A/43/PV.5 General Assembly

The Assemhly will now hear an address by the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway. Mrs. Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime Minister of Norway, was escorted to the rostrum. Tho PRESIDENT (inter~Letation from Spanish): r have great pleasure in welcoming the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway, Mrs. Gro Harlem Brundtland, and inviting her to address the General Assemhly. Mrs. BRUNDTIJAND (Norway): On behalf of Norway I add my congratulatioYlR to those of the speakers who have preceded me, Sir, on your election as President of the forty-third session of the General Assembly. The community of nations is looking to this forty-third secsion of the General Assembly with high hopes and great expectations. After years of decline in multilateral co-operation, are we fi1ally witnessing the turn of the tide? The conspicuous, constructive role that the Organization has lately successfully played with regard to many regional conflicts clearly demonstrates the need for an effective united Nat.ions. We, who as a matter of policy and conViction have always supported the United Nations, are encouraged to see it resume itR rightfUl role as the protector and promoter of peace and st~hility, a centre where nations harmonize their policip.~ and actions in favour of a more secure world hased on social and economic justice. As policies and positions of nations change we must have one focal point in the world which is constitutionally and permanently charged with the task of searchinq for neqoti;~t~('1 solutions to politk.:>l, economic and social r:onfli.'t"l. There have heen long periods when the iJnited Nations has suffered from thp. divisions between hlocs, ann in particular from the lack of nialoque and co-operation between the Uni ted states and the Soviet Union, but the post-wai: bipolar world has yielded to a multipolar one. The major Powers are gradually .. realizing that it is in their own interests to maintain a more effective world Organization. The improved bilateral relations between the United States and the Soviet Union, epitomized by the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles - the INF Treaty - will undoubtedly have positive effects on the ongoing endeavours for substantial arms reductions. It r:mains a primary concern for the Norwegian Government to capitalize on what has been achieved and to work towards agreements on deep cuts in strategic nuclear weapons, a comprehensive test-ban treaty, a ban on chemical weapons and the elimination of asymmetr ies with a view to establishing a balance of forces on a lower level of conventional armaments. This is particularly important in Europe, where the concentration of weapons is the largest and the most threatening to peace and stability. Disarmament and arms control is a matter of global concern. The United Nations has an important role to play in encouraging, supporting and supplementing disarmament negotiations conducted in other forums - multilateral, regional and bilateral. An encouraging feature in today's improved international atmosphere is the willingness to address serious regional conflicts in a new and constructive manner. We welcome the fact that the various parties are increasingly making use of the good offices of the Secretary-General, thus allowing the world Organ iza tion to serve as a real catalyst for progress towards a more peaceful, just and safer world. I should like to pay a tribute to the Secretary-General. Years of patience and hard work are now paying dividends. Stalemate and setbacks are giving way to meetin~ls of minds and to progress. We have wi tnessed this new atti tude in the Geneva Accords on Afghanistan, in the success in bringing about a cease-fire in the Iran-Iraq war and in the progress towards peaceful solutions in the Western Saha=a, Kampuchea and Namibia. In other areas of conflict, progress is desperately needed. We welcomed the Esquipulas Agreement of last year. Expectations were high that the five Central American Presidents would themselv~~ find solutions to the problems of that troubled region. The present stalemate is, however, severely prolonging the plight of the peoples of Central America. We urge the parties to return to negotiations and to continue the implementation of the peace plan. In the Middle East the state of chronic unrest in the Israeli-occu?ied territoriee underscores the need for Israelis and Arabs to make genuine and determined efforts aimed at achieving a lasting and comprehensive peace. The Norwegian Government supports the convening of an international peace conference on the Middle East under the auspices of the United Nations. We believe that such a conference, with the participation of all parties directly concerned, represents the best way to achieve a negotiated settlement. Meanwhile, Israel has a special obligation under international law to protect the civilian population in the occupied territories and to secure their human rights. In South Aftica the apartheid system is still being upheld in defiance nf basic principles of civilization. The apartheid system must - and will - come to an end. Apartheid, representing institutionalized racism, cannot be reforn~d: it must be abolished. International pressure on South Afr ica must be increased. Tpn years have passed since the united Nations was able to agree on limited man•. Locy sanctions against the Government in Pretor 1". Now we need to mov· t()vJjl ~'; t adoption of comprehensive and effective sanctions, and we need to mov'" nn....·. We are encouraged by the Secretary-General's optimism concerning the improved prospects for the independence of Namibia. We welcome the news that an advance team can now be sent to Namibia to prepare for a United Nations military and civilian presence in the Territory as it assumes its rightful role and place amongst the sovereign and independent nations of the world. Norway will stand firmly by its commitment to participate in the United Nations Transition Assistance Group. The system of apartheid, wars and natural catastrophes in southern Africa have produced millions of refugees and displacad persons. An international conf~rence held in Oslo last month focused on the situation fo:", those unfortunate aild depr ived people. The conference stressed in particular the need to cater for displaced persons, who at present fall outside the responsibility of United Nations agencies. It also underlined the need for emergency programmes, contingency plans and early-warning systems. We must all sup-port the programme of action adopted at that conference. It is a paradox that at a time when the political climate in the United Nations has improved considerably the Organization should be threatened with financial bankruptcy. The financial crisis facing the uni ted Nations is unacceptable from e\'ery point of view. It impedes plannin9~ it creates a bad climate for the implementation of reforms~ and it undermines the morale of the staff of the Organization. Unilateral withholding of contributions undermines multilateral co-operation. All Meriler states must respect the United Nations Charter and meet their financial obligations. We urge all countries to settle all their debts promptly. We are living in an era of rapid change. In general terms the peoples of the industrialized countries have e~perienced a rapid improvement in their living oonditions. For the developing countries this is not so. While the 19808 may be a decade marked by real progress in respect of international peace and security, the decade is one of lost opportunities for the third world. Very little has been done to prevent the gap between ;;he rich and the poor countries from widening. As we approach the turn of the mil1enium, we face the major challenge of overcomin9 the global development crisis. we must launch a victorious battle against the poverty that continues to tie hundreds of millions of people to an existence that cannot be reconciled with human dignity. Stability, prosperity and social and economic justice are coming to different parts of the world at different speeds. Corrective action needs to be taken. The challenge that confronts us is ethical as well as political. We can safeguard the future only by working together: we cannot safeguard it at each other's expense. The future will depend on how successful we are in adopting common attitudes towards our common challenges. Most of the developing countries are witnessing a reversal of the earlier more hopeful trends in growth performance. A sharp deterioration in the international economic environment has played a major role in triggering the acute crisis which now afflicts the third world. This was clearly established once again during the mid-term review of the United Nations Programme of Action for African Recovery and Development 1986-1990 conducted here in New York over the past two weeks. The critical economic situation for the developing world is characterized by unsustainable, crushing burdens of external debt; a substantial decline in export earnings due to severely depressed commodity prices and to increasing protectionism; a significant decline in flows of resource transfers, in particular with regard to private lending and investment; and the chronic instability of the international currency market; as well as abnormally high real interest rates. Is it not politically, morally and economically perverse that there has been a net transfer of resources from poor countries to X'ich countries totalling over $100 billion in the past few years? Is it not appalling that while close to a billion people are living in poverty and squalor, the per capita income of some 50 developing countries declined last year? These trends will have to be reversed, not only because the situation in itself is unacceptable, but also because it is in the self-interest of all developed countries - west and East. There is a need for a fresh start in international development co-operation. Development aid and lending must be increased. I emphasize this, and I see no reason to conceal the fact that while Norway in recent years has given around 1.1 per cent of its gross national product (GNP) in official development assistance (ODA) to developing countries, we are disappointed that at the same time the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average has declined to a meagre 0.34 per cent. Clearly, many countries can and must do better, much hetter. We call on those donor countries which have been lagging behind in their ~DA transfers to make renewed efforts commensurate with their abilities. There is a need for a double-track approach: the development and the debt crisis have to be urgently and effectively addressed. The two are inter linked and they are equally acute. Many countries are caught in the vicious circle of having to service, reschedule and refinanc~ their external debt while necessary investments and reforms are being suffocated. Urgent action is now needed to alleviate the debt burden in ways that represent a fairer burden-sharing batween aebtors and lenders. Norway has taken concrete steps to alleviate debt, and strongly advocates further multilateral co-ordinated debt-relief measures. It is obvious that the heavily indebted low-income countries 'will never be able to repay their debts. We must fully recognize this and deal with it accordingly. We cannot continue to maintain iron codes that carry with them the risk of political destabilization and increased suffering for the most vulnerable groups, codes that negatively affect women and children, block the development of human progress and human resources, curtail investment and innovation and make it virtually impossible for many debtor countries ever to assume their rightful place in the international economy. The decisions taken at the Tbronto economic su~~it brought some new hope that the major economic Powers are willing to act upon these issues. Although they have recently agreed on some further steps, in particular with regard to Africa, much remains to be done by the large industrial countries to alleviate the debt problem. The recent proposAls by the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) are steps towards a real solution of the debt crisis, which is indeed a common crisis - both for the North and for the South. The industrialized countries of the North must now demonstrate that they see the poverty of the third world as their common challenge. We need a more equitable world order based on common responsibility, on mutual respect and solidarity, and on the fundamental principles of human rights. The protection of human rights is a matter of pr iorHy concern for the Norwegian Government. TO work for human rights is to work for democracy, development, solidarity and progress. Unfortunately, systematic and persistent violations of human rights still occur in many countries. We must work tirelessly to counter these violations and to strengthen the instruments of implementation that we have created. This year we celebrate the fortieth anniversary of the universal Daclaration of Human Rights. It gives us an opportunity to reconfirm our obligations and to redouble our efforts to upgrade our civilization. The world's population may double by th~ middle of the next century. It is clear that meeting the needs of present and future generations will require forceful, sustainable economic growth supported by a world-wide campaign to protect the environment and our natural resources. (Mrs. Brundtland, Norway) In the 19705, environment and development were seen by many as plainly contradictory. At that time, environmental concerns were considered as something only the rich could afford. Tbday they are concerns no one can afford to ignore. The time has come to start this process of change that is needed. We need a new sense of mission and we need a vision of a better future. We need a common framework and concepts that can unite us. The threats to the ozone layer have opened" even more eyes to the fact that no single country can protect its environment in isolation. Global problems require global solutions. The Montreal Protocol of last year needs to be followed by further agreements on measures to protect the atmosphere. The problem of dealing with hazardous and nuclear wasteG and recent cases of dumping in the third world clearly show that a strict international regime is required also to protect the developing countries from becoming a dumping ground for industrial excesses in the North. In the ongoing negotiations led by the United Nations Environment Programme the developed countries must now sensitize themselves towards the just demands of the developing countries with a view to adopting a global consensus early ne~t year. At the Oslo Conference in July this year I the Heads of 22 Un! ted Nations agencies discussed the follow-up of the report of the World Co~~ission on Environment and Development. They agreed with the Commission that to achieve sustainable development, environment and development policies must preserve peace, secure growth on a sustainable basis and alleviate poverty. At last year's session of the General Assembly, the proposal was put forward to hold a global follow-up conference in 1992. Norway supports the proposal to hold such a conference, which should focus on the broad issues of sustainable development. (Mrs. Brundtland, Norwaz) One hundred years ago the Norwegian writer Henrik Ibsen said: "Nothing is more powerf~l than an idea whose time has come." Sustainable development is such an idea~ Together we must make it a reality. Humankind is exposed to risks - political and economic risks - and we are becoming increasingly aware that we run the risk of an ecological disaster comparable in scale and impact to large-scale nuclear destruction. The next decade will be crucial. Vital and difficult decisions will have to be taken. We have the capacity to destroy life on this planet, but we also have the capacity to save and to enhance it. To achieve the necessary o.1anges we need a stronger commitment to the international institutiol'1S we have created. We need a ooa1ition of reason and a real co-ordination of policies. The secretary-General of the United Nations must have our firm support. He must be accorded the authority and the resources necessary to promote the basic objectives for our own survival; peace, development and environment.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway for the important statement she has just made, a statement which offered an encouraging and hopeful message to the developing world. Mrs. Gro Har1em Brundtland, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway, was escorted from the rostrum. ME'. ~ (Singapore); For the past few years, we have been meeting here with the financial crisis hanging over the United Nations like the sword of Damocles. Today the financial crisis continues unabated, primarily because of the reluctance of & few Member States to meet their legal dues, but the sword of Damocles has vanished. There is now widespread global recognition that the United Nations is an indispensable instrument in the search for peace. After the (Mr. Sang, Singapore) Afghanistan and Iran-Iraq agreements, the critics of the United Nations have been silenced, at least for quite a while. Under these auspicious circumstances, I am pleased to see you, Mr. President, presiding over a General Assembly session which will mark a turning-point in the history of the united Nations. With your extensive international experience and your country's commitment to the ideals of the United Nations, I have no doubt that you will bring to this session the right measure of fairness, firmness and guidance. I would also like to place on record our appreciation for the excellent work done by your predecessor, Mr. Peter Florin, who presided over one of the busiest yeclt~:'l in the life of the United Nations. There is no doubt that 1988 will go down as one of the most remarkable years in United Nations history. Seemingly intractable problems are now making gradual progress at the negotiating table. A large part of the credit for this must go to the United Nations Secret.ary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, who never lost faith in the United Nations ability to contribute to peace even in some of the recent dark days of the united Nations history. His courageous and dedicated efforts, combined with his unflagging patience, resulted in the agreements on Afghanistan and the cease-fire in the Iran-Iraq w~r. We applaud his commitment to finding solutions to the other equally intractable problems in the Middle East, southern Africa, Cyprus, Western Sahara, and especially Kampuchea.* We are troubled that the hints of peace we get from Viet Nam on the Kampuchean problem remain meagre and uncertain. As long as the invasion and occupation of Kampuchea continues to threaten the peace and stability ot ";,:l,:lth-East Asia, we are gratified that the Secretary-General and his Special Representative, *Mr. Borg Olivier (Malta), Vice-President, took the Chair. (Mr. Seng, Singapore) Mr. Rafeeuddin Ahmed, continue to work on the Kampuchean issue. We also believe that the United Nations commitment to the search for peace in Kampuch~~ is in full iconformity with the letter and spirit of the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement, which declared in its latest Summit Meeting, in Harare, that nthe United Nations represented the most appropriate inter~ational forum with the central role in the maintenance of international peace and security and peaceful settlement of international disputes and crises ••• ". (A/41/697~ Politica~ Declaration, para. 314) (Mr. Seng, Singapore) While the r~markable political developments of 1988 deserve our full attention and scrutiny at this General Assembly, they will not be the focus of my remarks. These recent developments represent significant changes in the political currents. Underneath these currents there are more significant tidal changes taking place which could significantly alter the political and economic landscape of our globe. These deep tidal changes are more difficult to perceive than the swift changes of currents we see on the surface, but their impact could be more enduring and perhaps determine the shape of the twenty-first centuryo These tidal changes are manifesting themselves in the remarkable change in the attitudes of all the major Powers and richer and more developed nations. In the past few decades the conventional wisdom in most multilateral forums was that it was the poorer, struggling nations of the South that faced a precarious and uncertain future. The richer and more developed nations of the North, viewing the future with greater self-confidence, were expected to channel their resources, imagination and energy to helping the South. Quite 15uddenly, in .the past few years, it has been the richer nations of the North which have begun to speak and behave like endangered species. All these major Powers, perhaps with the rare exception of Japan, are now afraid that unless they make dramatic adjustments in their economic pOlicies they may slip badly behind in the new industrial and technological raca that has been unleashed. Nations that are able to ride on the new technological:wave will assure themselves of a privileged place in the twenty-first century; those that are not will be: considerably weakened. It is this realization that explains, for example, the dramatic reforms being undertaken in the Soviet Union under the banner of perestroika - a word th't is now as easily recognizable in the English language as in the Russian. Any nation that worries about its future today should attempt to carry out equally bold (Mr. Seng, Singapore) restructuring, or perestroika, of its social, economic and political systems. There is no other choice, as demonstrated also by another large and important nation, China, which is attempting equally dramatic and no less visible changes in its economic system. Significant as these developments have been, they are dwarfed by the changes taking place in the even more developed economies. The largest bilateral trading relationship in the world is between the United States and Canada, with trade totalling $130 billion per year. This trading relationship is likely to be further strengthened with the expected ratification of the United States-Canada free trade agreement by the two countries, resulting perhaps in the creation of a single, enormous North American market. Large as this market may become, it could still be smaller than another giant economic animal that will emerge in four years' time: the single European market. The decision in 1987 of the 12 Parliaments .of the European Community to ratify the Single European Act virtually guarantee~ the market's creation by 31 December 1992. The progress towards it may be slow, since the process of formulating it will be based on 300 directives, 200 of which have been put to the Council of Ministers of the European Community and 69 of which have been passed. The political will to create a single European market is manifest. The economic benefits of such a single market could be immense. Today the Community has a total population of 320 milli~n and a combined gross national product of $4.6 trillion. One study, by the Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affa iro of the European Commission, enti tied liThe Economics of 1992" and .published in 1988, predicted an increase of gross domestic product when the single market is created of between 3.2 per cent and 5.7 per cent in the medium term, a 4.5 per cent to 7.7 per cent decrease in consumer prices, and the creation of between 1.3 million and 2.3 million new jobs. Other equally important changes will (Mr. Seng, Singapore) be taking place with the creation of the single European market, in the form of the gradual removal of the administrative barriers that separate the 12 nations. In 1992, or a little later, it will be po~sible for goods and services to flow freely among the 12 countries - perhaps an unprecedented development in the history of man, since a similar removal of national barriers has been accomplished in the past only throu~h empire-building. Today these barriers are being removed voluntarily. For the citizens of the European Community this means that they will be able to go to college, work or retire in whichever European country they ~hoose; to travel around without having to show passports; and to save their money in any of the 12 currencies, which may eventually become one currency. We can imagine what the world would look like if the other subregions were to attempt equally dramatic reductions in the artificial barriers that separate nations. Here again, the established wisdom is that it could not happen in other parts of the world, which are beset by national, ethnic or territorial conflicts. This may be so. Yet it may be salutary to remind ourselves that only 44 years ago the battlefields of Europe w~re drenched in the blood of millions of soldiers trying to defend or extend frontiers. If some of those soldiers are alive today, and some of them surely must be, they must be puzzled that the frontiers they defended with blood and enormous sacrifice are now being voluntarily dismantled in some significant r~spects. All countries which are at war today should pause to reflect on the the European experience. If the armies of Viet Nam - to cite one example - were to return to their national frontiers and Viet Nam were to live peacefully with its neighbours, it could easily become a dynamic and prosperous nation. Instead, its people are today suffering considerable economic misery and deprivation, leading to (Mr. Seng, Singapore) the severe outflow of economic miyrants g who have put a heavy burden on the rest of South-East Asia. The choice is clear~ do we want to go the way of Europe or the way of Indo-China? Although we commend the growing integration of developed economies, we are mindful of the dangers it could pose for the global economy. One fundamental reason why the global economy has enjoyed relatively steady and constant growth rates has been the creation of an open and fair trading system under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which has been in force since 1 January 1948. If the new economic giants of North America, Western Europe and Japan were to try to build economic fo~tresses that divided up the global economy they could well increase the vast gap between the rich and the poor nations. Members of the United Nations should be vigilant and ready to defend the open global economic system. It would be ironic and tragic if the economic integration designed to remove national economic barriers ended up by creating even more formidable economic barriers which shut most developing countries out of the global economic system. These are some of the major challenges that we shall face in the years to come. The United Nations has adjusted well to the new political currents sweeping across the glaJe today. It nc-eds to pay equal attention to some of the major tidal changes that are forthcoming. If this General Assembly session could begin to focus its attention on some of these issues, it might well make a historic contr ibution. Mrs. RUIZ CERtrrl'I (Argentina) (interpr~tation from Spanish): In recent years those of us who have taken part in these debates have normally begun by giving a pessimistic description of the world situation and a list of conflicts and situations threatening international peace and security. The persistence of centres of tension and unjust situations and the emergence o£ worsening of certain disputes justified this gloomy picture and to some extent caused our warnings, our feeling of hopelessness faced with what appeared to be problems without a solution, to become a habit. The United Nations was not spared that criticism. There was scepticism because of what was regarded as a paralysis of the Organiz~tion's capacity as a mediator. tie believe that the facts show that the criticism was groundless, and that, as we have affirmed in the past, this alleged weakness of the united Nations was caused only by a lack of a~ eemen t or in many cases the feel ing of res ignation of its Members. In international relations there are two alternating tendencies: a period of co-operation follows one of conflict, like swings of a pendulum, though in practice the periods often overlap. It would seem that in recent years there has been a change from the phase of conflict towards that of co-operation. The United Nations has played a part in this new dynamic. In fact, in many instances it has crea ted the necessary framework in which the way towards a final settlement of long-lasting conflicts may at last be found, through dialogue and nego tia tion. This year, and particularly in the last few months, a number of b.'eakthroughs have taken place which can be attributed largely to the Organization. It gives me great satisfaction to begin this statement by expressing the recognition of the Argentine Government of the key role played by the secretary-General. Mr. Perez de Cuellar has succeeded in giving orientation and drive to the trend of co-operation to which I have referred. On the queation of Afghanistan, after six yeara the determination and perseverance of the secretary-General and of his Special Representative, now Ecuador's Foreign Minister, Mr. Diego Cordovez, led to the signing in Geneva of the agreement between Afghanistan and Pakistan, guaranteed by the Governments of the United States and the Soviet Union. In the case of Iran and Iraq we have also arrived at a cease-fire. Argentina, a non-permanent member of the security Council. reiterates its commitment to the establishment of a just, honourable and lasting peace within the framework of security Council resolution 598 (1967), and urges both parties to redouble their efforts towards building the future of peace and co-operation that both nations deserve. I consider it appropriate to em~lasize at this point the ~~mentum gained lately by the United Nations peace-keeping forces. In recent decades we have actively co-operated in various peace-keeping operations. Also, as an additional contribution to this undertaking, the Argentine Government today contributes personnel to the United Nations Iran-Ir~q Military Observer Group. Within this framework we also notice positive signs in the Maghreb region, and we welcome the resumption of diplomatic relations last May between Algeria and Morocco. We also view with hope the development of the process of consultations by the President of the Organization of African Unity and the Secretary-General of the United Nations with the countries of the region. We trust that just and lasting solutions to the question of Western Sahara may be found. We cannot fail to mention the encouraging aspects of certain other major issues. I refer here to the new talks that are taking place on Cyprus and South-East Asia and between the two Koreas. Recent developments also make it possible for us to look hopefully towards the future in southern Africa. We must not slacken our efforts until a just, democratic and egalitarian society has been established in an independent Namibia. The only internationally agreed basis for the peaceful settlement of that question is the United Nations plan for the independence of the Territory, contained in Security Council resolution 435 (1978). All the relevant conditions for implementing the plan have been met. We hope that the talks engaged in by the Governments of Angola, Cuba, the United States and South Africa may be a sign of a change in the attitude of South Africa, marked so far by defiance of the international community. However, if that is not so, and if, on the contrary, South Africa seeks to perpetuate illegally its policy of colonial occupation of the Territory of Namibia, the United Nations must take the necessary steps, including those provided for in Chapter VIr of the Charter, to achieve its goal of making Namibia independent. In parallel with these situations, we cannot but regard with concern the persistence of certain problems, with respect to which wa must redouble our efforts, so that they are not left out of the phase of co-operation that I have mentioned. The events that have been taking place since last December in the occupied Arab territories have added another element to the already unstable and explosive situation prevailing in the Middle East. A just and lasting solution to the situation in that region can be reached only if it includes both acknowledgement of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people to live in their territory, with the authorities and form of government that they freely choose, and the right of all States of the region, inclUding Israel, to live within internationally recognized boundaries. Argentina considers it necessary to open channels of negotiation in order to find viable fOrmulas for all the parties concerned. In this context, the convening of an international conference, under the auspices of the United Nations, with the participation and consent of all the parties, could be an appropriate mechanism. The situation in Lebanon is again causing particular concern to the people and the Government of Argentina and occupying their attention. The Lebanese people must be able to exercise their inalienable right to live free of all foreign interference, thus recovering their full sovereignty. Another question is that of ending the apartheid regime of the South African Government. The reje.ction of aE!rtheid has been clearly reflected in many General Assembly and security Council resqlutions. There will be no peace in southern Africa until it is totally and definitively eradicated. The most approriate, effective and peaceful way to achieve that is to apply mandatory sanctions against the Government of SOuth Africa, under Chapter VII of the Charter. I should now like to refer to the situation in Central America, a question in which my country has a direct interest, and which affects in a special way the whole continent. Last year in this debate we highlighted the political will of the five Central American Presidents, who confronted the regional crisis by signing the Guatemala agreement. Our country, a member of the Contad(~a support Group, has worked, and is continuing to work, towards a ~aceful and negotiated solution to the problems of that region. We understand that the objectives sought by the United Nations can be achieved only if the principles of non-interference and self-determination are respected, without delays or conditions. We believe that peace is directly linked to the concept of development. That is why we have sponsored the plan of assistance and co-operation for Central America worked out by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and adopted by the General Assembly this year. Since the signature of the Esquipulas II agreement, the countries of Central America have taken important steps towards peace. That shows that the way that has been chosen is the right and the only appropriate one consonant with the principles of the United Nations. The difficulties that have emerged in recent months must be dealt with in the same spirit. We the countries of America that feel committed to contribute towards a solution to this crisis, are convinced that force, threat and economic coercion must be left behind - indeed, that they have become a thing of the past. Only through co-operation, increasing integration and effective political will will it be possible to initiate economic development, which is the key to any future stabilization. We are convinced that Latin America has entered upon a period of active solidarity in the solution of its problems. The initiatives of the Contadora Group and the Support Group resulted in the creation of the permanent mechanism for consultation and concerted political action. The Presidents of the Group, at their meeting at Acapulco, established a dynamic system for unifying the criteria for consultation and negotiation, with the basic aims of promoting the peace, development and democracy of our peoples, aims that are in agr€ ment with the basic principles of the United Nations. Our work also includes other fundamental areas in which we must strengthen the co-operate phase upon which we have now entered: I am referring to disarmament, to social and humanitarian affairs, and to international economic relations. Disarmament, while it contr ibutes to detente, ought also to bel its logical consequence. The heads of State and Government of India, Greece, Mexico, Sweden, Tanzania and Argentina have continued to work actively in the Group of Six on the initiative for peace and disarmament, particularly in the priority task of nuclear disarmament. The implementation of the Treaty banning intermediate-range nuclear missiles is, undoubtedly, an i~ :porta-:lt step in the process of disarmam~mt. The poss ibility of reaching agreement on the reduction of strategic nuclear weapons is, in turn, another auspicious element in the area of bilateral disarmament. Both will undoubtedly benefit international peace and security. However, this new atmosphere is not yet refle~ted on a multilateral basis. We believe that the present session is a propitious occasion to reflect the possibilities offered by this new situation in the field of disarmament. The convergence in political will should allow the Conference on Disarmament to make progress on such priority issues as stopping nuclear-weapons tests and preventing an arms race in outer space, as well as on the early conclusion of the preparation of a convention banning chemical weapons on a non-discriminatory basis. With regard to Argentina, we cannot, in dealing with this central issue of the United Nations over-all policy on disarmament, fail tc mention the situation in the South Atlantic. Our country has fully and resolutely supported the initiative of the General Assembly, a~ r.~flected in resclutions 41/11 and 42/16, i:1 which the South Atlantic has been declared a zone of peace and co-operation. The South Atlantic has been subjected to an unjustified militarization by nuclear-weapon States, which have established bases, carried out manoeuvres and' moved their naval units in the area without restrictions, thereby adversely affecting the security of the region as a whole. For that reason a firm and vigorous response was called for. The States that co-sponsored the resolutions to which I have referred have worked actively towards the establishment of a concrete and effective means of consolidating peace and security in the region pursuant to General Assembly resolution 42/16. The final document produced by those countries and signed at Rio de Janeiro last July sets forth some basic pr~nciples: the issues of peace and security are linked with those of development and militarily significant Powers are urged to reduce their military presence and show restraint in this regard, banning the introduction of nuclear armaments. In the social and humanitarian field, my delegation wishes to associate itself with the celebration of the fortieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Nor can we fail to refer to the question of drug trafficking. We are resolutely j~termined to fight against that scourge, and we acknowledge the effort being made by our Latin American brothers, despite the difficult economic circumstances they are experiencing. Progress in the political field is in sharp contrast with the prospects for international economic relations. The truth is that, with regard to the question of development, little or nothing has been accomplished in the past few years. The main consequence of this omission during the present decade has been that the developing countries, particularly those of Africa and Latin America, have not been able to contribute to the growth of the international economy in a manner proportionate to their potential. The growing external debt of those countries has caused a massive reverse flow of financial resources that is setting up insurmountable barriers against the imports of the developing world and is posing a formidable obstacle to the growth of world trade. Sharp increases in interest rates, restrictions on commodity trade and protectionist measures in the industrialized countries, along with the enacting of subsidies for their own agricultural exports, indicate the lack of a global development strategy. As part of any global strategy it is essential that substantial progr~ss be made towards the liberalization of international trade at the new round of multilateral negotiations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade ~GATT), for which the mid-term review, to be held at Montreal in December, should agrr ~s suggested by the Cairns Group at its meeting at Bariloche, upon long-term reform in agricultural policy, a contractual freeze and a gradual reduction in agricultural support and subsidy measures and other policies that cause the greatest amount of economic distortion. The new strategy for global development must focus on a lasting solution to ~le problem of debt, which encompasses, on the one hand, a continuing process of structural reforms in the debtor countries and, on the other hand, the reduction of the total amount of indebtedness and a real transfer of financial resources towards those countr ies. Development is also necessary to ensure global security, within the framework of interdependence which I mentioned earlier. This analysis of the internationul situation and the dynamic process in which we are immersed leads to me share wi th you some thoughts about the internal functioning of our Organization. In 1985, the united Nations decided to initiate a process of reform that would enable it to respond to the challenges facing it with the greatest effectiveness and efficiency. Since then many efforts have been exerted in the search for formulas acceptable to all. However, much remains to be done. We believe that if we are to rely on the united Nations as a suitable instrument capable of meeting the needs of our times, we must as soon as possible move beyond this transitional stage. We are convinced that we will find solutions satisfactory to all. To achieve that, we are willing to make our contribution and to co-operate in the quest for agreements that will enable us to implement the objectives we set forth in General Assembly resolution 41/213. At the same time it is indispensable that the Organization be provided wi th stable financing so it may be in a position to give us what we expect from it. Otherwise, we alone shall be to blame. Thus, each Member state must continue to make every effort to fulfil its obligations without imposing condition~ not provided for in the Char ter. I wish to conclude my statement by referring to two matters on our agenda that are of special importance to my country. The first is the question of Antarctica. Argentina is linked to that continent by sovereignty, history and continuity. As an original signatory of the Antarctic Treaty, Argentina has participated actively in creating an effective and flexible system, open to all states, which has kept the continent free from conflicts, ensured that it be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and prevented it from becoming a setting for international discord. The second is the question of the Malvinas, an old colonial issue that has existed since the earliest stages of Argentina's independent development. A settlement became a real possibility with the advent of the deoolonization movement encouraged by the Uni tea Na Hons. The Assenbly is aware of, and has shown unmistakable signs of agreeing with, the constant willingness of the Argentine Government to achieve a just and final solution to this matter, which has high priority in my country's foreign policy. Since 1965 a succession of resolutions have called for negotiations between Argentina and the Uni ted Kingdom to reach a peaceful solution of outstanding problems, in par ticular the problem of the fu ture of the MaIv inas Islands. These resolutions lay stress on Argentina's efforts to comply with the demands of the international oommunity, but so far these have been repeatedly thwarted by the position of the British Government, which has refused to begin comprehensive negotia tion~1 despi te the efforts of the secretary-General, whose mission of good offices to br ing together the parties to the dispu te has been and continues .t.? be ackno~ledged by Argentina. The recent heightening of tension in the area owing to measures that deepen the differences between the two countries is another source of concern for the region and the world~ this makes the prompt resumption of bilateral contacts even more essen tial. While reaffirming its sovereign rights over the Malvinas, South Georgia and SOuth Sandwich Islands and the adjaC"'ent seas, Argentina reiterates its willingness to enter into a dialogue with the United Kingdom, a wide-ranging, sincere dialogue, without pre-conditions, which would take into account and respect the interests of the inhabitants of the islands so as to ensure their well-being and prosper ity. On th is issue, as well as on 0 th er regional and global problems, my country is ready to co-operate actively in fulfilling the fundamental purposes of this Organiza tion. Mr. BEDREGAL GUTIERREZ (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish)~ I wish first of all to congratulate Mr. Dante Caputo, Minister for External Relations of the Argentine Republic, an illustrious exponent of Latin American diplomacy and intellectual traditions, on his well-deserved election to the 1>residency of the Assembly. I take pleasure in expressing here my affection and respect for Ambassador Nita Barrow, whose attributes and diplomatic experience are a credit to our region. I wish also to pay a tr ibute to the Secretary-GeneraI, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, for h is tireless and effective quest for peace and harmony among nations, and to assure him of my admiration and support. The Government and the people of Bolivia wish to express, through me, their solidarity and sympathy with the Governments and peoples of ~angladesh, Jamaica and Mexico in connection with the natural disasters of recent weeks, which caused such serious loss of life and material damage. The forty-third se~sion of the General Assembly is beginning its deliberations wi thin an auspicious framework of profound changes in world poli tics. The East-West agreement on disarmament and understanding has opened up the prospect of lasting and beneficial peace by initiating a broad process of dialogue and negotiation which we hope will help put an end to the insanity of the nuclear arms race. Dialogue has begun to elim~nate, we hope for ever, polariza tion based on the fr agile theory of peaceful coexistence - polar ization that has putat risk the system of international security. We are living in a new era of reason, of faithful and sincere relations among States, which give a fresh impetus to dialogue and strengthen the political will of States to consolidate peace and effective co-operation to overcome hegemony and irrational pressure and thus create a world order based on the dignity of the individual. The changes that have taken place will be to the common benefi t in the con text of the objective of beginn ing a new era in Nor th-Sou th rela Hons on the bas is of symmetrical interdependence, so that well-being will no longer be an exotic flower that blooms only in industrialized countries, which are wealthy because they are industrialized, and which monopolize the magic of technology. The understanding between the super-Powers on the estC:.lblishment of th is histor ic foundation of peace will test our will to co-operate in the service of those on the neglected fringes of the world who are tackling the obstacle course of development in the face of brutal frustration and at the cost of enormous social sacrifices. In recognizing the blessings of nuclear disarmament, we must acknowledge ~le peace efforts of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. These reflect the humanistic idealism of the San Francisco Charter, which advocates a just and harmonious international society, and are based on the philosophical foundations laid at Bandung and Bel9rade. The solidarity of the weak countries of the third world has undoubtedly helped to prolOOte the cause of mankind, which has been strengthened by East-West co-operation, thanks to the theor.y and practice of active neutrality in a world which until recently lived in fear induced by nuclear terror and which still suffers from the devastating scourge of the absolute poverty affecting two thirds of the world's population. This last challenges the very survival of mankind. The future of the developing countries will be at serious risk until stable conditions are established to foster their development and provide a political solution to the problem of external debt. Early in this century force was use~: '".<.' make a Latin American State discharge its public obli'qations, and it was then that the Drago doctrine emerged, which made recovery of such debts by coercion ille9al. ~day there are more subtle ways of putting pressure on States, particularly th~se of Latin America, the Caribbean and Africa. These create intolerable financial strangulation, cause developmental regression and impoverish the PeOples concerned. In these times, it is quite incongruous to accept the principles of protectionism in the face of this heavy burden borne by the third world. And, of course, the threat or use of force in any form is unacceptable. This matter is in essence political, and involves the responsibility of both creditors and debtors. Despite its struggle to free itself from the worst hyperinflationary crisis that any country of Latin America and the Caribbean has ever suffered, Bolivia recognizes the existence of this financial obligation. We have been negotiating the buying-back of our commercial debt on terms acceptable both to us and to the creditor bunks. We have met our paym~nto to mUltilateral official finmlcing agencies, and on the bilateral level we have been flexible in our approach to negotia tions wi th the Paris Club. However, these efforts and this true demonstration of our good faith and of our recognition of what we owe should not lead anyone to take unilateral decisions of non-payment. But the sacrifice borne by our people is over~nelming because the servicing of this debt involves more than 25 per cent of the value of our exports, which imposes a stran9l~hold on my people's right to strive to achieve disarmament and to combat poverty. This situation is repeated nutatis IilltWldi:! in almost all the debtor countries. As a result, the entire world community - and particularly the creditor countries - must become aware of this grave matter, and undertake the realistic and practical measures needed to prevent this question of debt from becoming a political and financial disaster of unforeseeable cons~uences for the whole world. The negative burden of debt on the economy of my country is revealed in tragic terms in a document which I have annexed to my statement and which will be distr ibuted with the official version of my address. I have referred in some detail to the problem of external debt because this is the most obvious link in the chain which binds the Third World to a cruel and unjust destiny that must be overcome. But, unfortunately for us, it is not the only link. We suffer from acute problems and shortages with respect to external financing for development, and in terms of trade, to mention only two aspects of a very gloomy and multifaceted picture. It is not possible for the flow of capi tal to r un from an itnpover ished South to a prosperous North. Latin America and the Caribbean alone contribute, through interest payments and other obligations, close to $2 billion per year more to the creditor countries than they receive. We must ask ourselves~ Who is ~~ntributinq to the greater development of whom? Although Bolivia appreciates and is grateful for the technical and financial co-operation which it receives from bila teral and mul tila tera.l sources, and which goes towards its development, this is patently insUfficient and not consonant with our determined resolve to escape from our current stage of underdevelopment. And in th is forum it is appropr iate to mention the co-operation of agel1cies of the Uni ted Na tions system, such as the Uni ted Na tions Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Fund for Drug Abuse Control (UNFDAC) and others. But ~tt is also necessary to state our hope that they will participate at a higher level of resources in my country's developnent endeavours. There can be no doubt that the heterogenous and plurali.stic make-up of international society doe~ not make it possible for there to be absolute agreement on assessments of world and regional problems. But we must recognize that in many cases this play of interests has a disruptive and deciG ive effect on the internal policies of Sta tes • However, we are borne up by the conviction that it is not on the basis of prejudiced attitudes and preconceptions that we shall be able to improve international relations. For we believe that, if we come together each year in this forum, we do so in order to find appropriate solutions to the problems and conflicts facing it, and not to deepen ollr differences further. There a!ce universal ethical values which are in keeping with the very essence of the dignity of a human being, whatever his or her culture, education, or national identity. These values encompass the will and resolve of all peoples of the planet to achieve peace, individual and social freedom, the right to development, and the full validity of international law. The peac:e solution in Central America can no longer be deferred. 'I'his abode of humanity, this Continent of Hope, wi th which we have the warmest solidarity I ~las been SUffering the consequences of fratricidal struggle fOt so many years, an~ to da te it has not been poss ible to elimina te the violence. Perhaps it might be appropriate for new diplonatic initiatives to be taken, designed to put into effect the very fruitful work carried out by the Contadora and the Support Group to ensure that the negotiating framework among the Central American Governments may really come into proper effect immediately. This is a matter of urgency, and there is a valid solution to it~ a worthy and fair political formula which will bring about a cessation of hostilities and promote understanding on the basis of practical implementation of the principles underlying the thjnking of this world Organi~~tion and its regional branch, the Organization of American States (OAS). It is not ;nappropr iate to mention, in connection with th is matter, the analogy which may be tr.ar:ed to the results achieved in prolroting peace in other regions of the world, which are very fresh in our memories. (Mr. Bedr eqal Glltier rez, Boliv ia) One of the principles of international law - perhaps the most important and fully valid one - rejected at a very early stage the colonialist policy which prevailed at that time, re9arding as an execrable practice the extension of soverei9"ty over Territories and populations that were be9innin9 to form their own socio-historical identity. For this reason, we reject any fotmula that sprin9s from the colonialist mentality, which still persists and continues to trample underfoot the di9"ity of certain nations. The General Assembly of the United Nations has on many occasions condemned the continuing imposition of the colonial power of the United Kingdom 'on L)e Malvinas Islands, and on this occasion my country renews its support of the historical ri.ghts of the Argentine Republic over this southern island Territory occupied by Great Britain, and our support for the resumption of negotiations designed to find a peaceful solu tion to th is confU ct • With the same pan-American awareness, Bolivia's support of the Panamanian Republic over the canal continues to be constant, and it is imperative for the international community to guarantee the fulfilment of the Torrijos-Carter Treaty. There are discrepencies in other latitudes that have been the subject of General Assembly resolutions, and we should be resolved to safeguarding the principle of independence which cannot be trampled underfoot by foreign inter.ference. We are referring to the conflicts in Kampudhea, Cyprus, Lebanon, Namib ia and the Wes tern Sabara • In the same spirit, we appeal to the parties concerned to achieve unification in Korea on the basis of dialogue. Fortunately, and thanks to the endeavours of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the war in the Persian Gulf, which so greatly disturbed world peace, is approaching its end. This is a historic achievement ty the United (Mr. Bedregal Gutierrez, Bolivia) Nations, which has solidly established itself as the highest and most trustworthy world-wide rnachiner~ for managing, negotiating, and bringing about the achievement of peace wherever it may be interrupted or disrupted. We should also wel~~rne the beginning of the process of withdrawal of foreign, troops from Afghanistan, and the respect shown for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of that country. That r too, is an achievement of this world Organization. The policy of apartheid of the SOuth African Government is an abominable scar on the face of human society. It is repugnant to the legal and eth ical conscience of the world that this racial segrega tion should continue to be practised wi th ~.mpunity by the Government of this country. And that Government should be the subject of the strongest possible sanctions for its conduct, which runs totally counter to all the codification of international law in the area of the validity and respect for human rights. Recent months have been fruitful, in the sense that the conflicts have been controlled and fresh conflicts prevented. The united Nations' activities have shown it to be a great neutral and trustworthy participant, helping to create conditions that should lead to dialogue and the resolution of conflicts. There is a promising at:l11osphere for the "creation of peace", with love, reconciliation and good faith. (Mr. ~edregal Gutierrez, Bolivia) A new spiri t has emerged, a spirit that will lead to the creation of peace through the broad avenues of negotiation, which will, in turn, provide incentives to the economic and social, political and moral sectors of our society, doing away with the need for and the possibility of violence. These are mechanisms which are based on the principle of the maintenance of peace, and States have begun once again to believe in and trust the bodies of the United Nations system, whose impartiality and neutrality can be relied upon. 'I'he item on development and strengthening of good-neighbourliness between States undoubtedly is the one that most strikingly demonstrates the need to fester and further friendly relations between States bound by geography and common borders. This period in man's history is a time of physical and economic integration. A happy example of reconciliation and the establishment of lasting peace for mu tual benefi t is that of Europe and the Economic Community. I n Latin America and the Caribbean we are striving eagerly to achieve that goal of political reintegration and economic integration. That is the path of unity and the quest for a common destiny. This item should be tackled with total intellectual honesty', defining the causes which at times make it impracticable to maintain friendly relations between neighbouring States when unnecessary conflicts await solution - conflicts which need to be overcome precisely because of the people!s new objectives of peace and development, within the framework of imaginative diplor~tic activities and with the cceativity consonant with the changes now taking place in all parts of the world. We must increase the ability of the United Nations to achieve its purposes. All initiatives designed to strengthen the 8ystem of international peace and security deserve OUI warmest support, because we are convinced t.hat we have not yet (Mr. Bedregal Gutierrez, Bolivia) succeeded in adopting an efficient system that will avert conflicts and provide for the solution of disputes. Solutions can be found if we continue to work faithfully within the framework of the competence of United Nations bodies and the principle that an appropr iate solution should be found for any conflict within a reasonable period. It is in the inte:est of the international community to find machinery and procedures that facilitate the implementation of General Assembly resolutions on the peaceful settlement of disputes. To this end, the intervention of the Secretary-General can be decisive, as has been demonstrated in practice, in promoting dialogue between the parties or in proposing alternative formulas, so that all conflicts are solved satisfactorily. The item relating to the peaceful settlement of disputes among states Members is of particular interest tG Bolivia and we have therefore sponsored draft resolutions urging all States to fulfil and comply in good faith with the Manila Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of International Disputes. Once again we reaffirm this juridical position, which is of enormous moral significance in terms of the prestige of the world Organization since the United Nations and the regional organizations 4ere established precisely to maintain international peace and security. That objective is being achieved through good faith and frankness, in keeping with honest statesmanlike conduct, by means of General Assembly and security Council resolutions on the peaceful settlement of disputes. Within the framework of these universal principles and in the light of American regional policy, Bolivia has proposed, since 1979, a solution to the problem of the landlocked status imposed on it as the result of armed aggression in 1879. The world pUblic knows that my country achieved independence in 1825 with a PilCific Ocean coast, the .coastal pt:ovince cover lng an area of approximately 160,000 (Mr. Bedregal Gutierrez, Bolivia) square kilometres. The coastal mutilation was never accepted by my country and for more than a century we have been inaking persistent efforts to find a solution to this problem through direct negotiation and, from 1979 onwards, with the participation and diplomatic and political support of the Organization of American States (0AS ) • Bolivia needs sovereign control over access to the Pacific Ocean that will restore its original status as a coastal country. TO this end, we have carried on intense diplomatic activity, which has created a genuine awareness of this problem among the world public. During these multilateral diplomatic activities, and partiCUlarly in the regional framework of the OAS, a number of resolutions have been adopted in which the parties involved in the dispute have repeatedly been urged to begin negotiations designed to find a just solution to this problem. It will be understood how much political, economi~ and moral damage my country has suffered as a result of this despoiling of its marine patrimony at a time, fortunately long past, when might was the supreme law of nations. This outstanding issue has a political and diplomatic basis on which we seek to redress a historic injustice. We are not seeking to deny the legal validity of longstanding bilateral agreements, but today they need to be supplemented and brought up to date in the light of the present realities of international life. It is no answer to offer mere free transit as a substitute for the return of usurped territory. That is why successive Bolivian Governments have sought a just solution based on r,atin Amer ican brotherhood. This is not an issue that can be clouded by casuistic spp.echifyloq and claims based on historical situations that are fossilized and out of date. In keeping with the reSOlutions of the Organization of American States, in 1987 Bolivia put a proposal for the solution of the conflict to the Government of (Mr. Bedregal Gutierrez, Bolivia) States took place in Montevideo in April of that year. Unfortunately, that basis for an understanding to our mutual benefit, which would have opened up the prospect and great possibilities of integration, peace and development, was arrogantly rejected, to the surprise even of the people of that country. Despite the continuing aggressive and arrogant policy of the present Government of Chile, my country will continue its efforts until it exhausts the regional resources available to it in ~le OAS before transferring the problem to the United Nations. Bolivia cherishes the hope that international solidarity and the practical viability of calm and up-to-date bilateral diplomatic negotiations will make it possible for our country to regain access to the Pacific OCean by means of this policy of peace, integration and development. We are certain that all Member States are carrying on a whole-hearted struggle against drug trafficking, which in the last two decades has assumed unprecedented proportions owing to the stubborn attitude of the criminals engaging in this very lucrative business, who challenge the capacity of State institutions, for action and control because they are able to draw on considerable economic power. This is a crime against mankind which we must eliminate. Its perverse and insensate nature goes beyond any reasonable considerations and our purpose must be to eliminate all aspects of this inhuman activity. 'The, international community simply cannot live with drug trafficking and its consequences. In the face of this inescapable fact, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Movement of Non-Aligned States and the international community have been the first - and this has been accepted by all States - to put forward the principle of collective, shared responsibility in the struggle to eradicate this scourge once and for all. (Mr. Bed~egal Gutierrez, Boli~ia) The new defini tion of the crime does not separa te the developing countries, which have been capr iciously called producer or transit countr ies for narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, from the d~veloped countries, which, in simil~~ fashion, have been characterized as consuming countries. The problem of the crim\nal activity of drug trafficking affects everyone equally, with its attendant negative impact on economies and the scourge of drug "addiction. We should note the steps taken as a result of genuine international solidarity in the struggle to combat this evil through the activities of the Utlited Nations Fund fer Drug Abuse Control and the United Nations Development Programme, as well as the United States of America and the countries of Europe, which have announced, and in many cases put into effect, pro~i:ammes of economic assistance for those countries that ar..:. affected by produ.ction, so as to enable them to attack ':.his p.::Oblem eff:ectively. Llespi te good intentions, the degre:= of co-operation is still quite low and does :lot encompass the minimum needs of existing plans to deal wi th this problem. Bolivia has just promulgated a strong law which it is applying in this unequal 3truggle against the power of drug traffickers: "Law governing coca and controlled iubstances". It is one of the most modern laws ever adopted in recent years in the ,uea of positive anti-drug law. Its special characteristics conbine harsh Jenalties with the replacement of coca crops by means of planned alternative !evelopment aimed at agricultural substitution and providing the necessary eC!.:l<'1omic ;j,::entives to those farmers affected by the elimination of the traditional ~r "tansi tional crops. The positive aspects of that law have clearly achieved encouraging results~ dIe the confiscation of cocaine paste has increased substantially, many of the L )st powerful drug traffickers have been arrested and hundreds of cocaine factories (Mr. Bedregal Gutierrez, Bolivia) have been destroyed. In addition, thousands of hectares of COCQl cuI tivation have been eradicated in oompliance with our international colllllitments: But it is clear that these efforts could be undermined if the industr ial countries, such as the United States of America, ~~ not effectively contribute in a timely manner the financial resources they have pledged. In this connection, my country calls on the international community to make a decisive contribution to the eradication of improper use and illegal t~afficking of drugs and rEdouble its efforts, without applying pressure or setting conditions, because our decision to continue the fight to final victory is being demonstrated daily. In conclusion, I wish once again to reaffirm our unswerving commitment to the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and our conviction that mankind must, with the support of all, pursue the course that has been so auspiciously begun in recent times towards its glorious destiny of peace and justice. May God bless war ld peace. Mr. da LUZ (Cape Verde) (spoke in Portuguese; interpretation from French text furnished by the delegation): It is with great satisfaction that we welcomed the election of Mr. Caputo to the presidency of the General l\.ssen'bly at its forty-third session. we are convinced that his professional experience and sound political and diplomatic sense will bring success to our work. Through his august person, it is to today's Argentina that we now convey the sentiments of brotherhood and fr iendship of our people which, from the other side of the Atlantic, has followed with renewed S~'11ipethy and confidence the dellDcratic progress of. the peoples of Latin Anter iea. To Mr. Caputo's predecessor, Mr. Peter Florin, we wish to offer our gratitude m,d appreciation for the excellent work he did as President during his term of office at the forty-second session • I also wish to congratulate secretary-General Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar for his praiseworthy efforts to find peaceful solutions to the many problems which affect the functioning of this Organization, and in particular his fruitful diplomacy in the quest for peaceful solutions to regional conflicts. Year after year the Republic of Cape Verde has intervened in the general debate of this Assembly to state its position on the major problems of concern to mankind. From disarmament to decolonization, from international peace and security to the fight against desertification, my country has always joined its voice to those of the majority of the members of this Assembly, sharing their concerns and their ideas, and making suggestions and proposals to solve these problems. Today, we should like to concentrate on some questions which in our opinion meri t special attention from the Uni ted Nations at this historic phase in international affairs, a time when profound changes are occurring in the world, in the life of the Organization, in the international economic situation and the peace process in southern Afr iea. The world is witnessing changes of fundamental importance in various fields of in terna tional affa irs. At the threshold of the year 2000, the ma jor. challenge facing mankind i$ its ability to steer these changes in such a way as to ensure the perpetuation of life, peace, development, jus: ~ce and progress for all. In the eoonomic sphere, the changes in recent decades which are character bed by the emergence of new poles of development have taken the form of a dynamics capable of leading to a recasting of the economic international system and the wi thdrawal of the most pronounced aspects of the bipolar iza tion of the world tha t has characterized post-war international relations. Such a change in international economic affairs causes profound alterations in the orientation of political regimes in many parts of the world, both domestically and internationally. The mounting interdependence of international economic relations is another important aspect of current changes that derive basically from economic needs which, in combination with the developnent of new technology, also make it essential for there to be mutual understanding of the interests of all countries and systems at the economic as well as political and social levels. Current developments requ ire that the resul ts of negotiations in the various international multilateral forums take account of the new realities, for these cannot be steered towards a positive evolution except through the real democratization of those relations and the advent of a new international economic order. * * Mr. Dlamini (Swaziland), Vice-President, took the Chair. The tendencies which can now be observed towards a mUltipolarization of the world in the economic field and the parallel aggravation of the crisis in the interna tional economic system have had a direct impact on the conduct of the var ious economic partners. If, on the one hand, such a situation leads to protectionism and other similar phenomena, on the other it stimulates new experiments in North-South and South-South co-operation. In the political sphere, we are also witnessing important changes. The resumption of dialogue and the intensification of co-operation between the two greatest Powers constitute an important axis for those changes. The summit meetings between the leaders of the Soviet Union and the United States of America, and the conclusion of the Treatl' on the Elimination of their Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles (the INF Treaty), are decisive contributions to the establishment of an atmosphere of detente in international relations, introducing as they do an element of rationalization, which is contrary to interventionism and could lead to the strengthening of the principle of the non-use of force in the settlemen t of dispu tes. The INF Trea ty is a major step in disarmament and we believe that other important steps in the nuclear field should also be taken in order to eliminate from the face of the Earth the danger of a holocaust. We are convinced that both the United States of America and the soviet Union are determined to bring about the full realization of this grand ideal and that they will be able to refrain from placing in space what they have decided to eliminate on Ear th. Aware that this Agreement concerns only a tiny part of existing nuclear arsenals, but with confidence in the dynamic that has been set in motion and the political will underlying it, we believe that the international community should not be excluded from this dynamic. on the contrary, it should encourage the two great Powers to redouble their efforts towards the complete elimination of nuclear weapons. On t.he regional level, we have been following with much interest the changes which have occurred in regard to the peaceful settlement of disputes. From Afghanistan to Kampuchea, from southern Africa to the Gulf, the message of peace and of negotiated solutions has been predominant in the last few months. The international community cannot but welcome this atmosphere which opens up new prospects for progress. Cape Verde wishes to express its great satisfaction with these developments, remembering that as a member of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries, Cape Verae has? .ways r 1'r·ocated the course of dialogue, of relations based on mutual respect and sovereign equality of St&tes, and of co-operation based on solidarity. In today's world everyone stands to lose when negotiated solutions are discarded and force is relied on instead. We firmly hope that this trend will spread to all the conflicts which for so many years have taken so many lives and spread desolation, stifling the hopes of man. We encourage the parties to the peace negotiations to press on with their efforts to achieve peaceful and lasting solutions. The encouraging developments to which I have referred notwithstanding, the international political situation is still precarious. The changes which are now taking shape in the quest for solutions to regional conflicts need to be consolidated. We hope that today's political detente will help consolidate peace and that peace will not be jeopardized by tactical and short-term concerns which might compromise the gains made in international security. At the same time, it is with satisfaction and renewed hope that we see, particularly in Central America and southern Africa, the carrying out of a process, which is increasingly well organbed and institutionalized, whereby neighbouring countries and others have helped eliminate the hot beds of tension that still exist. The participation of countdes of the same region or on the same continent in this venture reflects the existence of new forms of solidarity with the peoples of countries threatened with destabiliaation or countries which have been victims of prolonged conflicts. It also indicates a new global awareness of regional security and a renewed collective political will, which are most conducive to peace and give evidence of the renewed determination of the international community to resolve conflicts. Members of the international community, particularly those with major responsibilities in the maintenance of peace, must continue to press ahead towards the negotiated solution of conflicts and do their utmost to refrain from any interference which might be damaging to the ongoing peace process or which might jeopardize the initiatives taken by the Secretary-General to bring about negotiated solutions to conflicts. In today's international scene, we believe that all countries, all Governments and all leaders must do their part in consolidating peace and promoting develoP1lent, thus opening up new prospects for progress and the emancipation of peoples wi th ju.-ltice and social well-be ing. Multilateralism is thus of great importance in the quest for solutions to gloQiil problems. It is a crucial instrument wi thin the framework of the changes taking place today, leading to a better appreciation and definition of the contours of the world over the next few decades. In recent years Cape Verde has been one of the countr iea which have sought to emphasize the importance of the Uni ted Na tions as an insti tution that is indispensable in a world such as the one in which we now live, a world in which global problems affecting the whole can be discussed and resolved by the collective effort and action of all Member States. We remain firmly convinced that the United Nations provides a reliable and suitable framework for debate on the major problems facing mankind. We are also convinced that if we want to live in peace and resolve our common problems by peaceful means, there is practically no alternative to the United Nations. As we see it, the work done by the United Nations has been meritorious, ranging from decolonization to the protection of human rights, from peace-keeping forces to economic development assistance. The major contribution made by the United Nations, or through it, to the building of a more peaceful and more humane world, is beyond the shadow of a doubt. The tasks which still face the United Nations in the future are colossal. Its success in the completion of those tasks requires, at each phase, a re-thinking of its methods and the adapting of its methods to the evolution of the prevailing trends in international relations, of which it is and must be a reflection, and at the same time a pr ivUegad instrument. We believe that the success of the United Nations in the attain~nt of the ideals and noble objectives in its Charter will depend on its ability to mobilize mankind for peace and to make the peoples of the world aware of the need to arrive, by overcoming the obstacles, at solutions to the problems of hunger, development, illiteracy, the emancipation of peoples, and also the defence of human rights ir: its many dimensions. The prospects of peace now taking shape in southern Africa are expressed mainly in the solid "Ul for peace which inspires the peoples and countries that have been victims of the destabilizing strategy of the South African regime, which is yet another result of a mature, determined diplomatic effort pu't forth over many years and which is distinguished particularly by the Lusaka Compromise and the Nkomati Agreement. The desire for peace manifested at all times by Angola and Mozambique, to which my country can rightly bear witness, has been an important and decisive factor in making it possible - despite the logic of the confrontation imposed from outside - to persist in the negotiated search for a solution to this conflict, in accordance with the resolutions of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the . . United Nations and the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries. Angolan territory, the solemn reaffirmation by the South African President of the validity and current significance of the Nkomati agreement, and Pretoria's commitment to initiate on 1 November this year the implementation of United Nations resolution 435 (1978) with a view to bringing about Namibia's independence. The caution which the negotiating process in southern Africa has always aroused in us, the fact that the relevant United Nations resolutions have repeatedly proved to be dead letters clnd the lack of respect for the rule of law and international public opinion should not lead us to minimize the importance and the dimensions of the current diplomatic success in the region. These are important victories of international law, of which the United Nations is the global guarantor. These diplomatic successes are the outcome of the combined dfforts of the members of the international community, which have repeatedly brought pressure to bear on the South Afr ican regime in order to lead it to heed the voice of reason and realize that international coexistence in today's world is subject to certain rules which cannot be breached. Also, we cannot disregard the beneficial influence of the general climate of detente in international relations, which has been mlde possible by the closer understanding between the great Powers and the mounting awareness of interdependence as a predominant factor in today's world. South Africa is thus in a situation in which it can either live up to the commitments it has entered into, thereby restoring its credibility in negotiations, or decide to violate them yet again, thereby entrenching itself in an isolation that will be a grave burden on a society whose contradictions have already assumed serious proportions. (Mr. da LUz, Cape Verde) The Pretoria regilDe must realize that by persisting in its racist practice of denying the elementary civil and political rights of the majority of the population and by drawing up and implementing a policy that is hostile to the neighbouring African countries, it has excluded SOuth Africa from the community of African nations to which it belongs. By rehabilitating itself as an African nation, through democratic racial coexistence, good-neighbourly relations and non-interference, diplomatically or militarily, in the domestic affairs of the neighbouring countries, SOuth Africa would be able to participate fully and with the weight of its economic and technological potential in the exalting task of the development rf Africa. Apartheid continues to be a challenge to mankind, and primarily to Africans. This system is an aberration and must be eliminated. The persistence of this regime, which denies to Africans their rights and their ability to govern themselves, makes any agreement with SOuth Africa precr~ious and brings to bear on the neighbouring countries a constant threat of interference and aggression. In the light of the recent results achieved in the process of negotiations in southern Africa, the international community must redouble its efforts to ensure ever-greater solidarity with the struggle of the SOuth African people and the intensification of international pressure to compel Pretoria to free Nelson Mandela and other black leaders, to recognize the African National Congress and the other democratic forces and to start talks with credible representatives of the black majority. That peaceful path is the path of r.eason, for it is the only one capable of saving that country from the cycle of violence and self-destruction. By agreeing to implement the plan contained in United Nations resolution 435 (1918), relating to the independence of Namibia, South Africa has a unique opportunity to make a start on its rehabilitation within the United Nations (Mr da Luz, Cap! Verde) system. Co-operation with the Organization in the impartial supervision of this process, and abstent.ion from any act that might impede the transfer of power to the legitimate representatives of the Namibian people - which the entire international community hopes will be peaceful and democratic - would constitute an earnest of the good faith of the Pretoria regime and could have a beneficial influence on the inevitable future internal talks with the representatives of the black South African majority. The process of Namibian independence thus can be seen as a decisive test which will influence the future attitude of the international community, and above all the African community, towards South Africa. The Government of Cape Verde is convinced that we are approaching the end of a long and painful period for the South African people and the neighbouring countries. We hope that the international community will support the peoples of southern Africa in the difficult reconversion of a regional system based on confrontation and discrimination to a system of co-operation and healthy racial integration. Decolonization has gone down in the annals of contemporary history as a noble undertaking, successfully accomplished under the aegis of the United Nations. As a matter of fact, even if the United Nations had no other merits, its establishment would be fully justified by the tremendous legitimate contribution it has made to the liberation of peoples from the colonial yoke, to their emancipation and to the elevation of the universal idea of justice and freedom. This historic phase of its international activity having now passed, the United Nations faces a major unaertaking that is no less noble and worthy: the struggle for human rights. At a time when we are commemorating the fortieth anniversary of the Declaration of Human Rights, the united Nations must make the (Mr. da Luz, Cape Ve~de) protection of human rights one of the fundamental and priority items on its standing agenda. Over the past 40 years many legal instruments for the protection of human rights have been adopted. Among them, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is without any doubt an important landmark in the modern movement to protect, enhance the dignity of and ensure respect for human beings, for their fundamental rights and freedoms. Putting its stipulations into effect, articulating its principles with national policies and implementing its provisions are historical necessities which all countries must keep in mind. Much has been done towards raising the universal consciousness, particularly with respect to the need to protect and respect fundamental rights and freedoms. The results achieved in the context of the struggle against racial discrimination and for equal rights for women arp. among the specific pieces of evidence of that progress. But much remains to be done in various fields of the protection of human rights. Indeed, the first fundamental right, the right to life, is still insufficiently protected in many parts of the world. Universal and unwavering respect for that right must be a constant concern of this Organization. In this connection, the Republic of Cape Verde is proud of the position it has taken never to introduce the death penalty into its penal legislation. We have done that fully by choice, aware that it is society that produces the individual; we are placing our bets on human beings and their ability to overcome. In my country we also assess the international situation in terms of its " specific and"tangible impact on domestic life, on the climate of peace and harmo.ly and Oh the colossal tasks of development and the combating of the scourges that beset mankind. Last year we identified the problems affecting the developing countries adversely, and we put forward ideas and suggestions tilat could, we believed, help to find a collective sOlution. One year later we note ,that nothing, or very little, has been done in the direction of solving those problems. Indeed, since then the obstacles to development have only increased, and hunger. continues to devastate the peoples of a number of countries. (Mr. da Luz, Cape'Verde) (Mr. da Luz, e~pe Verde) The persistenc~ of this situatioll in various corners of the world runs counter ~o the positive developments observed in the international political climate since the last session of the General Assembly and continues to be a challenge to this )rganization's capacity and the determination of the inte~national community to .'ind real and lasting means of satisfying the aspirations a~ c'lr peoples. We tt~e .he view that the solution of the problem posed by questions of Fi~ac:e and nter~ational security necessarily involves the solution of problems posed by ,nderdevelopment, hunger and poverty. The resolution of regional conflicts does ~t in itself necessarily imply the existence of a climate of international peace nd security. The principal causes of instability and the threats to regional and )iversal peace lie in unjust international relations and poverty affecting the ljority and in the unequal distribution of the earth's resources. It is in the lterests of the whole Q.f the international community to woek and co-operate with a ew to assisting the countries of the third world to find solutions to their oblems, problems which we all share. r.~velopments in the world economic situation are of concern to us because ile, on thE: one hand, the industrialized countries are registering heartening tes of economic growth, we are once again forced to acknowledge that in the Neloping countries,. and in Africa in particular, it has scarcely been possible to curb the negative tendencies which continue to keep millions of human beings in an intolerable state of poverty. Millions of men, women and children annually pay with their lives the price of the world imbalance, an imbalance for which they are not to blame. The world's conscience is challneged by the contrast between the prosperity of some on the one hand and the abject poverty e'at we see in other a'·~as. While the present situation is favourab~e to certain countries and to the detriment of the (Mr. da LllZ, Cape Verde) developing countries, it is certainly not to be encouraged in the near future, even in the case of those who are at present drawing some advantages from it. In order for the world economy to improve - and this is something we all wish to see - there is a vital need for eVldence of a shared and powerful political will, a will based on the sacrificing of short-term gains, which stifle the healthy development of international economic relations. It is the African continent which continues to present the most desolate economic and social picture and which offers the most uncertain prospects. The special session of the General Assembly in 1986 devoted to consideration of the critical economic situation in Africa provided a framework and an opportunity for a contract of solidarity, which might have renewed the hopes for economic recovery in the African continent. However, two years later an assessment of the measures taken in that direction obliges us to acknowledge that, despite the efforts made by a great number of African countries and the important initiatives carried out at the international level, the results continue to be insufficient and far from encouraging. The conclusions of the mid-term review of the United Nations Programme of Action for African Economic Recovery and Development 1986-1990 demonstrate that a great deal remains to be done. Many African countries have undertaken structural adjustment programmes in accordance with the requirements of the International Monetary Fund, thus exposing themselves to serious risks of social and political disruption. At the same tin~, the inSUfficiency of financial flows, the continued worsening in the terms of trade and ':he unbearable burden of debt continue to act as powerfUl elements, the effects of which are cumulative and interrelated, neutralizing the tremendous sacrifices beinq made by the African peoples in the quest for valid and lasting solutions. (Mr. da Luz, Cape Verde) Cape Verde has not been spared the problems, affecting th~ least developed countr ies of the Afr ican continent. Despite the diffi<:ulties it is facing, the Government has directed its activities towards a policy of austerity, seeking to limit the volume of external debt, which for a poor country constitutes a heavy burden. We regret that at the international level the volume of debt has not been considered sUfficiently significant to be included in the framework ot tiot:. special-treatment programmes. This means, paradoxically, that a country is penalized for having taken the oourse of a prudent and austere economic policy. We wish to remind this Assembly that in its second national development plan, covering the period 1986 to 1989, the development priorities of Cape Verde are set out and their implementation will be jeopardized without substantial support from the international community. It is essential and vital that the fresh winds which are bringing hopes of peace to the world should also bring changes in the world economic order, changes which would lead to the design of new machinery and the mobilization of fresh resources to reduce the gap between prosperity and poverty, establish international relations on a moral basis and help effectively to build universal peace. we cannot conceive of a world of peace and concord while imbalances persist which place a great part of mankind on the fringe of progre~s and outside the general well-being. We sincerely hope that the detente in relations between the two great Powers and the positive climate currently prevailing, which favours the peaceful solution of conflicts, may herald a new era of co-operation and dialogue in international relations. The life of peoples on thie planet is a tribute to their capacity for collective survival. Their history, marked by violence, destruction and war, has taught us from the very beginning that the course we are now following in the international community is the only possible course if we are to continue to carry (Mr. da Luz, Cape Verde) out the marvellous work of creation. Conditions exist for us to make the twenty-first century the century of development for all. That is our obligation towards future generations, to begin now to take the concrete steps necessary to bring about this new era. Our collective survival requires it and our highest spiritual values justify it.

I shall now call on those representatives who wish to speak in exercise of the right of reply. Hay I remind members that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second and should be made by delegations from their seats. Mr. DAZA (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish): I sincerely regret that the delegation of Bolivia, through its Minister for External Relations, deemed it necessary to draw attention in the General Assembly this afternoon to an issue which affects my country. I therefore feel obliged to respond at this point. I am not going to give the Assembly a historical account or an interpretative view of history, but I do wish to affirm that truth can be distorted, not only when inaccuracies are put forward, but also when half-truths are spoken or ~nen truth and facts are glossed over. Such elements appear in the statement of the Minister for External Relations of Bolivia who, regrettably. also made accusations against the Government of Chile which I categorically reject. I wish to reaffirm here what we have said on other occasions: that the boundaries between my country and Bolivia were established once and for all in a peace treaty signed 84 years ago. That treaty set the bounaaries, as did many treaties linking countries represented in this Assembly. Thus, there are no issues outstanding between our two countries. The Treaty set forth responsibilities and obligations for both oounuies. Under this Treaty my country undertook important responsibilities, which it has been carrying out at all times and in accordance with which Bolivia is acting. The Treaty not only resolved the issuee at the time it was signed but also established a permanent basis regulating relations between my country and Bolivia. Based on that instrument, we have, over the past 84 years, signed a nunber of various instruments which have served to supplement and enrich the 1904 Treaty - on free transit, railway operations, economic co-operation, and so forth. Consequently, Bolivia receives favourable treatment in Chile in & mnnner that goes far beyond what is provided for in that peace Treaty. Henos the 1904 Treaty has been a permanent instrument of peace, a flexible instrument capable of improving relations betweeil the two States, and it has eliminated whatever hint of controversy between them. SO there is no dispute whatsoever between Chile and Bcl ivia. It is absurd and illogical to maintain that the legitimate exercise of rights stemming from an international Treaty, and the arduous work of Chileans in a territory that belongs to them, could cause a dispute. There is no such dispute. There has been no arrogance by ChileJ it has always been our intention to seek understanding and good will. The right of a Government to assess negotiations and to take a decision accordingly is ,;'1 essential part of the exercise of state sovereignty. No one, save the people of Chile, hds the right to question such Cl decision. By virtue of that Treaty which binds us, the present Government of Chile - and I want to make this emphatically clear - has always been and continues to be ready to find any possible way or means to improve free trmnsit, to work imaginatively towards integrating the economies of our two countries and to make progress towards modern and effective forms of co-operation that will enable our two nations to plan for the fu ture. Mr. OJARA (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish); The version to the effect that there is no madtime dispute between Bolivia and Chile still requiring a solution is a subterfuge designed to confuse international public opinion. The maritime dispute is at present within the institutional framework of the inter-American organization. The quest for a negotiated solution to Bolivia's mar itime pl:'oolem by way of whatever peacefUl means required in order to find a satisfactory f~rmula enabling my country to retu~n to the Pacific Ocean in sovereignty forms the basis of my country's consistent policy for resolving the land-locked state in which it finds itself as a result of armed aggression carried out against it in 1879. This just policy, which is in consonance with contemporary international law, was clearly set forth in this world forum by the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Bolivia in his statement this afternoon in order to place before world public opinion the facts about the efforts we have been making to resolve this century-old dispute. Notwi thstanding the failure of the various negotiations entered into, my Government has not lost hope that Chile will come to agree on the need for an open, frank dialogue based on the resolutions adopted by the Organization of American States. If necessary, my Government will appeal to the world body so that it may also be seized of this grave problem. On this occasion it is not our intention to call into question the 1904 Treaty, which sealed the nutilation of Boliviaos madtime sovereignty. The peoples and the Governments of Latin America and others condemned it for its excessive harshness, a fact which makes clear that it was imposed by force • (Mr. Ojara, Bolivia) There is no doubt that in order to restore a balance we need the intervention of the Organization of Amer iean States and possibly in future that:. of the United Nations within the framework of the respective competence of these two forums concerning the political settlement of international disputes. We consider that the Government of Chile should not reject the exercise of that competence which is indispensable for the maintenance of peace. ~, Government urges the Government of Chile to live up to the obligations contained in the Chapter Oft the peaceful settlement of disputes. We do not seek a jUdicial process in respect of the 1904 Treaty, but the land-locked sta te of my country, caused by armed aggressi~n, has to be modified in order to make possible the practice of peace and friendly and good-neighbourly relations between two neighbouring Latin American countries. The PRBSIDENTi I call on the representative of Chile, who has asked to speak a second tiMe in exercise of the right of reply. ~~DAZA (Chile) (interpretation from Spanish), I shall not prolong this debate unduly. I wish not to make a subjective assessment, but simply to present the facts because, as ha. been stated many times f facts are neutral. It is clear that during the last century we had a war with Bolivia, but wars in our continent during the last century were hardly exceptional. In Latin America they were the rule, and many Weirs took place. 'the Peace Treatl' that ended the state of war between Bolivia and Chile was not imposed ~y force, it was signed 20 years after the cessation of hostilities, following proposals made by Bolivia itself to the Government of Chile. It was a Treaty that, apart from fixing the border once and for all between my country and Bolivia also, to ensure that there would be no dispute, ~et out serious obligations and rights as far as Chile is concerned r in accordance with which Chile is acting, pursuant to the Treaty. The Treaty provided Bolivia with the widest free transit through Chilean ports. Under the treaty we undertook to build a railway, since handed over to Bolivia, linking Bolivia to Arica, and assumed responsibili~y for financing the building of Bolivian railways. Although it seems paradoxical, Bolivia had no contnct with the sea and it was the 1904 Treaty that gave Bolivia contact wi th the sea. we are prepared to improve on that Treaty and take all necessary steps out of goodwill, to enable Bolivia to have more effective access to the sea. Bolivia is not a land-locked country; it is a country that has the most favourable system of free transit in the world, as has been recognized not only by Chil~ but also by international bodie~. I have here the agreement concluded at a meeting of the Af[0-~sian Legal Committee held in Arusha, Tanzcmia, in which the question of ~iliHd-locked countries (r-it. Daza, Chile) is addressed. It 'ltdb~:'l that the bila.ter':ll agreements b,?tween Chile and Bolivia at'e very interesting [Qr the hasil.: rea:,on that they grant the most fundamental right 0f free transit to a.ny land-locked country. The treaty of 1904 establi:>hed once ann for all the border between my country and Bol iv l."i, and accord ingly there i.s no :i ispu t ..~. The rl~presentative of Bolivia has :,aid that he is not chall<":!nging the 1904 TL'eaty in any respr:tct. Of coursl~, he Cc'lnnot do so because his country benefits from the Treaty. It establisht?::; tile border and through that Treaty, Bolivians now have rights which they exercise on Chileim territory, a Territory that has always been populated by Chi l,,:::.tns, that h,:ls been developed thanks to the toil and the sweat of Chileans and that loJithout any contrib'ltion from the Bolivians. The PRESIDEN'~: I call. on the representative of Bolivia who has asked to speak for a second time in exercise of the right of reply. Mr. OJARA (Bolivia) (interpretation from Spanish): I am very sorry to have to say that the represerltative of Chile is utterly cynical in his latest remarks when he 3tates that Bolivia never had a sea coast and that it was the transit facilities that gave it co;'\tact with the sea. The representative of Chile refl'!rs fr~uentl.y to the 1904 Pea::e Treaty. That Treaty, which was so ominous for my COun try, was signed precisely as a consequencA of the armed aggL'ession perpetrated by that country in 1879, as he himself mt?:l tioned. 'fhe delegation of &>livia wiShes to terminate this discussion by inviting the Government of Chile to return to the negotiating table to continue the negoti'ltions which were so abruptly broken off hy it in April 1987. Those negotiations were necessary pursuant to the resobtions which, since 1979, have been adopted by the Organization of American States and which urge both countr.ies, Bolivia and Chile, to engage in negotiations aimed at arriving at an equitable and mutually satisfact~ry solution. The meeting rose at 6.15 p.m. ('1r. Ojara, Bolivic~)