of all foreign forces, thus enabling that country to enjoy its sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-aligned status. In the Korean Peninsula, since the start of the contlict in tl1e early 19506, the situation has been a permanent source of tension. 1be only way to lessen tension is to create the necessary conditions to enable tne peoples of ~outh and North Korea to establish a dialogue making possible the establishment of a climate of mutual trust so as to resolve differences without any foreign interference. We are living in a world where interdependence has increasingly become an absolute necessity. we note with satisfaction tt!e efforts undertaken oy the united Nations to encourage the developed and the developing nations to co-operate to establish a new just equitaole international order. (Mr. Farah, u)ibouti) The United Nations promotes understanding and co-operation in the broadest meaning of those words. ~he United Nations must redouble its efforts to find solutions to eliminate abject poverty, hunger, malnutrition and disease. In conclusion we firmly believe in tne United Nations for the safeguard of international peace and security. We reiterate our support for the noble ideals embodied by the United Nations, for it offers tne oest forum for findlng solutions likely to lead to understanding, tolerance and co-operation in international relations. The meeting rose at 12.3U p.m.