A/43/PV.46 General Assembly

Today I should like to begin our daily work for a better world by returning for a moment to the beginning, to our source, in other worda, to the Charter. Defining the purposes of our Ot'ganization, the Charter states tha~ we are resolved: Wto save succeeding generati.ons from the scour:ge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and -to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person-. Today, 70 years after the end of the First World War and 50 years after the infamous Kristallnacht - which marked the beginning of persecution of children, elderly persons and men and women of the Jewish faith and genocide which cost the lives of millions of human beings - facing those two terrifying memories, it is appropr iate for us to reaffirm the purposes that I have just recalled at this meeting of the Auembly. Let us use our memories to ensure that the past never aga in - never a~4 in - suffocates our future• AGENDA ITa.t 42 ~ESTION OF IEACE, STABILITY AND m-QPERATION IN SOUTH-EAST ASIA

I should like to inform representatives that following consultations req~rdinq this item, it is proposed that, in view of recent developments, the General Assembly, in pursuance of the efforts to promote peace, stability and co-operation in South-East Asia, dacide to postpone the consiCer~tion of the item and to include it in the provisional aqenda of its forty-fcurth session. May I take it, therefore, that it is the wish of the Assembly to defer consideration of this item and to include it in the provisional agenda of the fortV-fourth session? It was so decided.

That concludes consideration of agenda item 42.

I call on the representative of Mongolia, who wishes to introduce the draft resolution. Mr. OLZ~Y (Mongolia): Four years have elapsed since the adoption by the General Assembly of the Declaration on the Right of ~eoples to Peace. Havinq solemnly proclaimed a sacred right of peoples of our planet to peace, this important document addresse9 itself to one of the basic tenets of our Orqanization, that is, -... faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the hU1'llan peraon, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small-. In adopting this Declaration the General Assembly affirmed the right to peace as a basic human right. One may say that this right derives from the right of the individual to life and creation, and from the right of nations to self-determination and free choice of their way of social development. It is a basic right because life witnout war is the primary international prerequisite for the material well-being, development and progress of countries, and for full implementation of the rights and fundamental human freedoms proclaimed by the United Nations. The realization of this right resides in the efforts to guarantee common security, and in strict compliance with the principle of peaceful coexistence as the onl~i mode of inter-State relations in ooday's world. Universal recognition of international peace as the highest human value would represent a turning-point in understanding the imperatives of the nuclear age on the basis of new thinking. Indeed, peace is not everything; but without peace there is nothing. The Declaration, inter alia, emphasizes that: "••• ensuring the exercise of the right of peoples to peace demands that the policies of States be directed towards the elimination of the threat of war, particularly nuclear war, the renunciation of the use of force in international relations and the settlement of international disputes by peaceful means on the basis of the Charter of the United Nations". (resolution 39/!!) Therefore, the adoption of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace in the then prevailing p~riod of confrontation and complexity in international relations constituted a timely call for vigorous joint action towards strengthening the very foundations of peace and security. It is encour~ging that some positive shifts can be discerned of late in the , international political atmosphere. Mongolia shares the feeling of satisfaction and relief over the conclusion and ratification of the Treatv on the Elimination of Intermediate-Rang@ and Shorter-Range Missiles - the INF Treaty - the first ever document on the liquidation of a whole class of nuclear weapons. However, one flower does not make a spring, as a popular sayinq goes. It is along these lines that we wish the USSR and the United Sta tes of America every success in the ir efforts towards the early conclusion of an aqreement on a So-per-cent reduction of their strateqic weapons. Any other step in the field of disarmament would equally be welcomed as an important contribution to the common cause of peace and security. It is our hope that at this historical juncture the other nuclear Powers and ma;or military countries will not stay away from the disarmament process. Mongolia follows with interest and hope the positive developments in the settlement of regional conflicts not only in Asia ~~t also in other parts of ~~e world. Hence we believe that the atmosphere of dialoque, understanding and co~peration - which is becominq a prevailing feature - contributes qreatly to deepening the international thaw elsewhere. Having said this, my delegation is, however, far from optimistic. The international situation remains a source of serious concern for all, and the arms race continues unabated, swallowing astronomical amounts of human, financial and scientific resources. Such a situation calls for intensification of the stru~qle for un iversal peace and canprehens ive security. It is wi th th is in mind tha t lily delegation deems i~ necessary that the General Assembly once aga in confirm the lasting importance and validity of the Declaration. In our endeavours to implement the provisions of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace, the Mongolian People's Republic proceeds from the following basic premises. First, in the nuclear age, security considerations have become the common concern of each and every country and they embrace all spheres of international rela:tions. Peace, therefcre, can be guaranteed only through joint efforts on the basis of resPeCt for the right of each country to full and permanent security. As the Secretary-General has pointed out, ·Yet in a world where the destinies of all countries are almost certain to he ever more closely linked, there can be no substitute for an effective multilateral system in the maintenance of international peace and security and in the co-operative management of global problems.· (A/41/1, p. 1) Secondly, responsibility for the fate of peace has become a matter of i_ediate concern not only to Goverments b'Jt also to peoples and their organizations. It is therefore important to encourage the popular anti-war and anti-nuclear movements. Peoples and their organizations have not only a right but also an obligation actively to promote peace and to influence the policies of Governments if those policies are not consistent with their desire to live in peace. (Mr. Olzvoy, Mongolia) Thirdly, the Governments are called upon to take steps to fulfil the material and leqal prerequisites f~r the implementation of the Declaration. Such steps could include the adoption by Governments of constitutional and other legislative acts on the protection of peace, guarantees of the right of their citizens and civil organizations to advocate peace and oppose the threat of war, and the introduction of educational and information programmes to give wider pUblicity to the ideas of peace, ~Jtual understanding, co~peration and so on. Fourthly, every practical step in the field of disarmament and international detente strengthens the material guarantees of the right of peoples to peace. TOday a major responsibility rests with all States not only ·to practice tolerance and 1 ive together in peace wi th one another as good neighbour s·, as stipulated in the United Nations Charter, but also to work actively towards ensuring peace and security through disarmament. An entirely new approach and practical steps are needed on the part of all States in order to find solutions to outstanding international problems. Every Government has a duty to tailor its international behaviour to the realities stemming from the imperatives of the space and nuclear age and the increasing interdependence of nations. We, the peoples of the United Nations, must do our utmost to contribute, individually and/or iointlv, to deepening and expanding the post tive trends in world affa irs. Last, but not least, the United Nations has a greater role to play in ensuring and monitoring the implementation of the provisions of the Declaration. Mongolia also advocates the further enhancement of the central role of the United Nations in "'.he maintenance of international peace and securitY, making it an effective int~rnational forum for reaching a universally acceptable balance of the interests of all. (Mr. Ol~voy, Mongolia) ~ put it in a nutshell, the main prerequisites for the realization of the right of peoples to peace are, above all, the follOlllinq: eOlclus ion of war as a ••ans of solving disputes and the non-use of force in international r~lations; adoption of ~asures bO strenqthen universal security in ~ll its co~ponents: ~ilitary-political, economic, humanitarian, environ~ental, and 80 on, ~esPQct for the sOV'ereiqnty and independence of States, and for the path of social ~eveloPftent chasen by peoplesJ and prolllOtion of the cause of un iversal and complete disarmament under ~trict icternational control. It is qratify'ing to note that the ma in idea of the Declaration is commandinq increasing support by countries and wacld public opinionj The ~xico Declaration of 7 August 1986, adopted by the peace and disarmaftent initiative, says: ·We are meeting today to proc:laim Humanity' s Rtght to Peace, and to reiterate our colllDitllent to the task of protectinq this right so that the hUllan race IIilY endure.- (~/4l/5l8, p. 3) As is evidenced by the report of the Secretary-General on the riqht of peoples to peace and documents of the summit meetinqo of the non-aliqned countries, the socialist and non-aligned Sutes have consistently str iven to contribute by their actions to enaurinq the exercise of the riqht of peoples to peace. We also appreciate the efforts of many intetnational interqovernmental and non-qovernmental organizations aimed at furthering implementation of the provisions of the Declaration. A worthy contribution has been made by scientists, scholars and poU ticlans, as well as the ie assoc la Hons, to defin i tion of the concept of the right to peace and determination of ways and means of ensuring the exercise of this right by al~ peoples. Bef~re concluding my brief statement, I should like to introdu~e draft resolution A/43/L.22, on behalf of the followinq countries: Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, CUba, Czechoslovakia, the German ~~cratlc Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library Republic, the Leo People's DentOcratic Republic, the Libyan Arab Jalllahiriva, Madagascar, Miur itania, Maur itius, Nicaragua, Romania, the Syr ian Arab Republic, Viet Nail and IIY own coun tr.y, Mongol ia • The provisions incorporated in the draft resolution are essentially self-explana tory. (Mr. OlzyoY, Mongolia) In preambular paragraphs the General Assemblv, referring to the Declaratiofi and the subsequent resolutions adopted on the sUbject, reaffirms that the illplet1lenta tion of the right of peoples to peace cons ti tu tee a fundamcn tal concer n of each State. It notes with satisfaction the positive events and trends in the field of disarmament, the resolution of crisis situations and the strengtheninq of international peace and secur ity. Furthermore, the General Assemblv refers to the relevant provision of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which emphasi~es that recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. In the operative part the General Assembly takes note with appreciation of the report of the Secretary-General and invites all States and intern,lttional organizations to continue their efforts towards the implementation of the Declaration at the national and international levels. It further calls upon all States and relevant organizations of the United Nations system as well as non-govermental organiza tions to inform the secretary-General about the measures taken and requests the Secretary-General to submit a report to the General Assembly at its forty-fifth session on the bas is of replies rece ived. It is our firm conviction that the Declaration should not be allowed to remain a mere statement of 900d intentions. Its .provisions must be realized in the practical policies of Gover nm~l~a.$. Therefore my delega tion believes that the implementation of the Declaration should be under continuous review in the United Nations. Bearing in mind the importance of periodic examination of this item in the future, the General Assembly would decide to include a separate item on the implementation of the Declaration in the agen~a of its forty-fifth session. The sponsors of the draft resolution sincerely hope it will command the widest (Hr. Olzvoy, Mongolia) Nr. rc>RAGA (Chile) (interpreta ti()f\ frOll Span ish) : When the General Auellbly, at its forty-first session, adopted a resolution entitled -Right of peoples to peace" it was surely seek inq to atta in one of the lIIO~t illustr 10us goals which explain and justify, because of its world-vide nature, the very existence of this Organization. Peace, the ideal goal which should be the focus of a mature society, has been present in the minds of virtuous Illen throughout the course of Ifsatern and Eastern cultunl developnent. Stemming f,rom the mere realization of the need for survival, peace has come to represent a sort of guarantee, -yster iously f~!8tled in the human soul, which through sublimation protects aga inst underlying impulses to annihilation. But the sense of mafu ,n a mater ial wexld must be directed IIlOce towards action than towards thought, and it is in th is process of crystallizing the ideal of peace that one can discover one's dynamic and precariou8 state. It can then become the law framinq individual and collective conduct that should eliminate the uncertainty surrol131ding peace, 80 that we have an acceptable minimum of th is uncerta inty in human reactions, becauee law must provi(~ thE! major e~planation as to why the species has been spared untold 8uffering by orqanizing various endeavours, actions and omissions whereby each and everyone can turn wisely to the legislators. In Chilean society, both historically and in its modern reality, the basic thought of the na tion is fcunded on peace. Peace has taken a var iety of forms and on occasion has resulted in effective action by leader s for the beneft t of the poorlilr sectors of society while on other occasions it has resulted in the strict impl_entation of provisions taking into account the common qood, and in fIIany fields equilibrium has been established between individual liberty and the need for social harlDOny. The same attitude has been championed by my conntry in various dialogues that In this connection the political constitution of the Republic of Chile quarantees the right to life, the riqht to live in a pollution-free environment, and the right to health protection and social security, equality before the law and justice. Similarly there is freedom of choice as to public duties and responsibilities, housinq, communications, opinion, information, association, ownership and so on. The fundamental Charter of 1980, similar to the previous constitutions which govern the fate of our Republic, includes all the fundamental provisions and the authority that govern and facilitate the harmonious development of individuals and the social group. Our provisions have also established means for the protection of the exercise of those rights through recourse to habeas corpus and constitutional protection. Throuqh the former personal freedom is protected aga inet any illegal or arbitrary action that could threaten, destroy, or result in deprivation of, the legitimate exercise of freedootJ the latter protects certa in fundamental rights which could be undermined because of an illegal or arbitrary action or. omission by the authorities or by an individual. Constitutional orqanic laws are issued on political rights and provisions adopted on labour and social security matters, on health, education and housinq. These are clear cut examples of the desire of the Chilean legislature to harmonize life wit;hin the country for the benefit of peace. (Mr. Moraqa, Chile) Chile l s nei ther denied nor concealed the existence of social problells as factors in the real national situation; what we have done is to face the situation of dire poverty by adopting a number of remedial me&sures. ~ot example, the familY allowance scheme has been standardized, and discrimination between workers and employees has been ended by the allocation of a special amount. pensions havQ been established to assist disabled persons and indiqent elderly persons, and t.her~ is a standard family system for the children of persons in extreme poverty and theee not covered by social security. With regard to houainq, financinq has been provided through systems and machinery cover inq various sectors of society. hous inq subsidies have been provided for and the percentage of home owners has increased from 54.1 per cent in 1970 to 63.2 per cent in 1988. In the area of health, promotion and protection proqrammes have bean extended wi th a view to preventing disease, particularly amonq ch ildn~n llInd pregnant wOlllen. Those measures, together with others, have made it possible to reduce mortalitv amonq infants under one year by a large percentage~· A demonstration of my country's aspiration for peaca can be found in the Treaty of Peace and Frien~ship which Chile signed with the fraternal Republic of Argentina. Under that Treaty, both countries have settled their borcler disputes, which threatened their people with confrontation. Imbued with the same spirit of peace, Chile signed and ratified the Antarctie Treaty and the Treaty Banning NUclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in OUter Space and Under Water. Similarly, the Treaty on Principles Governinq the Activities of States in the EKploration and Use of nJter Space, includinq the Moon ~nd Other Celestial Bodies b~s also been signed and ratified hy Chile. In the area of disarmament, Chila signed and ratified in 1974 the Treaty of Tlatelolco, aB it did the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpilinq of Bacteriological (Biological) and Tbxin WeapOns and on Their Destruction. Bearing in mind the threat to peace posed by terrorism, we h6~e signed, in the cQ\te:ct of the Organ iza tion of American St:a tee, the Convention to prevent and penalize acte of terrorism which take the form of crimes against individual$ and rela ted extortion. Did my country not give a clear d~monstration a few weeks aqo of the firm desire of its Government and citizens to achieve social harmonv by conducting a referendum in accordance with our constitution? Wa~ this not a manifestation of the popular will, carried out in complete order and calm, without any call for viol.nce or any fraud, and with massive and exemplary participation by the citizens, and an abstention rate of only 2 per cent, thereby demonstr~ting clear-cut civic responsibility and maturitY? There are many examples of my country's resolute will, clearly demonstrating our innau J genuine and susta ined desire for peace " n!. GAAVAIOV (Bulgaria): The People's Republic of Bulqaria attaches great import.4nce to the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace, adopted by the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly on the initiative of the Mongolian People's Republic. Several years have passed since then and the dynamic development of international affairs has proved convincinqlv the profou~d political substance and universal nature of this document which proclCQime that peace is the sac~ed right of every nation, and assistance in its implementation, one of the fundamental responsibilities of every State. *Mr. Huer ta Mon ta lvo (Ecuador), Vice-Pres ident, took the Cha ir • Now, under the conditions prevailinq in the nuclear space age, as enormous quantities of weapons of mass destruction capable of destroyinq every living being several time$ over have been utockpiled, the international community has come to realize that the peace and security of States and the futur~ of nations cannot be guaranteed by military means. Every att~pt to resort to weapons in solving the main problems of our ~ge is inevitably accompanied by the threat of mankind's self-extermination. As the President of the Council of Sta te of the People's Republic of Bulgar ia, Comrade Tode" Zh ivkov, put it: "The most important task facing manki.nd today is the preservation of peace, that is, the preservation of life on Earth". Bulqaria believes that the Declaration on the Riqht of Peoples to Peace is one of the most constructive documents ever adopted by the United Nations. It corresponds to its noble aims; it also facilitates our ;oint efforts in the search for a solution to the most important ptOblem of our age, namely, the survival of mankind. The Bulgarian deleg~tion regards the principle that the policies of States should be directed at the elimination of the threat of war, particularly nuclear war, at the elimination of the use of force in international relations, and at resolving international conflicts by political means, as a key element and the core of the Declaration. And that, as we are well aware, is the very logic of the new political thinking. We are happy to note that understanding of the need of such new thinking and approaches to world problems is gaininq qround constantly at the Uni ted Na tions. The Declaration also proclaims peace to be a supreme value that can only be preserved through the joint efforts of the international community by eliminating both the material means of waqinq war, and the reasons that bring thi~ evil to life. Everyone should therefore realize that without recoqnizing the riqht of nations to peace and unless States accept the Obliqation to turn peace into a lasting state of i~ternational affa irs, it will be impossible for mank ind to survive. At the same time, it will be illlpossible to solve any cf the acute problems facing mankind today if this right is not universally recognized and granted. The joint initiative of the socialist countries, includinq lilY own, th! People's Republic of Bulgaria, on a comprehensive systelll of international peace and security, proposed at the forty-first session of the Ganeral Assembly, is directed at guaranteeing the right of peoples to peace. It combines intrinsically such illlportant aspects of security as the militarY"1)Olitical, economic, ecological and hUllanitarian fields of international relations. In our view, its adoption would lead to the building of a world free of nuclear _apons and violence in which the right of peoples to peace would not only be proclaimed, but also practically illlplemented. Regrettablv, however, there are still quite a few obstacles and unresolved issues between us and this ideal. However, Bulgaria Shares the view, voiced by a nUmber of other participants in the general debate, that joint efforts have resulted in lessening the direct threat of nuclear war, and that the preser:vation of peace has been given a better chance. Thia has b&en a oomaon victory and contribution, but I would particularly like to point out that the event that played a very illlportant part in raising our expectations and optimism was the Soviet-United States dialogue enhanced by the Geneva, Aey!c1~vikc WaShington and Moscow summit meetings and particuhrly the Treaty between the United States and the Union of Soviet SOcialist RepUblics on th_ EUmlna tion of The ir Interllledia te-Range and Shorter-Range Mise iles - INP 'l'rea ty • This was the first. step in mankind's history - t:l small one, but: highly important for the future of l:8ace - on the roltd to real nuclear disarmament. Because this agreement not only reduces the threat of nuclear conflict and strengthens strategic st.ability; it has in fact become one of the compon~nts of the only mater ial foundation which could be used upon which to build mankind's future and which could guarantee the right of nations to live in peace. Bulgaria believes that the guar~nteeing of the right of peoples to peace requires new efforts and measures in the fiel~ of disarmament which would ultima tely lead to the reduc tion and elimina tion of nuclear weapons, a cCl1lplete and comprehensive ban on nuclear tests, the prevention of an arms race in outer space, the elimination of chemical weapons, the reduction of armed forces and armaments, particularly in Europe, the cutting of military spending and the resolving of other issues of military security. The strengthening of international secur ity through the regulation of regional conflicts by peaceful means and by ta:ting into account the interests of all Statas, the consistent honouring of the right of nations to self-determination and the non-admissibility of interference in other countries' internal affa its are other highly important faotors for building a just and lasting peace on Earth. The realities of our world today and the la test dcvcloP.l\lents in international affa irs clearly indicate that the settling of disputes and conflicts by peaceful means and the prevention of new ones should be securely embodied in the practice of international relations and should become their norm. In this context I should like to note the great potential and contribution of the United Na tions both to the settlement of regional confl icts and to the preservation and strengthening of ~orld peace and the development of co~peration between the Member States. Bulgaria believes that the prestige and potential of the United Nations, the Security Council and other bodies should be utilized to such a degree as to turn th(! world Organization into a truly efficient and effective instrun~nt for maintaining international peace and security. Th~ Wldisputed loqic of our interdependent world today requ ires the undertaking of urgent joint action for solving the global issues facing mankinrt in such areas as international economic, currency and financial relations, the ecology and power generation. No secure quaran.tees for peaca can be built without: the development of broad international co-operation in the socio-humanitarian field, including human rights, the promotion of contacts between peoples and the exchange of information. New political thinking requires all of us to abandon the old stereotypes of the so-called image of the enemy, distrust, hostility and confrontation if we want to build moral guarantees of world peace. Their value lies in the fact that they centr ibute both to the establishment of the mater ial guarantees of peace and to the qranting of the right of nations to peace. Peace is the !~al of socialism. Lenin's well-known phrase is fully reflected in the policy of socialist Bulgaria which is based on the principle of peaceful coexistence between countries of different social order. Guided by our conviction that there are no large and 3mall countries in the fight for peace, the Paople's Republic of Bulqar ia spares no effort in oontr ibuting to the developnent of co-operation between nations and to the strenCjthening of peace in the Balkans, in Europe and throughout the world. For the past four decades Bulgaria's foreign policy has been inspired by the ideals of peace and international und~rstandinq. Our efforts towards peace are naturally directed first at our own reqion p the Balkans, where we are trying to strengthen and develop good-neighbourly relations "'i th all Balkan Sta tes and peoples to con tr ibu te to the consolida tion of an atllofJphere of detente and co-operation that corresponds to the spir it of our time and to the interests of all States and peoples. In pursuit of this noble goal, the People's Republic of Bulgaria has sponsored, and is implementing, a whole complex of proposals and initiatives. I should like to draw attention in particular to sQlle of them: the initiative on the turning of the Balkans into a zone free of nuclear and chemical weapons, the signing by all Balkan States of a Code of Good-Neighbourly Relations, on the peninsula's ecological protection and on the de~elopment of co-operation in the political, economic and cultural fields. BUlgaria took a constructive part in the meeting of Foreign Ministers of the Balkan countries, held earlier this year in Belgrade. This meeting, the first of its kind in history, set the beginning of a process of Balkan co-operation and strengthened the impact of the Conference on security and Co-opera tion in Europe and in the Balkans. The participation of Bulgaria in world affairs and in such forums as the Conference on security and Co-operation in Europe and, of course, the united Nationo is insPired by the ideals of peace and international understandinq. BUlgar 1& firmly suppotted the adoption of the Declara ticn on the Riqht of Peoples to Peace and will spare no efforts in the implementation of its aims and principles. BUlgaria will continue to werk with the United Nations and all Member States for the full implementation of this Declaration. In fulfilment of this policy, BUlgaria has sponsored the draft resolution en this issue contained in document A/43/L.22, so eloquently introduced by the representative of the Monqolian People's Republic. thq initiative on the right of peoples to peace, proposed by the Mongolian People's Republic, takes place at a time when a turn for the better is beginning to take shape in international relations. Developments of the recent past, in particular the advent of nuclear disarmament which came wi th the sign in<j of the Soviet Union-United Sta tes Treaty on the Elimination of Their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles, confirm the German Democratic Republic in its belief that the implementation in every respect of the right of peoples to peace is feasible and can be guaranteed in a world free from nuclear weapons and ~iolence. At the same time, we cannot fail to see that the road towards liberating humankind from nuclear and other weapons of m~ss destruction is an arduous one. Removing the Obstacles barring that road requires, more than ever before, sustained efforts on the part of all those wtio earnestly seek peace and are prepared to work for it. The German Democratic Republic regards the right to peace as the most important of fundamental human rights, since its guarantee and exercise is a basic prerequisite for the continued existence of civilization and for overcoming the grave political, economic, ecological and humanitarian problems facing mankind. In the German Democratic Republic the pursuit of a secure peace is a constitutional mandate. That firmly established policy principle is reflected in the historic obligation assumed by the German Democratic RP.public to do everything to ensure that never again will war but only peace emanate from German soil. Accordinglv, the German Democratic Republic actively pursues a policy which is aimed at prcmotinq international politic~l dialogue in the interests of peace, the comprehensive guarantee of equal security for all States and peoples and the balancing of interests. That is also the underlying concept of my country's llctivities within the United r~tions. Thus, in the course of what are now 15 years of membership, it has persistently worked in this world-wide organization of so~ereiqn States to help solve the cardinal issue of the present time: averting the threat of a nuclear ca tas trophe. That is Hlus tra ted by a mul ti tude of proposals the German Democra tic Republic has submitted and by the active support it has given initiatives launched by its allies and other countries with a view to solving the pressinq issues of the present time in a new way - a way that: meets the requirE!lllents of the nuclear and space age. One of those is the Declan tion on the Right of Peoples to Peace, adopted on the initiative of the Mongolian People's Republic at the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly. The deeply symbolic character of that initiative is reflected in the fact that since its adoption it has been considered in the context of the Interna tio:nal Year of Peace proclaimed by the United Nations. The basic idea of both is to save succeed ing genera tions from the scourge of war and to take e ffec t ive collec tive measures to that end. Both are bc:sed on the awareness that in the nuclear age peace and security cannot be achieved by military and confrontational means, but only by political and co~perative means. Hence it is all the more essential to promote in every way possible the trend towards common endeavour, dialogue &nd understanding - a trend which has a beneficial effect on international relations as a whole. We were deeply moved, at the beginning of this meeting~ by the President's statement in memory of the vic tims of the Naz i pogrom SO yearsago. On 8 November last the German Democratic Republic Par liament in Ber 11n devoted a special meeting to the commemoration of the millions of victims of the Nazi dictatorship. In his commemorativ~ address marking the Nazi poqrom half a century ago, Parliamentary President ROlet Sindermann stressed that at the time of liberation from fascism the pledge was given to work incessantly until ~ll the roots of war had been extirpated, until hatred of other peoples and contempt of man had given way to love for other human beings. And he continued by saying that those who honestly pursued this great goal must fight against everything that threa tened humank ind today, and tha t peaceful co-opera tion among peoples and Sta tea for the good of all would ha~e to replace the evil spirit of confrontation. we note with great satisfaction that there is a growing tendency world-wide for States to work together and conduct a result-oriented dialoque, all of which has given a marked impetus to the activities of the United Nations, in particular where its effectiveness in implement~nq the right of peoples to peace is concerned. Ttte ability of the world Organization to contribute effectively to m~king the positive changes in international relations irreversible is manifest in what the United Nations h~s been doing to promote measures of arms limitation and disarmament, help achieve practical results in the peaceful settlement of regional conflicts and thus strenqthen the new approach to equal security for all States and peoples. This presupposes that States muster the political will and readiness to "eet the challenges of the twentieth centurv~ which is drawing to a close. The Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace rightly underlines that the preservation of this riqht and co-operation in its implementation are fundamental obligations of each State. The German Democratic Republic will continue to do all it can to help strengthen world peace and ensure a peaceful future for mankint'l. That is why draft resolution A/43/L.22, now before us, bears the siqnature of my countty also as a sponsor. Mr. KHANSY (Lao People's Democratic Republic) (interpretation from French): At its thirty-nintbl session the General Assembly, on the initiative of the Mongolian People's Republic, adopted the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace. That ~claration, intended to be a document of un ique importance, is still extremely relevant. Peoples are still livinq under the threat of nuclear al'lnihilation. Everything must be done to make the Declaration come true. In our view. promotinq the exercise of this sacrosanct right i~ a basic obliqation for .. each State as it formulates and applies its foreign policy. The world is now witnessing positive trends in international relations. In their efforts for peace and international co-operation, many countries have put forward various initiatives to prevent nuclear war, reverse the arms race, promote the development of peoples, do away wi th anact~ronistic views of the world that are based on hatred and hostility, and establish between States relations of understanding and mutual trust in which the primacy of the pr inciples of law and ethics must replace the policy of armed confrontation. The Group of Six, whose peace and disarmament initiative is still echoing through this Hall, has also engaged in important - indeed, extremely commendable activi ties aimed at elirnina ting the threat of nuclear war. Many other Sta tes, pacifist movements and peace-loving peoples in all continents have made their noble contribution to the international attempt to preserve peace and prevent a nuclear holocaust. It was in part thanks to those initiatives and activities that the summit meetinqs between the United states and the Soviet Union were able to take place and to lead to the conclusion of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Ranqe Missiles. The Lao People's Democratic Republic welcomed the conclusion of that Treaty, and welcomes also the serious implementation nf its provisions now under way by the two parties. That is an important step towards true nuclear disarmament which could help reduce the threat of a nuclear conflagration and, thus, promote the practical exercise of the right of peoples to peace. This instrument, which is in the interests of all peoples l truly helps the struggle for the creation of a non-violent and nuclear-weapon-free world. Under its provisions the Treaty would, it is true, eliminate only two categories of the nuclear weapons of the two countries. Nevertheless, it does symbolize their resolve to achieve a larqer reduction in their ar senals. (Mr. Khamsy, Lao People's De{J()cra tic Republic) The international community should thus encour&ge them in their negotiations on the conclusion of an agreement on a 50 per cent reduc.tion in their strategic offensive weapons. The conclusion of such an agreement by the two countries would be a major step towards true exercise of the right of peoples to peace. While the right of peoples to peace must be based on specific measures in the ... area of disarmament, it is also ~elated to strict respect for the principles of the United Nations Char:t~r. One of the provisions of the Declaration of the Right of Peoples to Peace states that the policy of States must be directed towards the abandonment of the use of force in international relations and the search for the peaceful settlement of disputes between States by peaceful means. In thi~ nuclear and space age, disputes cannot be resolved by military means. Only by dialogue and a spirit of p~aceful coexistenc~ can such conflicts be solved. Those who still dream of settling conflicts, including border conflicts, with other States by military force must now understand that this is not in the interest of their peoples, or of world peace, and that the goal they seek will never be reached in that way. After more than 30 years of war imposed on us from outside, the Lao people wish only to live in peace and devote all their efforts and resources to national reconstruction. Since the establishment of the new r.egime on 2 December 1975, my Government has strictly applied its consistent policy of peace, friendship and co-operation with all States, particularly neighbouring States, without distinction as to their socio-political system. At the United Nations we have actively contributed to the efforts of the international community to eliminate the threat of war, especially nuclear war, and the threat or use of force and in international relations, and to ensure the settlement of disputes by peaceful means in accordance wi th the provisions of the Charter. At the national level we try to teach our (Mr. Khamsy, Lao People's Democratic Republic) people the ideals of peal:e, co-operation and international unde~standing. In so doing, my country hopes to contribute, albeit modestly, to ensur~ng the effective guarantee of the right of peoples to peace. Every people has a right to peaceful and independent development. However, development is possible only if there is peac~. All States and international organizations must, therefore, help to preserve and defend peace wherever it may be ~. threatened. Because of its universal nature, the United Nations has an important role to play in this area. The Organization has done well to step up its efforts in sup~~rt of disarmament, take action to help break the deadlock in regional conflicts, take measures to strengthen international security and establish a climate of trust among States, and encourage respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. We can only welcome this action. The Lao People's Democratic RepUblic will continue to make its contribution to all efforts to attain that lofty 90al. However, at a time when in some cases military concepts still prevail in the preparation of policies, we must expect & long and difficult task. Thus, in this undertaking the international community must employ all its energy and do everything possible to arrive at the desired goal. Mr. PRAM NGAC (Viet Nam): We have advanced beyond the time when international politics were based on the interests of a single Power or group of Powers. In the nuclear age we cannot shirk our responsibility to uphold the right of every people and every individual to life, freedom, peace and the pursuit of happiness. If we are to give priority to human values, the non-use of force must become the foundation of international life. TO this end, international relations should be built on the basis of mutual understanding, trust, respect and co-operation in all areas. (Mr. Khamsy, Lao People's Democratic Republic) We are firmly convinced that t~e right of peoples to peace can be fully exercised only in a world free from violence and the danger of war, a~ we should lik~ to recall the following conclusion unanimously arrived at by all Member States participating in thE! first special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament: "Removing the threat of a world war ~ a nuclear war - is the most acute and urgent task of the pressnt day. Mankind is confronted with a choice: we must halt the arms race and proceed to disarmament or face aLnihilation." (resolution 5-10/2, para. 18) The right of peoples to peace should also be interpreted as the right to defend tile interests of the peace, security and development of every country; the right to outlaw wars of aggression and prohibit the threat or use of force in international relations. The Declaration on the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations, adopted by the General Assembly on 18 November 1987, constitutes an appropriate and practical measure in promoting the implementation of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace. Aware of the dangers facing the world, people are beginning to realize that they constitute a single whole. Without denying the diversity or forms of social development, mankind increasingly opposes the selfish pursuit of national interests and seeks to harmonize the legitimate interests of individual countries and nations and to preserve our common human civilization. Each of us, of course, sees that whole and our future differently. While respecting all the different visions of the future of humankind, we share the common ground that a better future for the human race will either come as a better future for all countries and peoples or will never come for anybody. (M~. Pham Ngac, Viet Nam) The peoples of South-East Asia have witnessed profound changes in their region over the past 40 1'ears. Although the problem of peace and .~c. .Jrity in South-'East Asia is essentially the same as that in the rest of the world, including the Pacific region and Europe, our region has its own characteristics. (Hr. Pham !gac, Viet Nam) The most striking characteristic of the situation in our region, as well as li\ the Asia-Pacific region, durinq the past 40 years has been the st:uggle of nations for political and economic independence. During that period Viet Nam became the victim of wars of aggression that were among the most intensive in the whole history of war and were fought with an unprecedented tonnage of bombs and shellsQ Viet Nam gave all for independence, knowing well the value and strength of independence~ freedom and peace. Therefore, we whole-heartedly welcomed and fully support ~~e Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace, adopted unanimously by the General Assembly on 12 November 1984, and this year we joined in sponsorship of draft resolution A/43/L.22, entitled "Right of peoples to peace". Through their diverse activities during 1986 in observance of the International Year of Peace, as referred to in United Nations document A/4l/733, and numerous concrete measures taken throughout 1987 and up to the present, as mentioned in United Nations document A/43/334, the Vietnamese people have vividly translated their earnest aspiration to peace into the language of practical action. First and f~remost, they have manifested their spirit in their active promotion of the idea of establishing relations of peaceful coexistence and building South~East Asia into a zone of peace, stability, friendship and co-operation with a view to ensuring peace and security for themselves and their neighbours in South-East Asia and Asia as a whole. There exist great driVing forces in the world, including the Asia-Pacific region and South-East Asia, for strengthening the struggle against war and for the defence of peace. The wish and aspiration of the people of the world to live in peace and prosperity are irresistible. Mankind has eve~y reason to unite and work for this noble cause. resolution, submitted ~y a number of delegations, which calls for recognition of the right of peoples to peace, deserves not only the careful consideration of the Assembly but also discussion of its implications and consequences. First, the preambular part of the draft resolution before us is based not only on earlier ~ecommendations of the Assembly but also on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the fortieth anniversary of which we are to commemorate on 10 December. Peace is the basic goal of the United Nations, and its attainment is the justification for the existence of most of the international organizations of our time. Not only are the organs of the United Nations working for peace and in the cause of peace, but peace is the fundamental objective of the specialized agencies also. It is not possible to separate the purpose of strengthening peace from the other tasks of the Uni ted Nations. All its organs - the General Assembly, the security Council, the Trusteeship Council, the Economic and SOcial Council and the International Court of Justice - are firmly committed to maintaining solidarity among peoples. The Hem before us is the proposal to set forth the right of peoples to peace. The general part of the proposal is unobjectionable. The nations which form the international community must commit themselves not only to fight for security but also to use their diplomatic activities in the service of harmony among nations and to mobilize their efforts to that end. It is undeniable that peace is generally disrupted by the policy of States which seek to resolve international disputes by force. There are undoubtedly factors that undermine harmony and circumstances that favour conflict. However, it is also certain that peace is not merely a collective right but at the same time an individual right, with objective, inalienable characteristics. In our time peace has become the right of all peoples. We could not prerequisite for the exercise of all their fundamental freedoms. In any case, peace is the right of every human being and, collectively, the prerogative of political communities. The fact that peace is simultaneously an individual and a collective right is its distinctive feature for human beings and for communities in our time. Hence the need to proclaim the right of peoples to peace. This is a shortened version of the idea, one that is merely a single phase of a cycle. If peoples have the right to peace, individuals necessarily have the right to demand it of the constituent political authorities. For some time there has been talk of the third generation of human rights, to distinguish it from the first, which is composed of the civil and political rights proclaimed by the French Revolution, the bicentennial of which we are prepa~ing to celebrate, and the second, which is composed of economic, social and cultural rights, which the nineteeth century helped to extend. The third generation is composed of the rights of solidarity, which involve the need for the sense of brother hood among peoples so necessary in our time. The rights of the third generation, therefore, are primarily the right to peace, to development, to a healthy environment and to the enjoyment of the benefits that international law has proclaimed the common heritage of mankind. These, together with the first and second generations, constitute an indivisible whole. However, there is a problem in that the Universal Declaration of 1948 did not succeed in incorporating these rights as an objective juridical reality. It is now the task of the United Nations to start to prepare a new text that will incorporate them with rights already recognized and provide the guarantees necessary for their full enjoyment. When we discuss in the Assembly the right of peoples to peace, we are not forgetting that this is another human right, just as inalienable and important as those already embodied in instruments• --- Colombia's proposal to the General Assembly is the preparation of a new declaration of rights, complementary to the Universal Declaration, including new fundamental prerogatives for both individuals and groups. We cannot separate the inherent right of nations to peace from the same riqht of individuals and the need foe its implementation not only by national authorities but also by the international community. If one looks at the contemporary world, plagued as it is by anxiety and threats, it is clearly necessary to recognize that the riqht to peace is the synthesis of all the other fundamental freedoms of man, without respect for which it is impossible to ensure respect for any of them. In an overall situation fraught with the threat of war, intimidation and terrorism, one cannot talk about human rights being fully enjoyed while peace, the fundamental attribute of individuals and nations, is not recognized as the basis of international order and harmony. To declare peace an individual and collective riqht and mobilize the work of the Unit~d Nations to ensure that it is respected and real is a prerequisite for man's survival ~n Earth. And in so doing we are identifying the best instrument through which to ensure that riqhts and freedoms enjoy the desired respect. Support for a third covenant on human rights covering peace, development, the environment and the enjoyment of the common heritaqe of mankind would be the best contribution the United Nations could make to the celebration of the fortieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration and would complement individual guarantees of respect for collective rights. We could confine ourselves to proclaiming the right of peoples bO peace were there not so many disruptive factors which make it difficult to exercise this riqht internally. The Government of Colombia is fu!!y aware of the fact that recognition of the right to peace cannot be just an externa! formulation. There has to be a commitment by all Governments to extend this right to individuals. The policy of the Government of President Virgilio Barco has made peace not onlY an imperative but also the emblem of its international conduct. The purpose of a third covenant, which would embody the new rights of solidarity, would be to affirm the fact that peace is the right not only of nations but also of individuals. In proclaiming this, the delegation of Colombia is not just making a theoretical assertion but inviting all Members of the United Nations to defend this right and turn it into a tangible realitv.· Mrs. OUSENKO (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpre~:=ion from Russian): The adoption by the General Assembly at its thirty-ninth session of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace, based on an initiative of the Mongolian People's Republic, confirmed the will of the international community to avert a world-wide nuclear catastrophe and ensure the survival of the human race. Coming at a time when there was an unprecedented accumulation in the world of weapons of mass destruction, the principal provisions of the Declaration stipulated that the peoples of our planet had a sacred right to peace. It is one of the fundamental obligations of every State to promote the implementation of the Declaration. The appeal in the Declaration to all Sta tes and inter national organ izations to do their utmost to assist in implementing the right of peoples to peace is aimed at the adoption of specific measures, inter alia, in the area of disarmament. In this way the international instrument has become an important contribution to the further developnent of the concept of comprehensive security. State po.licies based ~n the new political thinking are beginning to yield quite tangible results in the international arena. By workinq together the international community has *The President returned to the Chair. 2---- moved the threat of war further away. There should, indeed, be no place for it in the life of the human community. The Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles - INF Treaty - has been signed and has now entered into force and become the first step towards true nuclear disarmament. Implementation of the agreement reduces the threat of nuclear conflict and thereby promotes the practical attainment of the goals of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace. With the cl imina tion of each ha tch of miss iles in accordance wi th the INF Treaty the layers of distrust and fear that have built up over the years are disappearing and we see instead the building of international trust and co~peration among States. An important step towards guaranteeing enjoyment of the right of peoples to peace \:Iould be the conclusion between the USSR and the United Sta tes of an agreement on a 50 per cent reduction in strategic offensive weapons while maintaining the Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems as it was signed in 1972. The work on a multilateral convention on the complete prohibition and destruction of chemical weapons is about to be completed after many years. We are trying to create a nuclear-weapon-free world using political means. Solutions are needed to the problem of how to prohibit the development of weapons based on new principles of physics. Conventional weapons ~nd armed forces must also be reduced. We also have to work out how in practice to curb the arms race on the seas and oceans and eliminate foreign bases and military presence on foreign terri tory. The purposes of the Declaration on the Riqht of Peoples to Peace are promoted by the initiative of a group of socialist countries, including the Ukrainian SSR, put forward in the United Nations, concerning the establishment of a comprehensive system of international peace and security. True international security in our time can be achieved by political means, on the basis of the priorities of common human values. The positive chanqes talc ing place in the wor ld today open up prospects of curbing the arms race and mak ing proqress in other areas rela tinq to the maintenance of international peace and security. Growinq interest in achievinq practical results in disarmament and establishing a nuclear-weapon-free world can be seen from the wor k being done at the present session of the General Assembly. There is unanimous support for ~~e growing role of the United Nations under the new conditions, opening up unprecedented possibil ities IEor the effective use of the tremendous potential for peace represented by the United Nations Charter. The United Nations must play an irreplaceable and unique role in moving the world forward towards a world without wars, in which security will be based on the force of law and morality, not on the force of weapons. The unique potential of the United N&tions must be used more broadly in breaking the deadlock in conflicts and settling disputes by political means. This can be done throuqh th~ collective efforts of States, with full respect for the independence of peoples and the riqht to determine their own future. The potential of this Organization must be activated for a just political settlement of existing regional conflicts and for preventing the emergence of new crisis sitl~tions. Full exercise of the right of peoples to peace can be promoted by the demilitarization and humanization of international relations and recognition of the right of every State to freedom of choice. The growth of th~ scientific and technical potential of today's world must be made use of in order to resolve global economic, ecological, energy, food, medical and other problems for the benefit of the ~ntire human race. Reducing the military burden would make available tremendous material and intellectual resources for the social and economic development of the human race as a whole. In establishing firm guarantees of peace, what is important is international co-operation in the humanitarian area, including human rights. As one of the Directors of the recently established Ukrainian Children's Fund, the main purpose of which is to increase awareness of the need to ensure the well-being of future generations, I should like to say that our organization welcomes any national or foreign, individual or collective contributions to the work of our Fund. The establishfi~nt and consolidation of international peace would be the best possible contribution to the activities of all children's funds that participants could make at this session of the General Assembly. I would appeal to all members to make this important contribution in the name of coming generations and in the name of the well-being of the children of all peoples, wherever they may live, whether in Asia, Australia, Africa, America or Europe. The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic consistently advocates the exercise of ~he right of peoples to peace. State establishments and social organizations in the Ukraine will continue in future actively to co-operate with the United Nations and its Member States in seeking the full implementation of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace. Mr. TANASIE (Romania): The Socialist Republic of Romania has consistently pronounced itself in favour of preserving tile right of peoples to peace and its implementation as a fundamental obligation of each State. We commend the Government of Mongolia for its valuable initiative, which led to the adoption just four years ago, on 12 November 1984, of the ~claration on the Right of Peoples to Peace. Agenda item 21 offers us an opportunity to reiterate our views on a vital issue of the times, namely, the aspirations of all peoples to eradicate war from the life of humankind and, above all, to avert a worl~-wide nuclear catastrophe. My country expresses its full support for the noble ideas underlined by the 1984 Declaration which reflect the awareness that in the nuclear age the establishment of a lasting peace represents the primary condition for the preservation of human civilization and the survival of life on Earth. This stand of Romania is based on the axiomatic truth that peace represents the supreme value of mankind as a whole. The preservation and consolidation of peace call for the combined efforts of all States, irrespective of their political and social systems. This is one of the most topical tasks of our era. Especially now, in the current circumstances when tremendous arsenals of nuclear and mass-destruction weapons have been amassed all over the world, when nuclear tests continue and such weapons are being increasingly sophisticated, there should also be a common response by the entire international community. This response should be a firm and clear one. Such a response has always been emphasized by Romania, which considers that nothing can be more important than the concerted efforts of all peoples, of realistically minded, advanced forces all over the world to halt the danqerous course of events towards tension and war. It is a response that should include a resolute switch to practical deeds, to concrete measures of disarmament, in particular nuclear disarmament, for the defence of the fundamental rights of eve~y people, of every inhabitant of our planet, to peace, life, and a free and dignified existence. If there is really one unchallengeable uniting imperative of our epoch, it is the implementation of the sacred right of all peoples on our planet to peace. This right is both individual and collective by its nature, and its full exercise is a primary prerequisite for the material well-being and economic, social and spiritual development and pr.ogress of all States and for the integral enjoyment of the human rights and fundamental freedoms proclaimed by the United Nations and incorporated in many international legal and political documents. In this respect there is one provision of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace that deserves to be recalled for its lasting value. I have in mind the provL:ion in which the General Assembly emphasizes that ensuring the exercise of the right of peoples to peace demands that the policies of States be directed towards the elimination of the threat of war, particularly nuclear war, the renuncia tion of the use of force in interna tional rela tions and the settlement of international disputes by peaceful means on the basis of the Charter of the United Nations In order to illustrate the vital importance my country attaches to ne effeo t ive implementa tion of the right of peoples to peace and to malt inq use of the United Nations machinery for that purpose, I refer to the proposals made in recent years by Romania in this Organization. one year after the adoption of the Declaration of the Right of Peoples to Peace, we submitted, and the General Assembly adopted by consensus on 8 November 1985, the "Solemn appeal to States in conflict to cease armec) action forthwith and to settle disputes between them . rough negotiations, and to States Members of the United Nations to undertake to solve situations of tension and conflict an~ existing disputes bV political m~ans and to refrain from the threat or use of force and from any intervention in th~ internal affairs of other States". In view of this general conep.rn of peoples, Romania came out with the idea of specificall\.' discussing the peaceful settlement of disputes between States. Another initiative belongs to the social sector and relates to the preparation, celebration and follow-up activities of the International Youth Year with the motto, "Participation, development, peace". The resolution the General Assembly adopted by consensus on that topic repeatedly expressed the conviction of the world Organization that there is a cardinal n,ed to harness the enerqies, enthusiasms and creative abilities of youth to the taSk of the preservation of world peace and the promotion of international co~peration and understandinq. The International Youth Year managed to put into focus the elementary but vital truth that the future of youth cannot be separated fl:om the fa te of peace. This was the political will of Romania concretely to contribute, through legal and political channels of the United Nations, to the universal implementation of the riqht of peoples to peace. If peoples are determined to have their sUbstantive share of efforts towards international peace and understanding, their ardent and noble aspirations should be assisted by all possible means by all Member States at the level of the United Nations as a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the a tta inment of th is common end. (Mr. Tanasie, Romania) There is no doubt that the foundation of peace can and must be strengthened within the framework of the United Nations and that this requires a stronq commitment by all Member Sta tes. It is in this perspective that my delegation joins in th~ appeal addressed to all States and international orqanizations, in particular those of the United Nations system, to do their utmost to assist in giving full life to the riqht of peoples to peace throuqh the adoption of appropr ia te measures a t both na tional and international levels. We are confident that through the joint struqqle of the peoples the policy of disarmament, security and co-operation and, first of all, peace as the most valuable asset of mankind will universally triutnph. That confidence has a historical basis in Romanian thinkinq. It has been stated time and again by the Romanian representatives befot'e international forums. In the year when all Roman ian people celebra te 70 year s since the crea tion of the unitary Romanian National State through what we call the Great Union of 1918, it is appropriate to quote the President of my country, Nicolae Ceausescu, who appealed to all States, saying that "The safeguarding of peace is one of the most important goals of our times. Under the existinq circumstances, every country, be it large or small, is responsible for the fate of wo~ld peace, can and must contribute actively to the defusing of international tension and the building of relations of confidence among peoples". It is the merit of the initiative currently being discussed under agenda ~.tem 21 that we have the opportunity to restate here our full adherence to the unperishing value of peace. (Mr. Tanasie, Romania) It is in this framework that my delegation co-sponsored draft resolution A/43/L.22, which reaffirms the lasting importance and validity of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace. We express the hope that the draft resolution will receive the broadest support of our world Organization dedicated to taking all appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace and to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war. Mr. GORAJEWSKI (Poland): Since the adoption in 1984 of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace the ideas contained theretn, and especially the awareness that in the nuclear age the establishment of a lastinq peace on Earth represents the primary condil':ion for tl:1e preservation of human civilization and the survival of mankind, have received further recognition and become the subject of serious consideration as a basis of the practical policies of States. The leaders of the Soviet Union and the United States, in their joint statement at the Geneva Summit Meeting in November 1985, agreed that a nuclear tlar cannot be won and must never be fought. The highest representatives of the six-nation initiative in their Mexico Declaration of 7 August 1986 proclaimed humanity's right to peace and reiterated their commitment to toe t~sk of protecting this right se that the human race may endure; and the socialist countries, in their memorandum on the question of a con~rehensive system of international peace and security submitted to the forty-second session of the General Assemblv, reiterated their firmly held conviction tha t peacefu 1 coexis tence among sover e ign and independen t Sta tes wi tit ~ifferent social and political systems, of different sizes and different levels of development, constitutes a universal found~tion of international relations. This convergence of views is most welcome, since the creation of a world (Mr. Tanasie, Romania) requir~s the co-operation of Governments and qovernmental and non-qovernmental organizations. as well as the active efforts of peoples. It requires demilitarization of thinking and calls foz ~ gradual restructuring of international relations along peaceful lines and their thorough democratization. Poland. for itR part. spares no effort to promote consistent implementation of the Declaration bv pursuing a constructive policy in favour of peace and international security through disarmament. An increasingly widespread conviction is gaining ground in Poland that national security can best be guaranteed throuqh the promotion of a climate of international confidence. by forswearing action likely to breed concern 00 the part of other countries over their security and. finally. through a process of the preparation of ~ocieties for life in peace. Tangible disarmament measures should make it possible to de-emphasize the military factor in international relations. alleviate the negative consequences of the arms race and prevent the further waste of limited resources indispensable for development purposes. With th is perspective. condi tions will be crea ted for developing human potential. giving scope for recognition of human life as the supreme value. It is precisely such a manner of thinking that underlies measures undertaken by Poland wi th a view to transla tinq the right of peoples to peace into practical action. In recent years Poland has submitted a number of specific initiatives aimed at ensuring the peace and security of the region of which we form part. that of Europe. The latest and most significant of such initiatives is the Ja.ruzelski Plan of t987 to decrease armaments and increase confidence in Central Europe. The Plan is a complex one and has been presented in a cor.:prehensive manner in "';"c. United Nations. inter alia. at the third special session of the General Assembly devoted to disarmament. Of particular relevance to the item under discussion is the proposal to undertake ;oint efforts that would ensure an evolution of the nature of military doctrines and concepts so that they could b~ ~eciprocally assessed as being strictly defensive. It would be an important measure of confidence-buildinq, bringing closer the prospect of life in peace to which humankind aspires. Th~ Polish Government will continue to take measures aimed at the implementation of the noble pr inciples oonta ined in the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace and we whole-~artedlv_support draft resolution A/43/L.22. from Russian): The Byelorussian SSR regards the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace, adopted at the thirty-ninth session on the initiative of the Mongolian People's Republic, as a useful document facilitating the search for a solution to the fundamental problems of the world today, averting nuclear war and the survival of the human race. The main goal of the Declaration was to enshrine in law tha idea that the Peoples and Governments of all coun tr les accepted the un iversal obliga tion to regard the preservation and consolidation of peace as the paramount human value, to ensure that peace became a constant feature of international life. 'lbday all countries and peoples, persons of all races and religious convictions, do not have and cannot have any interests more human or high minded, any goals more lofty or noble, than ridding humanity of the threat hanging over it that threatens the survival of the species. Therefore what is required ie not only new and primarily political and legal means of carrying on inter-State ties, but also a fundamentally different philosophical approach to international problems. The use of force to solve problems is quite ridiculous in this missile and space age. Accordingly, the Byelorussian SSR believes that the right of peoples to peace enshrined in the Declaration 'must be interpreted as a right that ensures respect for the objective interests of all peoples and countries. A solution to the global economic, ecological, energy, food and other problems can be found only on the basis of universal recognition and implementation of that right. The peoples of the world have an enormous potential for good will, for peace and co-operation. Facilitating exercise of this in the appropriate forums is the most important job of the United Nations. It is precisely within this Orqanization, which is now enterinq the age of maturity, that it is possible to establish a system of Of course, there are many other problems still awaiting solution. Of great importance to strengthening international security and ensuring the right of peoples to peace is the breaking of deadlock in conflicts in various regions of the world. History and life have shown that parties to a conflict unfortunately often come to sensible solutions only once all other options have been closed off to them and their forces are becoming exhausted. But do problems always have to be taken to the limit? Do forces have to be totally exhausted before a mutually beneficial solution can be arrived at? The Byelorussian S5R believes that every people should have guaranteed to them the right to peaceful development in independence. Throughout our history, our Republic has striven to attain this lofty goal. Seven decades of hard work and struggle - and we are marking this milestone on 1 January 1989 - following on a radical reorganization of our society, gave the Byelorussian people an opportunity not only to achieve economic and social progress, but also to make a real contribution to the efforts to attain this goal at the international level also. The Byelorussian SSR is as always willing to co-operate with States on the basis of a clear understanding that comprehensive security can be achieved only through political means, not through force. A policy based on force must now yield to the force of law.

The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/43/L.22. A recorded vote has been requested. (Mr. Sokolovskiy, Bye!orussian SSR) international policy, the corner-stone of which will be common human priorities and joint efforts. This is the approach which underlies the initiatives of the socialist States that have proposed the concept of comprehensive security. The Byelorussian SSR has co-sponsored this initiative. The socialist States' concept of comprehensive security and their efforts to implement the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace are along the same lines. They complement and enrich one another; they help move forward and strengthen the positive shifts in thinking that have occu~red and to make irreversible the processes that have beg~n in the international arena. We believe that ensuring genuine peace, which is the main pu~pose of the Declaration, reqUires development of the recent impetus to curb the arms race and achieve disarmament bilaterally: we feel this movement must be made multilateral. There must also be further development of the process of the peaceful settlement of regional conflicts through national conciliation. The world community is today at an important stage as it moves from hope to action, but we must recognize that as yet there is no guarantee of irreversibility for the positive changes that have begun, and it is therefore extremely important to maintain the impetus. The most effective guarantee of the exercise of the right of peoples to peace would be comprehensive and complete disarmament, achieVing security through ever lower levels of armaments and building a world without wars, without violencew without nuclear weapons. We have to step up the efforts of all States bilaterally and multilaterally to reduce and eliminate nuclear weaponry, to prevent the expansion of the arms race into outer space, to achieve a full and comprehensive ~an on nuclear testing, to eliminate chemical weaponry, to reduce military expenditures and to solve other problems relating to military security • (Mr. Sokolovskiy, Byelorussian SSR) A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Bu~kina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet SOcialist Republic, Cameraon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Yemen, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Ir.an (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, L~ Peopl~'s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritiusr Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, saint Lucia, sao Tbme and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, SWaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, TOgo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe Agair3t: None Abstaining: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Djibouti, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Samoa, Senegal, Spain, SWeden, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America Draft resolution A/43/L.22 was adopted by 118 votes to none, with 29 abstentions (resolution 43/22). *Subsequently the delegations of Djibouti and Guatemala advised the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. The PRESIDbNT (interpretation from Spanish): I shall now call upon those representa Uves who ~lsh to expla in the ir vote after the U'otinq. Mr. FIWEIREDO-MACHADO (Brazil): The Brazilian delegation abstained in the vote on draft resolution A/43/L.22 because it contains elements extraneous to the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace, adopted in 1984 vi th our support. The Declaration clearly states that: -the promotion of its implementation constitute(sJ a fundamental obligation of each State-. (resolution 39/11, para. 2) It is therefore inappropriate for operative paragraph 5 of the draft resolution to conta in a call to non-qovernlllental organ iza tions to inform the Secretary-General about measures taken to implement the Declaration. This paragraph seems to imply that non-qcqernmental organizations have a role of their own in implementing an intergovernmental Declaration in the field of peace and security. This would not only be at variance with the letter of the Declaration, but also not in line with the Charter of the United Nations itself, which was conceived as, and continues to be, an intergovernmental institution. especially in regard to ma tter s of peace and seour i ty. Ms. LETTS (Australia): Australia has aga in this year been forced to abstain in the vote on the draft resolution on the right of peoples to peace. We recognize that the sponsors have amended it in a way that acknowledges implicitly all rights contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as notes the positive events and trends in international relations, including in the field of disarmament. Nevertheless, we ~gain abstained, for two principal reasons. First, the draft resolution again makes reference to resolution 39/11, about the terms of which my deleqation continues to have considerable misgivinqs. secondly, it requests the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the resolution to the provisional agenda of the forty-fifth session an item entitled "Implementation of the Declaration on the Right of Peoples to Peace". As we saw no need for an inclusion of this item at the forty-third session of the General Assembly, we again see no need for either of these paragraphs, particularly in view of their budgetary impl ications.

That concludes our considera tion of agenda item 21. AGENDA ITf)l 49 REVI~ OF THE EFFICIENCY OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL FUNCfION ING OF THE UNITED NAT]nNS: NOTE BY THE SECRETARY-GENERAL (A/43/785)

The Assembly has before it, in document A/43/785, the note by the Secretary-General which draws the attention of Member Sta tes to the repor t of the Specia1 Commiss ion of the Economic and Soc ia1 Council on the In-depth Study of the United Nations Intergovernmental Structure and Functions in the Economic and Social Fields (E/1988/7S). Members will recall that the Assembly decided at its 3rd plenary meetinq, on 23 september 1988, to a11008 te agenda item 49 to the Fifth Committee on the understanding that the report of the Special Commission would be considered directly in plenary meeting. (Ms. Letts, Australia) Mr. CDSTELID (Australia): My delegation welcomes the opportunity provided by this agenda item to comment on the report of, and follow-up action top the Economic and Social Council Special Commission on the In-depth Study of the United Nations Intergovernmental Structure and Functions in the Economic and Social Fields. In 1987, the Economic and Social Council Special Commission was qiven a very weighty mandate: to review the United Nations interqovernmental structure and functions in the economic and social fields with the objective of enhancinq the effectiveness and efficiency of the Uni ted Na tions system in improving the quality of human life. There was a wide range of interests of Member Sta tes in the outcome and the issues which required examination covered a wide spectrum. The task was daunting. The Chairman of the Special Commission, Ambassador Badawi, qu ided the wor k of the special body with tact, patience and skill. For their tireless efforts, we warmly thank him and the Secretariat, which ably supported the exercise. The Australian Government regrets that the Special Commission, despite its long labours, could not arrive at agreement on a package of wide-ranginq structural reforms in the economic and social fields as originally envisaged in recommendation 8 of the report of the Group of 18 high-level intergovernmental experts. Several factors contributed to this, but lengthy post-mortems would not be constructive. We should rather turn our attention to the positive outcomes to date and seek to build on these. For Australia one of the most important conclusions to be drawn from the Special Commission exercise is - to use Ambassador Badad's words in his report - the agreement of Member States that "Review of the functioninq of the United Nations should be seen as a con t inu ing process a imed at br inq inq abol1 t appropr ia te re forms to enhance the capacity of the Orqanization to meet the changing needs of its Members". In our view, it would be wrong to believe that this activity is about simple cost-cutting. Throughout the life of the Special Commission, our objective has been to make the United Nations more responsive to '=he contemporary needs of all Member States, for exa~le by seeking to reallocate scarce human and financial resources to new and emerging priority ar.eas. At the second regular session of the Economic and Social Council this year, a resolution entitled "Revitalization of the Economic and Social CounciPJ was adopted. My delegation joined the consensus in the adoption of this text, and we earnestly hope that concrete reforms will flow from that 6ecision. However, we do not believe that the Economic and Social Council resolution represents the end of the reform process envisaged by Member States in 1986. In my Government's view, the urgent task before us is to carry forward this reform task in a way that _ bu ild ing on the founda tions la id by thE! Spec ia1 Commission - will lead to decisions being taken at the ear Hest possible time on concrete reforms. (Mr. Costello, Australia) We have considered carefully ways to carry forward the reform effort. In doing so, we have taken several principles into account, including the need, first, to keep the reform objective high on the United Nations aqenda~ secondly, to find a way to overcome the difficulties posed by certain political obstacles and to place - the exercise on a more technical level; and thirdly, and finally, to define clearly the terms of reference to gi~Q structure and logic to future work. Furthermore, the context for our consideration of these informal ideas is the undoubted merits of the role of the Special Commission in collecting and sorting the basic data about the present intergovernmental machinery, including the subsidiary bodies. It also provided a valuable forum in which the views of Member Sta tes were usefully elabora ted. In our view, a mechanism or framework n~~ds to be established through which reform work can continue. Without such a programmatic approach, reform will falter or become piecemeal. Our belief is that the most efficient way to proceed is to request that further work be done, in conjl~~ction with a group of eminent persons who have in-depth experience of the United Nations system, so that by the next session of the General Assembly we are in a position to take action. My delegation has therefore commenced discussions with a number of other interested delegations in order to produce a draft resolution on furthering the work of reform, based on the principles I outlined earlier. My delegation believes that work on this item would benefit if those discussions continued for several more days. Hence, we would suggest that you consider, Mr. President, whether the debate on this item might not usefully be postponed for the time being, to see if these consultations can bear fruit in the form of a widely supported text. Australia looks forward to participa ting actively in discussions on this topic. (Mr. Costello, Australia) Mr. ~P.ADATOS (Greece): I hsve the honour to speak, on behalf of the European Community and its member states, on item 49 - Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations - and on the report of the Special Committee. The work of the Special Commission was inspired by the report of the Group of 18 and was envisaged as a comprehensive and necessary process aiming at the simplification of the intergovernmental structure and functions in the economic and social sectors of the United Nations. Unfortunately, the Special Committee has not been able to fulfil the task set forth in recommendation VIII of the Group of 18. The outcome of its work has fallen short of our expectations. The TWelve remain committed to reform. We played an important part in the arduous task of the Special Commission, and we want to draw upon the many areas of agreement revealed in the Commission's report that can form the basis for further work by the General Assembly. It is our understanding that informal proposals are being discussed amonq a number of delegations with regard to ways of bringing this process of reform forward. The streamlining of the intergovernmental machinery remains a major concern and should be addressed, and we are ready to work with others in creatinq a basis for further fruitful deliberations. Mr. GHEZAL (Tunisia) (interpretation from French): The Tunisian delegation is happy to express again, on behalf of the Group of 77, the importance we attach to the question of the reform of the intergovernmental structures of the Secretariat in the economic and social fields. In resolution 41/213 the General Assembly asked the Economic and Social Council to make an in-depth studY of that question. The Special Commission established by the Council in its resolution E/1986/112 produced a report after a great deal of work. It was, however, unable to reach any conclusions or recommendations, despite the availability of a packaqe of proposals by the Group of 77, contained in the annex to the Commission's report - which indeed is purely factual. What conclusions can one draw from this situation? First, the carrying out of a thorough and genuine reform depends, of course, on the support of all parties to the commitments entered into in this respect, in accordance with their obligations under the Uniteu Nations Charter. Moreover, it is conceivable only if there is respect for the statutes and mandates of the various organs of the United Nations. The reform of the economic and social structures in fact began on the initiative not of the developed countries but, rather, of the developing countries. Thanks to their resolve, their constructive spirit and the flexibility they have constantly demonstrated, a consensus emerged, following their many initiatives, that made possible the adoption of resolution E/1988/77, on the revitalization of the Economic and Social Council. Any subsequent reform must therefore, in our view, be based on that important, unique decision by Member States to improve and strengthen the Economic and Social Council - this United Nations organ - as well as its support structures in the Secretariat. Moreover, the goal of the reform has been to adapt the United Nations in the fields that are of concern to us to a constantly changing world, in order to meet the challenges that will face the international community in the twenty-first century. The United Nations, once restructured, can thus continue to be the best possible instrument for dialogue between States, in accordance with their individual and collective interests. (Mr. Ghezal, TUnisia) On behalf of the Group of 77, I pay a tribute to Ambassador Badawi of EgyPt and Ambassador Aguilar of Vene~uela as, respectively, Chairman of the Special Commission and President of the Economic and Social Council, for the tireless and praiseworthy efforts they have made in this sphere. We should also like to express our thanks to the Secretary-General, the Director-General and the Secretariat for the support they have providsd to MenDer States, particularly the developing countries, in their work over the past two years of reflection and discussion in the Special Commission of the Economic and Social Council as it examined the possibility of reforms in the united Nations. We could legitimately ask ourselves how we should proceed in future and further the reformatory process in the eco:lomic and social fields. Clearly, the new objectives and priorities of the Organization for the 1990s have yet to be defined. The ~cretary-General is engaged in preparing the next united Nations medium-term plan, and is currently consulting with Member States on that subject. The convening of a special session of the General Assembly devoted to the reactivation of economic growth and development in the developing countries is a matter that is still being considered. In our view, it could layout the general framework of the principles and objectives of Member States and the Organization as we approach the year 2000. The operational activities, the new international development strategy, the future substantial programme of action for ti.e least developed countries, the conclusion of the United Nations Programme of Action for African Eco"omic Recovery and Development 1986-1990 6 and the planned conference on the environment and development should give effect to those objectives. We must therefore await the decisions of Member States as to the future guidelines to be followed by the international community and, in particular, tileir views with regard to their economic relations, before any reform can actually be made. In the mean time we are of the view that any functional or structural reforms must proceed from the decisions to be taken on the basis of the reports that the Secretary-General was requested to submit under Economic and Social Council resolution E/1988/77 in 1989. At present, the General Assemblv, althouqh aware of its responsibilities, is not called upon to take any decision and must not in anv way preiudge the implementation of that resolution or the report to be submittG€il tlIV the Secretary-General to the forty-fourth session pursuant to General Assemblv resolutions 41/213 and 42/211. Accordingly, in the view of the Group of 77, the General Assembly at this session can only take note of the report of the Economic and Social Council on the matter, along with the report of its Special Commission, whose mandate has now been fulfilled 0 Mamber States will undoubtedly envisage some future action, particularly in light of the reports of the Secretary-General called for i~ Economic and SOcial Council resolution r:/196ijil1. The Gro~p of 77, for its part, wishes to reaffirm its devotion to the commitments it entered into in respect of the reform and the strengtheninq of the functioning of the United Nations in the economic and social areas. Mr. MOYA mLENCIA (Mexico) (interpretation from Spanish): The deleqation of Mexico wishes to express its full support of the statement made by the Ambassador of Tunisia as Chairman of the Group of 77. Since Mexico was one of the Vice-Chairmen of the Special Commission of the Economic and Sociel Council on the In-depth Stud)' of the United Nations Intergovernmental Structure and Functions in the EConomic and Social Fields, representing the GLOUP of Latin American and Caribbean Countries, we are aware that, notwithstanding the efforts of the Chairman of the Special Commission, the Ambassador of Eqvpt, of the other officers of the Special Commission and of many countries, it has not been possible to reach conclusions in the Special Commission's work and stu~ies that could lead to a profound reform of intergovernmental structure and functions in the economic and social fields. Nor, &s the repoLt notes, was tht Special Commission able to achieve any convergence, oWing to the unilateral approach adopted, which was objected to by the Group of 77 and otner countries, particularly since the report dealt with reforms in the structure and functions of subsidiary bodies with a view to achieving greater universality within the F~onomic and Social Council. My country would therefore like to stress the fact that the Special Committee's report should not serve as a basis for further reform, althouqh it contains valuable elements that should be taken into account. Mexico would also like to reiterate its reservations with regard to the report, which are set forth Gn the final page of document E/1988/77. In conclusion, our country is firmlY committed to a qenuine, authentic process of reform of the United Nations, but we believe that in order to embark upon such reform and to succeed it must at least have the following features: first, it must be carried out without any kind of pressure, such as the threat of withholding a country's legally assessed contributions to the Organization~ and secondly, it must be carried out without any overt or covert attempt to qive greater specific weight to a few countries over and above the majority, without any desire to dismantle bodies p wi thout prejudice to the fact that the Uni.ted Na tions should indeed curb its expenditures, which is a goal in itself, and without undermining the instruments needed for the Organization's economic and social work or the legitimate rights of its staff. In short, reform must be carried out with a view to strengtheninq the United Nations, not to weaken it. It would be paradoxical if, ~t a time when the world is experiencing a much greater economic and social crisis, an attempt were made to undermine the operational capability of the United Nations in those very economic and social fields. LastlYe it is necessary in this process ef reform for all Member Stat~s, not merely the developing countries, to show the necessary full political will, so as to ensure that the process becomes a dynamic forward flow, not a paroxysm based on political motives. It must result in a United Nations that is better suited to carry out its noble task in favour of peace, economic and social development and co~peration among nations. Dame Ann HERCUS (New Zealand): My delegation is grateful for the opportunity afforded by the debate under item 49 to reaffirm its commitment to the proeess of reform of the Organization which was started two years ago with the adoption by consensus of resolution 41/213. New Zealand sets great store by the ability of the Organization to contribute in many ways to the political, economic, social and cultural well-being of the international community and its constituent parts. For this to be possible our Organization must remain dynamic and forward-lodtinq. Its administrative and financial structure and practices must respond to the imperatives of efficiency which motivate member Governments. As a small State ourselves we believe t~at it is particularly in the interests of small countries that the existence and effectiveness of the Organization is not threatened. We want to see it strengthened, not weakened. We small States - more so than the large or even the middle-sized - have the most to lose if the difficulties of the United Nations are not resolved. It is fundamental that all Members fulfil their financial Obliqations under the Charter. We cannot lose sight of that basic point. But, beyond that, we are not so blinkered as to believe that the United Nations is without blemish. The Organization has become unwieldy and wasteful of both funds and the skills of its staff. We have expressed concern previously over duplication of activities, out-dated programmes and the like. In addition, for small States it has simplY (Hr. Noya Palencia, Mexico) become too difficult to follow responsibly even a modest ran01 of activities of interest. We often feel we are drowning in a sea of paper. It is fair to say. however. that since the Assembly adopted resolution 41/213 we have undeniably made proqress. But it is equally fa ir to say that that proqress has been patchy and that in some areas it has been limited or far from adequate. This is not altogether surprising since the issues are often very complex. but the fact of complexity requires additional will to find means of resolution. we suggest. The Special Commission established bV the Economic and Social Council to conduct an in-depth study of the United Nations intergovernmental structure and functions in the economic and social fields achieved a great deal during its existence. While we reqret that it proved impossible to adopt a final report containing specific recommendations for subsequent action. its \1Ork to date should not be under-valued. It is our firm view that the time is right to carry forward the process of reform. What we are saying quite simply is that we do not like the way in which the present financial situation has developed. and we look to see it remedied. The situation. carefully handled. provides an incentive for us to look at underpinning the recent welcome resurgence in the Organization's authority by maintaininq steady and coherent progress in reform. includinq in the economic and social fields. Our objective should be a streamlined. well-manaqed and above all responsive structure. My delegation will be happy to participate constructively in efforts to achieve that objective. Mr. STROMIDIH (Sweden): I have the honour to make this statement on ~ehalf of the Nordic countries: Denmark. Finland. Iceland. Norway and Sweden. Many speake!l'8 in the general debate observed that the role of the United Nations in the political field had been enhanced by recent events. but that progress towards the solution of many economic problems was lagging behind. We for our part consider that the United Nations can count a number of considerable achievements in the economic field also. The United Nations system has many times proved its strength both by contributing to qreater awareness of global problems and offer 1ng solutions to them~ we share the view, however, that further progress is called for. We must make the United Nations a more efficient tool for solving the problems that face mank ind and require a multilateral solution. Of course, increased political will to tackle together the economic and social problems is a prerequisite. The Nordic countries believe, however, that internal reforms aimed at making the United Nations more responsive and more efficient have an impact on how Member States view the activities of the United Nations and on their willingness to participate actively and constructively in the work of the United Nations. The activities of the United N~tions in the economic and social fields are very broad. As new tasks have emerged, generally without old ones beinc; phased out, the aqenda of tile United Nations has shown sustained and considerable qrowth. This expansion has been accompanied bv a parallel growth in the interqOMernmental machinery, which in some cases ~as resulted in duplication of agendas and duplication of work. We should also bear in mind that the present structure is not the result of a comprehensive analysis of the needs of the system or of its member States but to a great extent the product of ad hoc decisions. The present str.ucture must therefore not be taken as the ultimate response bO our needa. There are a great number of committees, c~~missions and su~ommittees dealing with economic and social issues. A number of co~rdination mechanisms exist but there is still a lack of co-ordination. Overlapping and duplication are recurrent phenomena. Even thouqh there is a feverish me~ting schedule, the p~oductive value of all these activities and meetings could at times be questioned. (Mr. Stromholm, Sweden) The Nordic countries for their part find it of paramount importance to replace unnecessary bureaucracy by efficiency; paralysis by effectiveness; duplication by concentration, repetition by action, and vagueness by priorities. In short, there is a need for a more focused and efficient Organization responsive to the needs of its Member States, in particular the developing countries. The open societie~ of the Nordic countries are closely linked to the world at large. we therefore have an obvious interest in an effective multilateral Organization. It would be difficult to build new multilateral forums. The United Nations already exists, it is needed, and it must be improved. This applies to all the various roles of the United Nations: as a forum for negotiations, as a peace-maker, as a norm-giver, and as a channel for development assistance. We are convinced that all United Nations Hembers have the same genuine 1nterest in a strong and effective world Organization. Against this background the Nordic countries saw the need for and supported the recommendation by the Group of 18 that a carefUl, in-depth study of t....e intergovernmental structures in the economic and social fields should be undertaken. We saw this recommendation as an ~portant part of the reform process or package outlined in General Assembly resolution 41/213. we can now take stock of the work carried out by the special Commission entrusted with this in-depth study. Our evaluations are somewhat mixed. On the one hand a reasonably substantial review of the intergovernmental machinery did take place. It showed that the performance of subsidiary organs of the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, although with some important ~xceptions, is satisfactory. The weakest links in the system were clearly identified as the relationohip between the superior bodies and organs - notably the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and the Trade and Development Board. All delegations seemed to agree that the distribution of tasks and functions is blurred and that the Economic and Social Council is not fulfilling its mandate as envisaged in the United Nations Charter. On the positive side it must also be noted that a considerable number of proposals for comprehensive reforms were introduced in the Special Commission. There seemed to be a willingness to consider wide-ranging changes and not merely minor adjustments of a cosmetic nature. In addition, there seems to be a growing awareness that solutions to the pertinent problems of today are sought on multiple levels and in several international forums, some of them only loosely linked to the political process of the United Nations. The Nordic countries regret, therefore, that the Special Commission was unable to fUlfil the essential part of its mandate, namely to present recommendations aimed at enhancing the effective~ess and efficiency of the United Nations in the economic and social fields. It is disappointing that, beyond the general agreement on the need for comprehensive reform, no consensus could be reached with regard to specific reform measures. The need for reform is still with us. I will not dwell here on all possible reforms but only point to a few areas in which the Nordic countries believe that further efforts could and should be made. First, we are still of the opinion that the aURs and usefulness of the general debate~ in the Economic and Social Council and the second Committee should be re-examined. They should either be consolidated or emphasize different themes in order to avoid duplication. We believe that reform in this direction would ~ncrease the value of the deliberations in the Economic and Social Council and contribute to increased political attention being given to the Council so that it could fulfil its central role as envisaged in the Charter. (Mr. Stromholm, Sweden) secondly, a new attempt should be made to rationalize and streamline the structures of the subsidiary bodies. In that way the discussions of the topics that these bodies deal with could be made more relevant and tangible. Thirdly, another look should be taken at the roles of the Economic and SOcial Council and the General Assembly. Reports to the Council for subsidiary bodies must be referred to the General Assembly only if it is explicitly decided that this be done. The Council's role as a filter for reports, resolutions and topics should be strengthened. This would make it possible for the General Assembly to concentrate its attention on major policy issues confronting the international community. In this context I should like to reiterate that the Nordic countries attach great importance to the biennial work programmes and meetings. The reform process should be a continuing one, and appropriate measures to enhance the efficiency of the United Nations must be considered and implemented on a regular basis. we must therefore conside~ how, within the framework of a continuing reform process, the valuable analytical work .carried out by the Special Commission and the proposals for reform put forward in the Special Commission can be used to promote further necessary reforms. The question on our minds must be how we can build on the work that has already been achieved, and move forward. The momentum of reform must not be lost. The Nordic countries are committed to th~ reform process and would like to see substantial reform ~asures adopted at this session of the General Assembly. we must at least come to co~~ conclusions concerning modalities and proc~dures for further discussion. One possibility could be to enttust the Economic and Social Council with further consideration of some issues. Another ~ossibility would be to make use of outside experts in preparing reports for further consideration. A third possibility could be to ask the secretarY-General to put forward reform proposals after appropriate consultations (Mr. Strornholm, Sweden) with Member states. We are quite open-minded and flexible in this respect, but we believe that it is of fundamental importance that the reform process remain on the agenda of the Economic and Social Council and of the General Assembly. In this context we would also like to encourage the Secretary-General to proceed with reforms of the structures of the secretariat, in conformity with resolution 41/213. To conclude, I should like to reaffirm that the Nordic countries believe that the United Nations system can and must be considerably changed and improved so as to be able to deal better with the problems facing Member States, not least the developing countries. We must accept the challenge of change, and work together to move the reform process forward. Mr. ZVEZD~ (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) (interpretation from Russian): I have the honour to speak on behalf of the delegations of the People's Republic of Bulgaria, the Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, the German Democratic Republic, the Hungarian people's Republic, the Mongolian People's Republic, the Polish People's Republic, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and the Soviet Union. Our countries attach great importance to the social and economic activities of the United Nations and are deeply convinced that these must be aimed principally at reaching agreement on mutually acceptable decisions regarding the solution of world-wide economic and social problems in the interest of all countries. (Mr. Stromholm, Sweden) We also advocate strengthening the work of thE' U'.lited Nations in that connection, which should be brought into accordance with the realities of the interdependence of States and world economic and social problems, and be in the interests of all COUi'ltr iea. Accordingly, our countries participated actively and constructively in the work of the Special Commission of the Economic and Social Council on the ~n-depth study of the United Nations inter-governmental structure and functions in the economic and social fields. Although the Commission was not able to arrive at agreed decisions on the restructuring of the economic and social structures of the United Nations - a fact recognized by all - it did useful work in a very thorough stud\' of the situation. The main thing is that, under the Special Commission, a dialogue was established to allow for better understandinq of the functions of the United Nations, taking into account contemporary requirements and needs. On the practical level, the work of the Special Commission made possible at the summer session of the Economic and Social Council this year an important decision designed to strengthen and, in practical terms, implement the work and functions of the United Nations and the Council under the Charter, particularly at the level of organizinq solutions to problems in the economic and social fields. We trust that the experience acquired bv the Special Commission will enhance a continued and fruitful search for mutually aqreed approaches to improving the economic and social mechanisms of the UnitP.d Nations, duly taking into account the balance of interests of the various qroups of countries. Our delegation still adheres to the goal of enhancinq the effectiveness of the E'conomic and social activities of th..: United Nations in the interests of all countries, and we are willing constructively to continue work in that direction in any forums acceptable to all other countries and regional qroups. (Mr. Zvezdin, USSR) Mr. SHAABAN (EQvpt): We wish at the outset to concur with the views expressed by the representa tive of Tun is ia on behalf of the Group of 77, particularly the reaffirmation of the commitment of the developing countries to the re form of the Uni ted Na tions. The work of the Special Commission, despite the absence of agreed recommendations, has proved very useful and has presented a reservoir of knowledge that should not be ignored or forgotten. However, ~he reform of the United Nations inter-governmental structure in the economic and social fields should be considered as part and parcel of the overall reform of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations. We therefore believe that the final considera tion of the report of the Special Commission should take place together with the final report of the secretary-General on the implementation of resolution 41/213 and his reports to be prepared in implementation of Economic and Social Council resolution 1988/77 on the revitalization ot Cbe Economic and Social Council, as we believe reform is indivisible. We fully recognize that reform aimed at enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the United Nations is and should be a continuing process. We agree with the statement made today by the Permanent Representative of Australia that Economic and SOcial Council reso1ut~on 1988/77 does not represent the end of reform. We are therefore willing to engage in informal consultations on how best to advance the process of reform. In the Group of 77 we shall meet shortly to consider the course of action to be followed with regard to that issue. Our delegation wishes to reiterate its full and sincere commitment to reform that will eventually be in the interests of all Member States, and particularly the development of developing countries. The Unibed Nations has traditionally been handed many of the world's most insoluble problelils. Even if there exists an argument that the Uni ted Na tions system is a less than an optimal forum for solving all these problems, the world lacks any better alternatives. Givan the recent Un.ited Nations successes in defusing regional conflicts and a generally more positive world attitude towards the Organization, there is a growinq recognition, and indeed an affirmation, that the role of the United Nations in the economic fiald should be enhancerl. Undoubtedly, a more efficient and more ~ffective United Nations will be able to fulfil those responsibilities in an optimal manner.

I should like to consult the members 1n connection with this item. At the beqinninq of our debate on this item, a suggestion was made that it would be a good idea for consultations to continue on the draft resolution. Since that suqqestion was made, it would appear the Assembly has come to share that view. May I, then, take it that the General Assembly will resume its consideration of the item at a later date to be announced in the Journal? It was so decided. PRO~AMME OF WORK

I should now like to make some announcements concerning changes in our programme of work as it was announced on 1 November 0 They are as follows: On the morning of Monday, 14 November, the Assembly will consider agenda item 31, "Zone of peace and co~peration in the South Atlantic", and will begin its consideration of agenda item 29, "Question of Namibia". In the afternoon of Tuesdav, 15 November, the Assemblv will take up aqenda item 22, "The situation in Central America: threats to international peace and security and peace initiatives", and will continue its consideration of aqenda item 29. (!.r. Shaaban, EgyPt) EXPRESS ION OF S»U\\THY '10 THE Q)VERtfttA""NT AND PEOPLE OF CHINA

On behalf of the members of the General Assembly and on my own behalf, I wish to extend to the Government and people of China, recently struck by an earthquake, our deepest sympathy at this major disaster that has caused tragic loss of life and extensive material damage in that country. I also wish to express assurances of the complete solidarity of the international community with the Government and people of China in these difficult circumstances. Mr. YU Menqj ia (China) (interpreta tion from Chinese) : Mr. Pres ident, in expressil19 deep sympathy 00 the earthquake that took place in China a few days ago, you have expressed concern for and friendship with the people of China. The earthquake was a serious one, and has caused qreat loss of life and property. The remoteness of the stricken a~ea and the breakdown of all transportation and communications have tendered relief work most difficult. Since the earthquake many countries, Governments, non-qoyernment&l orqenizations and individuals have conveyed their sympathy and condolences to the Government and people of China and expressed th~ir readiness to provide relief assistance. We are greatly moved by these gestures. Mr. Pres ident, I shall convey your expression of sympa thY and ~t'ln~lence to the Government and people of China, especially those of the stricken area. To you, Sir, I Should like to express t~e gratitude of the Chinese deleqation. The meeting rose at 1.25 p.m.