A/44/PV.55 General Assembly

I call on the representative of Brazil to introduce draft resolution A/44/L.24. Mr. NOGUEIRA-BATISTA (Brazil): Since the last session of the General Assembly we have witnessed appreciable political improvements in the South Atlantic region. We welcome developments in southern Africa, which gave birth to the long-awaited implementation of the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia. The recently concluded elections in that Territory are a most significant step in this process. Brazil joins the other States of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic in hoping to receive Namibia very soon as a full member of our regional community. In this process, the United Nations has played and is still playing a very important role, especially through the work of the United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG). In the same context, the role of the United Nations Angola Verification MiSSion (UNAVEM) has also been significant. General Assembly resolution 41/11 declared the South Atlantic a zone of peace and co-operation. By recognizing the spec~.f1c identity of the region and the legitimacy of the concerns and aspirations of the riparian countries, the international community supported the common determination of the States of the sone to contribute in an effective manner to international peace and 8ecurity, a8 well as to promoting the economic and social aevelopment of the South Atlantic co_unity. The Pinal Document of the first meeting of the States of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic, held in Rio de Janeiro from 2S to 29 JUly 1988, contains an ilftPOrtant body of conclusions and recommendations, confirming that identity and reaffirming the endecvoucs of the member States to co-operate with each other. In the implementation of those recommendations, the terms md conditions for a technical programme to review the developments in and implementation of the legal regime established by the 1982 Convention CX\ the Law of the Sea were laid down v1th the assistance of the Office for OCean Affairs and the Law of the sea. This programtre is to be developed in two semin~::'~, to be held in the Congo in 1990 and in Uruguay in 1991. It also aims at providi~g an additional opportunity to evaluate possibilities of co~peratlon between participating States on certain aspects of the law of the sea of common interest to the States of the zone of peace and couoperation of the South Atlantic. The declaration of the zone of peace and co~peration is a constructive ini tiative. Our intention remains to promote progress for the peoples in Booth Ilmerica and Africa, with, it is our hope, the increasing support of the international community. Bearing that in mind, I have the honour to introduce, on behalf of Angola, Argentina, Benin, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gamia, Ghana, QJ!nea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Nigeria, sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, 'Jbgo, Uruguay, zaire and Brazil - the 22 States memers of the zone - ~he draft resolution contained in document A/44/L.24, which, like its predecessors, is the result of a joint drafting effort by the countries concerned. The draft is simple and straightforward in building upon the Declaration adopted under resolution 41/n. Under its preambular part, the Assembly would affirm that cO~p&ration among all States, in particular those of the tegion, to\lfards achieving peace and development is essential to pronnte the objectives of the zone, the Assellbly would indicate that the States of the region are fully aware of the importance of preserving its envirCll1ment, acknowledge the threat posed to it (Mr. Nogueira-Batista, Brazil) by pollution frCllll any source, and note the efforts of States of the zone towards fUlfilling the goals of the Declaration. Under operative paragraph 1, the Assembly would take note of the report, (A/44/536) submitted by the Secretary-General, which the sponsors gratefully aCknowledge. In paragraph 2, it would call upon all States not only to oo-operate in the prollOt!on of the objectives of the region, but also to refrain from any action inconsistent with those objectives, particularly actions which might create or aggravate situations of tension and potential conflict in the region. In paragraph 3, it would welcome the beginning of the implementation of the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia and express the hope that Namibia would be received very soon as a full memer of the South Atlantic conununity. Under paragraph 4, the Assembly would emphasize the impera tive need to pre~erve the environment of the region and urge all States to take all measures necessary to protect it fran environmental damage. In this context, in opera tive paragraph 5, the Assembly would urge all States to abstain from transferring hazardous, toxic and nuclear wastes into the region and disposing of them within the region. Operative paragraph 6 reflects the positive results of the consultations which will make possible the holding of the seminars, with both the assistance of the Office for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea and the financial support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). In SUbmitting draft resolution A/44/r..24 to the General Assenbly for its consideration, we most sincerely hope that, understanding our motives, the Assembly will once again, be supportive of the legitimate aspirations of the peoples of the South Atlantic region. The PRm m~T, I now call on the first speaker in the debate on this item, the representative of Nepal. (Mr. Nogueira-Batista, Brazil) Mr • .msS,E (Nepal) a In alce again speaking on the agenda item entitled ·ZOne of peace and co"'Operation of the SOuth Atlantic·, my delegatiat is naturally aware that Nepal is situated at a great physical distance from the South Atlantic. My delegatiCln is, however, conscious of another reality - the close affinity between the initbtive for the establishment of a zone of peace and co"''Operation in the South Atlant~c and its OWl mdel!t proposal to declare Nepal a zone of peace. It is, indeed, that concePtual similarity that motivated rrq delegation to co-sponsor the historic General Assembly resolution 41/11 of 27 October 1986. In this context, may I recall that Nepal had supported the 1971 General Assembly Declaration of the Indian OCean as a Zone of Peace and the 1976 proposal for the establishment of a zone of peace, freedom and neutrality in South-East As ia. Similarly, my country has endorsed proposals for the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in South Asia, in the Mediterranean, and covering the African continent. It has supported the Tlatelolco Treaty of 1967 as well as the Rarotonga Treaty of 1985, representing as they do effective regional approaches to non-prol1feratiat in Latin America and the SOuth Pacific. Nepal has also welconed a partiCUlar aspect of the Antarctic Treaty of 1959, that continel'\t's demilitarization and denuclearization. Allow me to touch briefly upon His Majesty King Birendre's 1975 proposal to declare Nepal a zone of peace - a proposal, I may add, that has received the valuable support of 113 States Members of this Organization, support for Which I rei terate our gnteful apprecia tion. It is a natural corollary of Nepal's policy of strict adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Non-Aligned Movement. In this age of new political thinking, we believe it could be a useful addi,tion to the existing body of confidence-building measures related to disarmament Std security. We bold that it represents one practical means for smcUgeo-strategicaUY located States to enhance their security even while securing their socio-ecoftomic development. In today's improvine, but all-too-fluid Md unprediet6ble international situation, we believe it is important for all States, and not only the militarily powerful ones, to feel and be secure. (Mr. Josse, Nepal) Coming back to our agenda item, allow me to express my delega tion 's congratulations to the Government of Brazil on its ;active role as co-ordinator in proJllOting intensive eX("!Janges aJllOng high-ranking authori ties fran South Atlcntic countries, as set out in the Final Document of the first meeting of the States of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic. As detailed in the Secretary-General's report (A/44/536), such exchanges have resulted in tangible agreements relating to political, economic, financial, commercial and teChnical co-operationft My delagat~on is JOOre them ever convinced that scrupulous adherence to the Declaration of the Zone of Peace and Co-operation of the South Atlantic would make a significant contribution to the maintenance of peace and security over that vast ocean expanse. We rei tera te our belief that s trict campl iance with the terms of that Declaration would greatly assist in the prevention of not only a geographical proliferation of nuclear weapons but also of threats to regional cnd international security stenming from conmitments to the non-introduction of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction i:Ild rivalries S\d conflicts that are foreign to the region. My delegation has noted some recent, promising developments on the international scene that have a bearing on the South Atlantic. Amon:j them is the holding of elections in Namibia last week, under the supervision and control of the United Nations, prepa~atory to its full independence in April 1990. My delegation welcomes the announcement a few hours ago of the results of those elections lIld their certification by the Secretary-General's Special Represent.ative. We wish to offer our most sincere congratulations to the Sout.h West Africa People's Organization (SWAPO) on its well-deserved electoral victory. It is our hope that by this time next year Namibia will have not only joined this .. (Kr. Josse £ Nepal) world body but also becone fully integrated into the community of South Atlantic States committed to the Declaration of the Zone of Peace and Co-operation of the South Atlantic. We share the goal of the Argentine Government, as expressed in document A/44/536, IIto see the South Atlantic become a true zone of peace and co-operation, free from nuclear weapons, protected from any form of arms race and from any aspiration to hegenony.1I CA/44/536, p. 4, para. 2) We hold that an essential condi tion for the establishment of a zone of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic is the complete dismantling of the apparatus and policy of apartheid by the racist Pretor ia regine, the adherence of Pretor fa to the nuclear non-proliferation Treaty, the placing of all its nuclear aCtivities under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) supervis ion, and the guaranteeing of a truly nuclear-free status for the zone. My delegation shares the view expressed by some Governments that, in light of the existing agreements concernin; nuolear~free zones in Latin America and the South Pacific, and the process of establishing a zone of peace in the Indian Ocean and a zone of peace md oo-operatim in the South Atlantic, the idea of considering the declaration of the whole southern hemisphere a nuclear-f(ee zone deserves serious attention. We wish to record our deep appreciation to the Secretary-General for his report. we also wish to express our appreciatim to the States of the South Atlantic region that have undertaken steps to implement the terms of historic General Assembly resolution 41/11. We urge them to continue their laudable «ad, in many ways, exemplary endeavOurs in ~)ningful regional co-operation. My delegation is therefore honoured to support draft resolution A/44/L.24, j1.Bt introduced by the representative of Brazil. We hope it will be endorsed by consensus by the Assellbly. Mr. ADJOYI. ('1bgo) (interpretation from French) s The nobility of the i deals enshrined in the Charter of the Uni ted Na tions calls for the constant mobilization of our energies and the rational combination of our initiatives for the purpose of creating the appropr la te condi tions for the advent of a more peaceful and prosperous world in full solidarity. In short, we are required to convert international peace and security into a solid shield against expansionist and domineering aspirations Which, as we all know, have precipitated the two deadliest conflagrations of our time. It is significant and appropriate in this respect for the General Assellbly to have ac})pted at its forty-first seSb.l,on a decls ial to declare a zone of peace 2I1d co-operation of the South Atlantic. It is fitting to recall that this declaration is in keeping with paragraph 64 of the Final Document of the firs t special sess ion of the GeneI'al Assembly devoted to disarmament. That paragraph stipUlates. wThe establishment of zones of peace in various regions of the world under appropL'iate conditions, to be clearly defined 2I1d determined freely by the States concerned in the zone, taking into account the char~eteristics of the zone lIld the principles of the Charter of the Un!ted Hations, 2I1d in conformity with international law, can contribute to strengthening the security of States within such zones and to international peace 2I1d security as a wole.· (resolution S-10/2) The very extensive support for the three resolutions adopted by the Gener21 Assembly on the question of the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic - General Assellbly resolutions 41/11, 42/16 and 43/23 - confirms the commitment of the in terna tional community to work tOWards in terna tional peace, security and co-operation and constitutes for the States of the zone a reason to work towaras the goals contained in the declara tion. It is clear from the resolu tions that implementa tiQ1 of the Declara tiQ1 is the joint responsibility of the States concerned and of the States of all other regions, in particular the militarUy significant States. Numerous efforts have been made since the adoption of General AsseJlbly resolution 41/11, of 27 October 1986, demonstrating the determinaticn of the coastal states of the South Atlantic to convert thei>: region into a genuine zone of peace and co-operation. The first meeting of the States of the ZQ1e, held at Rio de Janeiro from 25 to 29 July 1988, emphasized the particular responsibility of the States of the region wi th regard to the preserva tion of peace and security in the Zone CWld outlined the framework for future action to give sW>stance to their desire to co-operate. Braz U •s remark able work as co-ordina tor of the Sta tee of the ZQ1e is clear proof of the importance of the decision taken at Rio de Janeiro to establish that post and of the catalysing role which the co-ordinator is called UPQ1 to play. It therefore appears to be both just and appropriat..e to welcome the active participation of Brazil in the Conference of Plenipotentiaries charged with drawing up the global convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous ",astes, as well as efforts of our Co-ordinator to orCJanize two seminars Q1 the application of the legal regime provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. These two seminars are extremely impcrtmt in that they are concerned essentially with the provisions of the Convention likely to have an impact Cln the zone. In line with its unswerving commitment to intarnat1cnal peilce and security and its strong faith in the virtues of & international co-operation of all kinds free from ideological considerations, Togo intends to ccntribute, to the best of its ability to thQ attainment of the objectives of the Declarstion of the Zone of Peace Ilnd Co~peratiQ1 of the So\!th Atlantic. That commitment has already (Hr. Mjoy!, Togo) bee de-.uatrated by the fact that ay CO\Dtry is a party to the AgreeMnt on non-agre8sion and autoal as8istance for defence concluded vith the States of the West African CoIuIunity and inl tieted the non-aggreuion Protocol between the 16 States _aber8 of the !rooncm.c eo.unity of West African States. Aa a founding _.er of the konoaie ee..unity of West African States, lIy country spare8 no effort to contribute to the 8ucce8S of this exellPlary experimnt. in Bubregional econollic integraticm, which is a factor for stmiUty and p.ce. Moreover, the .any initiative8 concerning aeaiation and the peaceful settlement of disputes and conflicts Ql the part of the President of the Republic, 8i8 Excellency General Gn.8ingbe Byadeu, confirs 'l'ogo'8 steadfsst dedication to peace. It ia not only the States of the reqicm that mould respect the South Atlantic as a ~()fte of peace and co"'Operation. This pertinent require_lilt is illplt.ctt in General Assembly resolution 41/11, of 21 Octcber 1986, in wbicb the General Aa8eJlb1y -Calls upon ell States of all other regiona, in particular the slllterily 8ignificant Stet., "crupuloualy to respect the region of the SOuth Atlantic a8 a zone of peace anc! co~perat!on, especially through the reduction and eventual e1islnaticn of their s11itary p~e8ence thera, the non~introdUctlonof nuclear weapon8 or other weapons of 1II&8S de8truction and the nm-extension into the region of dvaldes _d confiicts that are forei9n to it-. (re8olution 41/11) It 18 approprlete to veloo. the intere8t shCJtojn by numerOU8 countries outside the z(lfte in the etuinMllt of the Clbject!vees of the Declaration. In this re.peet, ay delegation ve1oo.s the SOviet Union's reaffiraation of ita readine88 to e~a.ine, w1th the Uni tee! Statea of ~rica and the other _ jot' naval Powers and the South Atlantic coastal State., the question of appropriate (Mr. M,o!!, '1'099) measures in response to the General Assembly's appeal fer the red1ction of the military presence in the reqion and the non-introduction of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction. This is a IIICI8t pos! tive and constructive offer which deserves to be taken up by other major naval Powers and States of the. zone for the purpose of deciding on specific action. In fulfilling their-responsIbilities in the implementation of the Declaratio~ of the Zone of Peace ,.,d Co-operation of the SOuth Atlantic the States of other regiolrlB, 1n particul.mr the militarily significant Powers, should avoid increasing existing tension or exacerbatilYj the calflicts unleashed in the zone. Moreover, they should consider the conclusion of agreements on the reduction and progressive elimination of military activities incompatible with the requirements of peace and security of the coastal States of the SOuth Atlantic, and co-operate closely with those States for the purpose of settling by political means conflicts in which States outs1de the regional are involved. The prohibition of the transfer of radioactive and other hazardous wastes to countries of the South Atlmtic lIIU!Jt be one of the priorities of the indl8trial States outside the region. Such a prohibition would respond to the concern expressed by the States of the zone during the Rio de Janeiro meeting. In view of their concern to protect the environment of ~he South Atlantic against any risk of degradatiQ\, they unar.iJlX)usly cmdemned any transfer of hazardous wastes to the region. M)' country, which wca one of- the first to 'protest at attempts at, and actual dUllping of, toxic and hazardous wastes and which hca recently adopted a rigorous environmental code, will support any action aimed at making the environment of the South Atlantic an unpolluted 8rea. (Mr. Adjoyi, Tbgo) My delega tion warmly welcomes the decison recently adopted by the. twelve States menbers of the European Economic Conmunity to prohibit the transfer I7.f their industries of toxic wastes to the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. That decision should be an example to all the other industrialized countries that produce toxic wstes. While it constitutes one of the strategic regions of the world and a huge market, the zone of the South Atlantic also has a significant political, economic, cultural and human dimension, because it has a diversity of States within it - peoples speak lng French, English and Portuguese, Hispano-Amer1cans, La tin-Americans and Africans, a dense {X)pulation that is varied in terms of race, religion and values. The establishment of this zone - in addition to being in keeping with the essential purposes of this world Organization - is an action that reveals the will of the States concerned to draw the best possible advantage from their compleraentar:ity. In any event, the contribution of all the States Mellbers of the United Nations to the effective implementation of the goals of the Declaration constitutes one of those reads that will inevitably lead us to the world of peace, justice and progress which all of us wish to build. If the progressive improvement in international political relations could give a lasting impetm to the joint action by the coastal States of the South Atlantic and by the States of the other regions, we would greatly increase our chances of achieving peace and co-operation in the region CII'ld thus strengthening world equilibr:ium. Mr. ARISMmDI (Colomia) <interpretation from Spanish) I We are gathered here today because the international community ie interested in discussing the new events in the South Atlantic from the perspective of peace and co-operation in the regia\. Ever since the reg ion was declared a zone of peace ald co-opera tion by a General Assenbly resolution adopted in 1986, there have been new, positive achievements within the region as well as outside it. The climate of world-wide detente makes it possible for us to continue our search for a better future and for negotiated solutions in keeping with the principles of international law. One need only recall the first meeting of the States of the zone of peace and co-operation, which dealt with many issues with which the Assembly is familiar. The efforts to achieve Namibia's independence are closer than ever before to realization. This has required constant follow-up action by the Security Council and agreements such as those reached in New York and Brazzaville, as well as many activi ties by the Secretary-General of the Uni ted Ra tians and the in terna tional community as ~ whole. All this has shown the world that peace processes, although they may be complex, can move forward when there is the will to negotiate and the readiness to comply with agreements reached. We hope that this process in Namibia will continue - for the good of the Namibian people, for the reaffirm tion of the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity, and for the strengthening of peace in that reg ion. We urge all States to promote the objectives of peace and co-operation established in the declaration of the zone of peace and co-operation in the South Atlantic and to refrain from acts which might create or aggravate situations of tens ion and potential conflict in the reg ion. We welcome with satisfaction the implementation of the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia, which began in AprU this year, and we hope that very soon we shall receive Namibia as a member of the community of South Atlantic States. We have particularly in mind the news we bave heard today of the successful outcome of the elections that took place in Namf.bia last week. (Mr. Arismendi, Colombia) Colombia considers that in order to achieve the objectives of peace and Co-operation in the South \tlantic the States of all the other regions 1Il1St refrain from introducing military equipment or personnel, weapons of mass destruction or conflict situations into that region. Against that background, Colo1lbia is a party to the Treaty for the Prohibi tion of ~clear Weapons in latin America and we abide by the rules laid down by the rtgency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in latin America (OPANAL). Also, we recently acceded to the Antarctic Treaty, because we share the P1ilosophy contained in that Treaty that that zone should be used exclusively for peaceful, scientific ends, and also to protect and preserve species and their habitats. By their nature, these instruments allow for the development of various forms of co~peration that reflect the true pcssibilities and needs of the region. By working towards that goal, we shall be working for the economic and social progress of our peoples. We are pleased to have establishe~ diplomatic relations, in the period between 1987 to 1989, with the fo!Llowing coastal States of the region: Angola, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Gambia, Ghana, G.t inea, GJ inea-Bissau, Liber la, sao Tome and Principe, Sierra Leone and ~go. We have been motivated in this by a spirit of understanding and co-operation, and by the desire to work jointly in the :interests of the region and of the international community, as part of the common effort to bring about peace. Peace is possible if we all work to achieve it. The first and foremost challenge for mankind is to have a civilized life, a life of dignity. Mrs. DIALIO (Senegal) (interpretation fran French): As a coastal country of the South Atlantic, Senegal takes the opportunIty offered by the consideration of agenda iUm 33 to reaffirm its dedication to the goals stated in the declaration establishing the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic. This seems to be the appropriate time ald place for Senegal to proclaim once again its determination to continue to respect the ethic that is the basis of the relations between States of the zone, Md its conviction that the future of ~he South Atlantic can be seen only in a situation of peace and harm~ny among the coastal States and peoples. This comi tment explains why in our relations with our neighbour s - as has been recently recalled by President Abdou Diouf - we follow a policy of active good-neighbourliness based on the constant quest for ever greater solidarity. It is for this reason that Senegal associated itself from the outset with the praisworthy initiative of Brazil and with all the consultations that resulted in the drafting of the· Declaration of 27 October 1986 by which the General Assembly designated the ocean space between Africa and South America a zone of peace and co-operation. In spite of the extent and complexity of the undertaking, in particular from the staldpoint of disarmament Md security, economic and social development, the safeguarding of the environment, respect for human rights and the rights of peoples, the South Atla'ltic States are working tirelessly to pronote the spidt. of the zone of peace and co~peration. Thus, in July 1989, the first meeting of the States of the regf"'n was held in Rio de Janeiro. This was at important step towards the attainmont of the zone's objectives. That meeting made it possible, in particular, to emphasize the responsibility of coastal States with respect to the promotion of the aims and objectives of the zoneJ to censure ~le principle sources of conflict mu tension that threaten peace ald development in the zone, Cl\d to outline a comprehensive programme of transatlantic regional co-operation • (Mrs. Dia110, Senegal) '.lbgether with these efforts, the States of the zone are trying to benefit from the enriching experiences of other zones of peace with the dame preoccupations from the contribution of specialized agencies, organs Md bodies of the Uni ted Ha tions system. It is thus proposed that, with the assistance of the Uni ted Nations, two seminars should be organized in 1990 Md 1991, in the Congo md Uruguay, on those aspects of the United Nilttons Convention Ql the Law of the Sea that could have a definite impact UPQl the ZQ1e. Similarly, African cnd Latin ~rican regional organizations could make an appreciable contribution, enabling States to equip themselves with international legal instruments Md the nl""..Jessary means to convert the zone into an area of ievelopment, sheltered from conflicts and free from nuclear weapons or 2I1jf other weapons of mass destruction. However, such an area would become a reality only with an imprO'le~nt in the political climate in southern Africa once apartheid has been eliminated Md South Africa's nuclear activities have been placed urtder the control of the International Atomic Energy Agency. In this contribution, mv delegation is extremely happy that very soon we shall be able to welcome the independent State of Nemib!a, after a long and painful independence process, to our midst as a memer of the zone. All these concerns, which are common to all the members of the zone, are clearly reflected in the ciraft resolution just submitted to the General Assellbly by the delegation of Brazil. In reaffirming to Ambassador Paulo Nogueira-Batista its gratitude for the commitment and dedication with which he has carded out from the very outset his role as co""Ordinator, the delegation of Senegal invites all delegations to vote in favour of draft resolution A/44/L.24.* 11 Mr. Navajas Magro (Bolivia), Vice-President, took the Chair. (~s. D1allo, Senegal) Mr. BALE (Congo) (interpretation from Prenoh) I On 27 October 1986 the Congo joined its voice to the voices of m2l'ly other delegations that solemnly declared the South Atlantic a zone of peace and co-operadon. 'Iloday, following a . . tradi tion establiesbed then !hd in view of the obvious interest of this questicn, my dele<Jation would like to take the opportunity of this debate to reaffirm Congo's support for the Rio de J!he~ro Declaration. Peace, security, developqnt !hd regional co-operation - these Objectives of the Declaration are extremely topical in the context of the relative relaxation of tension in internaticnml relations, in which the crucial problems of the develoQllent and ecorlOllic recovctry of developing countries should from now on have top priority. 'lhlB these objectives are beco.ing increasingly illport&nt. Th& task of translating these objectives into the reality of the life of the States, 80Clieties !hd individuals living in this urine area situated betw.en Mdaa and South Ameri~ requires, in addition to the support of the States of the ZCCle, the support of the international CClllJllUnity as a whole. The oo_itllent ma~ in Rio de Janeiro in July 1988 by the States ot the zone, " -. partiCUlarly with regard\tlo prollloting regional co-operation in achieving 8COIlOIlic and social development, piotection of the environllent mnd peace and security for all States in the region shows their cSetemination to develop their relations in conditions of peace and freedom, in a climate free froll tension and in confor.i~ with the principles and rules of international law and the Qaarter of the United Natione. I therefore we1C1OmEt the effOrts being .adG at the level of our mile by Argentina Md the United Kingdom to find sc1utions to the problems relating to the • future of the Falkland Islands (Malvin~). My delegation also welcomes the implementation of Security COmc!l resolution 435 (1978), on Namibia, which we all hope to be able to welcome very soon as a *-ber of our Organization md a member of the zone. The re&let:ion of the military presence in the zone by States of other regions, in particular the JlllitarUy signific2!Dt States, which should refrain fl'Oll't introducing weapons of mass destruction into the zone, would undoubtedly contribute to a rewct10n of tension m4 contribute to the achievelllent of the objectives ttet forth 1n the Rio de Janeiro Declaration. The Declaration en the Denucl.rizatioD of Africa, with tIh!ch the African States of the zene have 801eanly associated thellselves, reflects their desire to uke the African continent and the Atlantic Ocean a nuclaer-weapon-free zone. This c!eclared intmticn, although shared by the comtdes of the Za'lEl, is unfortun:mtely colIPrOlll1s.d by the confirmed nucl_r capability of South Africa, whicb, as cemere are aware, ha established racia Q8 a system of GcwernRnt" (Mr. Bale, Con..12) If the reative calm that reigN! in Angola and the independence process of Namibia which is under tmy constitute a positive development in southern Africa, 8parthaid remains & threat to international cnd regional peace Md security•. While reiterating its strong condemation of apartheig, Congo calls upon all States which are helpirrj South Africa in its nuclear and other armament efforts to cease all forms of co-operation with that re~ime. We must also recognize that the so-called reforms that have been cerried out. in South Africa are more along the lines of an adaptation of Q2artheid because of the internal and external pressures, without any r&die&l changes being made e Only unaniDDUB md concerted action a1 the part of the Secud ty Council and the international community as a tllole to bring about ma."ldatory measureo, daapite the selfish interests of certain countries, could lead Pretoria to endicate apartheid. Thus 'the coastal States of the South Atlantic will rejoice in welcoming to their midst a democratic and multiracial South Africa freed from apartheid • . !esting peace and security, in our zone, as well ae globally, can be guaranteed only when all the peoples of the world &re &ble to determine ~~eir future 1n \ freedom, when the artificial barrier:s of race and all other for_ of discrimination are broken dow. The elimination of the economic and social instability of the States of the zone and all the developing countries as a whole is necessary in order to have genuine peace 51d security. This shows the great !llpartance of the reapact we aust all have for the relevant United Nations resolutions en the subject .. '11le development of the States of the zone, the preservation of the envirau!l9nt from pollution and the promotion of trade undoubtedly require enormous resources which are often bl1yond the capabilities of our States. Although modest, the efforts which have been _de so far deserve to be enoouraCJed~ Concettation between (Kr. Bale, Congo) the States of the zone has been enhanced often .as a result of periodic visits by high-level authorities, inspiring countries to enter into agreements of co~peration in the poli tical, economic, financial, trade and technical areas. The pursuit of these contacts will undoubtedly contribute to the achievement of the Rio de Janeiro objectives) but greater support from the members of the international oommunity as a whole would be more helpful. The ongoing support that the majority of the Member States of the United Nations have given to the resolutions concerning the South Atlantic as a zone of peace and co~peration shows the universal aspiration for peace and the desire to promote co~peration in the various regions of the world. We welcome the efforts of the Office for Ocean Affairs and the taw of the Sea in the Secretariat of the United Nations, the United Nations Developll\ent Programme and those oountries that are organizing seminars on the application of the legal regine provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which are to be held in Congo and Uruguay. My country, for its part, is taking all the necessary measures to ensure the success of the Brazzaville seminar. In concllSion, we should like to recall that; in order to strengthen peace a."\d co-operation in the South Atlantic, it is indispensable for all the States of the international community to commit themselves to engaging in negotiations in order to settle peacefully whatever disputes may arise between them in the context of the norms governing international coexistence. Kt. AZ IKlWE (Nigeria), The Nigerian delegation views United Nations General Assembly resolution 41/11, of 27 October 1986, which solemnly declared the Zone of Peace and Co-operation of the South Atlantic, as an important lananark 1n fostering regional co-operation, security and development, as well as in the promotion of international peace.. The principles and objectives of that resolution (Mr. Bale, Congo) underline our conviction concerning the imperatives of poli tical understanding and socio-economic collaboration among Statesv which constitute the pillars of genuine peace and secud ty • The South Atlantic is a region of particular significance to Nigeria for various reasons. Like other States of the Zone znd a coastal State bordering the South Atlantic Ocean, it is vital to the security and legitimate maritime transactions of Nigeria to safeguard the South Atlantic for peaceful activities. Furthermore, as the co11llll0n ocean joining the African continent with South Africa, the South Atlantic is pivotal to the co-operation of these two geographical components of the developing world whose close contacts have long been inhibited by decades of colon ialism and underdevelopment. Above all, by canplementing the Latin 1lmerican nuc1e2r-weapon-free zone under the Treaty of Tlatelo1co and the African initiative on the denuclearization of our continent, the South Atlantic Zone rn;anifests the desire of the States of the region to be ft' ZN! from outside foreign interference, military rivalry, nuclear-weapon competition and other hostile intentions. The Final Document (A/43/512, annex) of the first high-level meeting of the States of the Zone of the South Atlantic, held in Rio de Janeiro in July 1988, established the blueprint for regional peace, co-operation and development. It illuminates the wish of the States of the zone to accord necessary priorities not only to political contacts and co-operation but also to consolidation of the security of member States and the social, economic and technical development of their peoples. In other words, the South Atlantic zone is already living up to the hopes and aspirations which guided its establishment as 21\ instrument of peace and South-South co-operat\on. (Mr. Azikiwe, Nigeria) WhUe Nigeria welcomes these positive trends and the mdest achievement recorded so far by the zone, we are not unmindful of the challenges and problems ahead. Although the region of the South Atlantic ocean is one of the least militari~ed areas of the world today, some recent developments give cause for grave concern to my country. First, the African continent continues to be throatened by the nuclear-weapons ambi tion of apartheid South Africa, a cOl.lltry that borders Ql the South Atlantic OCean. In spite of 25 years of efforts by the Organlzaticn of Afdcan tl\ity (OAU)« dating back to 1964, to make Africa nuclear free, the oppressive minority regime in Pretoria, aided and abetted technologically by outside Powl!~8, has cmtinued ,its relentless acquisition of sophisticated conventional and nuclear aLms to maintain its apartheid policies. The recent d1sclOBur~ of South Africa'a dev$lop~nt, with Israeli assistance, of nuclear-tipped mediuM-range misBilea with a range of 1,700 kUometres, lII'ld of completed nuclear-testing facilities point to the increasing threat not only to the security of the neighbouring Aff'ican States but also to regimal and internatimal psce. Secondly, the strategic importance of the South Atlantic es a vital ocean lane for in.terna timal shipping, mad time tr ansactions and cOMlllunica tions networks gives it value as one of the busiest ocean routes in our interdependent world. However, the interests of the major Powers have not always been satisf&ctorUy confined to peaceful uses of strategic sea lanes. The threat poaed by naval syBtelU and their deployment in vast ocean areas far from their geographical origine and their sophisticeted nucleet armaments, especially eboard sub_rines, pose a considerable security threat to seaboard security, especially thet of developing co.tal States, including those of the South Atlentic zone. The presence of lIilitary bues belonging to the major Powers in various iillitnds of the South Atlantic Oce,an, some in close proximity to the territories of 8U11e ~tetes of the zone, gives cause for security concern. Thirdly, as a zone sharing frontiers with the virgin continent of Antarctica, the South Atlmtic cannot be lndifferent to develoPINnU in that lI1irtulbi ted lald 11888, which, because of 1ts potential resources, has ettrected treJlendous lnternatiQ'lel interest in recent years. UnfoE'tmately, instead of being presetvec1 for purely scientific exploration and activities, Antarctica is gradually being (Mr. Azikiwe, Nigeria) exploit:e4 for ecClftOllic, .lneral md toud8tic re.ens. 'rhe cOlllIsquenc. for the reat of the world, espacially for the i_cUate coastal eountrio8 of the South, of upsetting Antarctica's delicate ecCl8YStsl threugh a 8ud4ell dsa in t."~ level of the ocean tcapel'atur, are uni_ginablc. The incrGlleing reports of oil spillage fro. ships .CI taMerS plying Antarctica a180 give rise to grave CCftcern aboU~ environaental pollution vith ita expected 8pl11-over effect. an the South Atlantic regian. if1th Antarctica thua becoming an econCllllic B1 Dorado to sc.e technologically advanced coamtd....Uitary cellpetl Uco Ol1er .a efforts to ccntrol lUlcra tl'1e .ineral areas re.ins a aiaUnci: p).aibll1ty, and vould have a negative Il1P8ct on the outlying regions. It is for theae rea.ens, armg other., that Nigeria cannot but bG concerned lest the full realisatian of the abjectlY. of the zcne of the SOUth Atlantic could be frustrated by th••• iapedi_nts. This ia .y ve call on the Unlta4 Hations and the lnternaticmal cOlD!Jftity ss a wcle to ..slat the Stat. of the zcne in tha bid to saf4ICJUard thsir legitlIDDte interests and Gspiratione, ae vall u to CJUftrantee freecb of navlgatim, peaceful ..titi. traffic 814 the s.curity of the envirONlil8nt. My delegation vishea to 00_n4 the support 91v~n by tha State. of the zone ..d by the General AIIs.ably dur1DlJ the for~-tbird ....lm, l.~ y.ar, to scUm en the i.s.. of the dumping of radioact!ve ~nd other huardoua ~te. in Africa. 'rhe cri_inal practice of the 111egal dlepagal of th... v.t. 1ft the terri tor1. of s~ Statea of tbe acne rightly ..t '11th the strong condeanati<tn of the internaticnal C08IIUifilty. '!'ha v1911lftc. of the Stat_ of the sone vith regar4 to such crlll1nal practice. by wuta _rcbllnt8 ha since then resulted In co-ordinated efform, tlbleb boo MO fa£' pt._tIId s1ailar Illegal cblping in any part of the zone. The international coaumity IIUSt give practical effect to its concern for the aafety of tha eftvironaent by tightening the existing legal frallework to ell.inea. CCIIplete1y the dUDping of radicactive and other hazardous wastea in. the territories of other States. My delegation welcoMe the report of the Secretary-Gtneral (A/44/536) and C\Wanda the United Rations for its Bupport for the aiD and objectives of the zone. We also express our appreciation to the United Nations Development ProgrUlle (tJlI)P) Md the United Nations Office fer Oce6lft Affaira md the Lawef the Sea for the ..aiatance being renda£'ed to the zone in attaining ita cbjeet:ivee and It ls the fervent hope of ay delE/9ation that during the next high-level _ting of the Statea of the zone in the second half of 1990 m indtpendent Nallib!a wUl be we].CX)lIed into the fold aa our 23rd Dl!lber. - Finally, ay delegation wish. to rei~erate ay country8s unflinching c~t_nt to the effectiveness and viability of the zone of the South Atlantic, and co_ends draft resolution A/44/L.24 to the Gen&ral Aasnbly for overwhelaing 8Up,oR. The RtIB mINT U.nterpretatien froll Spanish) I We have beard the last speaker in the debate on thi8 i t_. I call on the representative of Vene:ue1a, who ,,18be8 to explain her vote before the voting. I re.ind her that, in accordance with Generel Aasellbly dseis ion 34/401, explanation.. of vote are limited to 10 Jlinutes and should be aade by de1egatior.s froll their aeate. Mrs.' DA SILVA (Venezuela) (interpretation froll Spanish) I Venezuela continues to attach .peclal iraportMce to the initiative covering the establ1ahJlltnt of III lone of peace and co~peratlon in the South Atlantic. 'In the statement we _de when thIs i tea was conalcSered at the fOl'ty..thlrd 8fUJS ion of the General (Mr. Azikiwe, Nigeria) As.~ly we clearly stated the :.880ns why Vene:uala .u a .ponaer of reaolution 43/23. We elllply"lah to aay now that V•••uela Is a COAstal St~te of tbe South Atlmtic, into which flO'lflJ our _in waterc:ourHf the Odnoco.. We ahare the vi_ that it le adviaable for uny r,,80ns to establish a zone of p.ce ..d co""l3puaticn in the South Atl.tic, 10 the lnter_t not only of the coss·tal countries in that area but of the entire international co_Wllty.. Coneequently, the 1nltietive concel'nil¥J _ignetian of the South Atletic as a 110ft. 8011e exclulive pvtrpoae 18 the pr~lon of co-oparatloft betveDn the COllatal State. _d other inter_t:AId State. Md co-ordination of the efforts of thoae countries in • co.-on mdertaking in tile internt of peace, security and. progress in the 1'89ion ia of great interut to V.nelluela.. (Mra. De S11va, Veneau!!a) The fact that this year we did not co-sponsor draft resolution A/44/t.24 should not be construed as waning or lack of interest on the part of Venezuela with . respect to this issue, md as in other years, we shall vote in favour of the present draft resolution, which reiterates those objectives. We hope that next. year t«ten the General Assembly again takes up this item we shall be able to participate actively in the preparation of the relevant draft resolutiono The PRESmENT (interpretation from Spanish): The Assembly will now take a decision en draft resolutlQ'l A/44/t.24. Should the General Assembly adopt the draft resolution concerning the zone of ... .~. ~ . peace IlI\d co"'Operation of the SOuth Atlantic, it would request the Secret8ry-Genera1 to keep implementation of General Assenbly resolution 41/11 under review md to submit a report to the General Assembly at its forty-fifth session, .. taking into account, inter alia, the views expressed by Menber States. Provision for this activity is programmed. in the proposed programme budget for the biennium 1990-1991. Consequently, no programme budget implications are anticipated should the General Aesembly adopt draft resolu tion A/U/L. 24. 'the voting process has ll'C1;I begun. A recorded vote has been requested. (Mrs. Os Silva, Venezuela) I I I _J Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library A recorded vote wao taken. In favour. Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, Q\ina, Colombia, ColOOros, Congo, Coata Rica, COte d'Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, GabCl'l, Gambia, German DellDcra tic Bepublic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, HCI'lduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, IndCl'lesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Demcratic RepUblic, Lebanal, Lesotho, LibelCia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Ualaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritmia, Maudtius, Mexioo, Mongolia, Morocoo, Mozanbique, Mo/anmar, Nepal, Netherlan(ts Q New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Paklstan~ ~anama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, R'l,78nda, saint Iucia, saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, sao Tome and Principe, saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles" Sierra Letne, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, SUdan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, '!bgo, Trinidad and Tobago, 'l't.I\isia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian Sovlet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Arab Emirates, Urlited Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Ham, Yemen, !Ugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia !9ainst. United Statf'~ of America Abstaining, Canada, Japan Draft resolution A/44/L. 24 was adopted by 146 votes to 1, with 2 abstentions (resolution 44/20).* * Subsequently the delegations of Papua New Guinea, Paraguay and Vanuatu infot'JIl8d the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish) I Before I call on those representatives wishi~ to speak in explanation of vote, JIIi!lY I remind delegations that, in accordance with General \ssembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are Hmited to ten minutes cnd should be made by delegations from their seats. Mr. SALAS (Me~ico) (interpretation from Spanish): The Governm~nt of Mexico believes that the efforts made by the Sta tea of the South Atlantic to strengthen the zone of peace and co~peration deserve the enthusiastic support of the internatiooal community. Hence Mexico voted in favour of the resolutions adopted on this subject, especially resolution 41/11 whereby the General Assel\i)ly solemnly declared a zone of peace and co-operatiro of the SOuth Atlantic. The resolution we have just adopted is one more step towards the consolidation and strengthening of that zone, particularly in emphasizing the impera tive need to preserve the environment of the region and ensure its protection. We are convinced that it is mly by means of strengthening international co-operatiQ\ that the peace objectives enshrined in the Charter of our Organization will be achieved. In this cmtext, my delegation welcomes the hoods of assistance that have been established between various areas of the United Nations and the States of the South Atlantic. For these reasons, the delegation of Mexico finds it difficult to understand why, this new text, when compared to the original resolution declaring the zone of peace CI'ld co-operatiQ1, does not cmta!n any reference to the obligation of all States to respect the principles of the United Nations Charter and the resolutions of the General Assembly. We believe that a reference of this kind would make a significant contribution to the achievement of the original objectives of the States of the South Atlantic. Mr. MAOlOUGAL (United States of America) = The United States has once again been canpelled to vote against the draft resolution en the South Atlantic zone of peace. As we have stated in the past, our opposition is based on the view that such a resolution would be inconsistent with the generally recognized principles under international law of the freedom of navigation of the hi9b seas and the right of innocent passage through terri tor lal wa terse The Uni ted states finds itself unable to accept such restr ictions. In additim, we believe that any attempt to establish an internatimally recognized zone of peace should be made through multilateral negotiations among relevl:I1t parties rather tha-a through a General Assembly resolution. Mr. AMIQJ,j! (France) (interpretation from French), Maintaining longstanding bQ1ds of friendship end co-operaticm with the States of the regioo of the South Atlantic, and wishing to support the efforts, to secure co-operation among States at the regimal level, France hE this year voted for the draft resolutim on this item. Nevertheless, my country wishes to reiterate its concerns with respect to the idea of a zme of peace in the SOuth Atlantic as it cmtinues to emerge from the text before us. Those concerns relate mainly to the anbiguities l.Ild to the lack of precioion with regard to the geographical limits of the zone, as well as to the exact nature of the obligations that would become incument upon the states concerned. 1 wish also to point out that France has always attached major importance to the need for the establishment of zones of peace or denuclearized zones not to rim counter in any way to the rules of international law that apply, in particular, to the use of mad time l.Ild air space. Prance ardently hopes, in a constructive spirit, that those arrbigui ties can be dispelled when this 8qenda item is considered at the forty-fifth session of the General Assembly. !r. ,DA OOSTA PEREIRA (Portugal) I The delegat,ion of Portugal was pleased to support draft resolutioo AI 44/L. 24 en the zone of peace and co-opera. Hon of the South Atlantic, as it did a similar draft resolution last year. We recognize the important and posi tive trends in in ternaHooal rela tions regarding the lessening of tensions throughout the world. In'this connection, the draft resolutim just acbpted cannot but eCl\tribute to the strengthening of international peace and co-operation and serve to promote the principles and purposes of the Uni ted Bations Charter. (Mr. Amigues ~ Fr.!nC!!) we .upport the incl.ten of new paragraphs regarding e!P/ircmmental concerns. IIowllVer, "e ahould like to express - as we did last year in connection with a al.Uu taJ£ - r.erv.tlone "ith l'espeC:i: to the deficient geographical delimitation of the area OC)vere4 by the prcwi.ions of the draft resolution. 1Ir. IIM'fIN (CMada), I wilh to say a few words in explanatim of my cOWltry·. abatention in the vote on draft resolution A/44/L.24, since we have in the p.t been eb1e to support cO:-irtipcnding draft tNolutions. Can., a. a genoral rule, auppo:t8 the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free acr••, given the satlafactlcn of certain CQ'ldi tions, .. constituting progress tow_rela total a""erence to tbe Hon-Proliferation Treaty and as being an element of atllbllbation f« the regions in queeticm. We have tradi timally viewed the draft re.olutiona en the zone of peace and co-operation of the South Atlantic in that that 'I. found this ,.ar that references to eRtraneous issues were included in the light ..d have been pleuees to support tb_. It W18 therefore with some regret draft r_olutiat, referenc" which we unfort.mately could not support. In s-rticular, 1 would point to operative paragraphS, under which the A8selllbly ·UtcJ.. all Stat. to atain frOll transferring ~d diapOlling hazardous, toxic ancl nucl_r ...te. into the rf9ion·, • bei...., inappropriate for • r.olutlan of this nature. _ h.e, .a a rUult, had to abatain this yel.lr. lfb. RtDmarr (interpretaticn frca Sp~i.) I We have ccncluclecl our conaideration of agenda lte. 33. (Mr. Ca Costa Pereira, Portugal) ACDDA 1TBM 157 (gs»ntinued) SPECIAL SBSSlDH OF 'lIB GBNBRAL ASSlIIBLY TO commBR TIB OIBSTlDN 011' Df'l'BiUlATlDNAL m-oHmATlDH AGUNST ILLICIT PRODUCTION, SUPPLY, DEMAND, '!'RAPI'IQCIHG AND DIS'fRJBUTZn, 01' NARCOTIC !BUGS, WITH A VI. '11) EXPAlI)]NG THE SOOR All) XNatEAS mG THE BI'1'B"-l'IVBNISS OF SUCII CO-<)flBRATION (a) IRAPT DBCISJON (A/44/Le 37) (b) REPORT OF TBB FIJ1''l'D CIllMI'l"J.'EB (A/44/69S) The PRESmBNor (interpretation from Spanish) I I should like to inform the Asseably that the sponsors of draft decision A/44/L.13 and of draft resolution A/U/L.l9 have withdrawn those drafts, which had been previously submitted to the Assembly. I now eall on the representative of Yugoslavia to introduce draft decision A/44/L.37. Kr. PBJIC (Yugoslavia) I I have the great honour to introduce, on behel~ of the delegations of Alger ia, Austral la, Bolivla, Braz 11, Colomb la, Egypt , :Ethiopia, Finland, India, Jamaica, Iceland, Malaysia, Mexico, Nepal, Norway, Peru, Samoa, Senegal, sweden, Thailand, Turkey and Vanuatu, and the twelve States members of the Jibropean Col'fGunity - namely, I1'r2lJlce, Spain, Greece, the Federal Republic of \ Germany, Denmark, Be1gimn, the United Kingdan, Portugal, the Netherlands, Laxeltbourg, Italy and Ireland - and on behalf of my own delegation, draft decision A/44/L.37, entitled -Organization of the special session of the General Assembly to consider the question of international oo'"'Operatio~ against illicit production, supply, damand, trafficking and distribution of narcotic drugs, with a view to expanding the scope and increasing the effectiveness of such co-operation-. 'the draft decis"iCll before us is the result of intensive and successful negotiations between various "delegations, in which all countries dell'Onstrated their desire to have a successful special session on the drug p!Qblem in order to enhance international co-operation in the struggle against this global evil. In paragraph 1 of the draft decision the date of the special session is set. The session wUl take place, according to this proposal, from 20 to 23 February 1990 in New York, mder the presidency of the President of the forty-fourth session of the General Assenbly. '!'he decisiaii' on the establishment of a preparatory committee of the whole for the seventeenth special session is contained in paragraph 2. It is envisaged that the committee should meet for two days during the first week of December 1989 and for three days during the first week of February 1990. According to paragraph 3, the Bureau - which is to consist of a chairman, three vice~hairmen and one rapporteur - may meet between the sessions of the preparatory committee to advance the preparatory work. The role of the COJIIDission on Narcotic Drugs in the preparation of the speci.al session is envisaged in paragraph 4. In paragraph 5 the Secretary-General is requested to submit to the second session of the Preparatory Co!IIUttee and to the special session a report onl • (a) Ongoing work towards the development of a United Nations system-wide plan of action on drug abuse control, taking into account the recommendations of the International Conference on Drug·Abuse and Illicit Trafficking and exis t1ng Uni ted HaHons prograllU'lles and other activi ties at the international and regional levels, (Mr. Pejic, YUgoslavia) • (b) Progress towards the allocation of sufficient resources within the United Nations system to ensure that adequate priority is given to narcotic issues w" Finally, in the last paragraph the Assenbly -Invites the Commission on Narcotic Drugs and other relwa'lt bodies of the United Nations system to transmit to the General Assenbly at the special session any views on matters pertaining to the special session w• It Is the sponsors' hope that this draft decision will be adopted without a vote. The PRommmT <interpretation from Spanish) & I should like to draw the Assembly's attentioo to the report of the Fifth Comttee in document A/44/695. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of that teport contain the programme budget implications of draft decision A/44/L.13, whlch has been withdrawn. I am informed that the new draft decision, in document A/44/L.37, will have the same programme budget implication as draft decislonA/U/L.13 would have had. That is because the draft decision that was withdrawn and the new draft decision contain identical elements - namely, the convening of a special session from 20 to 23 February 1990, ald the establishmen.t of a preparatory committee of the whole to meet for two days during the first week of December 1989 and for three days during the first week of February 1990. The Asseubly will now take a decision on draft decision A/44/L.37. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt that draft decis ion? ~aft decision A/44/L.37 was adopted. The PRl!'SmENT (interpretation from Spanish) & We have concluded our consideration of agenda item 157. (&. Pejic, Yugoslavia) AGBtI>A IT!M 21 (continued) ACSIBVEMBN'JS OF TIE DJ'.l'I!RNA'l'JDNAL YEAR OF PFACE (a) DIOR'!' OF '!'BB SSmSTARY-GBNBRAL €A/44/615) (b) DRAFT RBSC~TJ)N (AI 44/L.16) The PRJiSIDBHT (interpretation from Spanish), The General Ae.&e~ly has before it draft resolutiCll A/44/L.1G, which 'was introciJced by the representative of Costa Rica at the 37th plenary meeting. I call CIl the representative of Costa Rica, who has asked to make a state_nt in connection with the draft resolution. Mrs. OiSmO de BARISH (Costa Rica) (interpretation from Spanish) I When we introduced our draft resolution A/44/L.16, entitled "Declaration of Human Responsibilities for Peace and Sustainable Development!;, we emphasized that it was recognized in the Secretary-General's report that among the important achievements of the International Year of Peace were the activities of various scientific institutions and educaticn centres for the promotion of peace. The draft resolution is designed to emphasize one of those achievements by asking the General Assembly to take note ~ith appreciation of the Declaration adopted by the Conferenc~ in Search of the 'l'rue Meaning of Peace, which was organized by the University for P.ce in Casu. Rica, an institutial er_ted by the United Nations. Our text is procedural in nature and its purpose is simply that the General Assembly take note of a Declaration which to all intents and purposes is inspired by tenets t;hat are COaDOl'l to all ethics, phil08ophies, religions, creeds and idea1.ogies that accept the responsibility of the hulUn being with regard to life, and the society to ~iCh he or Ibe belongs and, beyond that, the internationdl cOlllllunity 0 • One of the paragraphs of the Declaration states that lIlaccording to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal zmd inalienable huun rights of all Jlleabets of the hWllln family is the foundation of freedom. justice and peace in the world. - (~44/626. p. 4) That fundamental principle, which has been affirmed in 118ny United Nations Cbcuments, leads \11 to another, which _phasizes -the challenge posed by the growing imbalances in the dynamic relationship between populatim, resources and the el1'liraullent-. (ibid., r,. 5) We believe that we are thus emphasizing the urgent need for a greater awareness of the unity of life and of the special character of eacb of the expressions of life, and for a IDOre profound human sense of responsibility and a reorientation of human thoughts, feelings IIld actions. In a very important statement made before the General AsseDbly, the Pl'ime Minister of the Uni ted Kingdom, Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, expressed grave cmcern and referred to the ntted for concerted action with regard to this issue. This too is mentimed in the DeclaratiOh and 1s a view that Cceta Rica shares. We also share the views expressed by the Ambassador of 1bgo in his ~rtant statelllHlt CI\ this subject on 24 October. He referred with great sensi tivity to article 7 of the Declaration which is in chapter 111, -The alternative3 facing maMind md universal responsibility. - Article 7 begins with the followil'l9 8tatell\ent~ -Of all liVing creatures, human beings have the unique capaeity to decide consciously whether they are protecting or harming the quality ~d cm<1i tions of life on Earth- (ibid., P. 7) (Mrs. castro de Barish. Costa Rica) In thls ccnnecticn th. AllbueDdoE' aaid' -If, just •• w. ar. - big or ..11, white or black, rich CC' poor - .,. could _ditate on articl. 7 ad bece. Imf. avare of the fact that the WOl'ld , ia a whole bued priar11y on love, unklnd would ha". taken • giant .up tcIIIIarda p.ce. - (A/..4/!!. 37, p. 21) The reprumtativ. of tbe Philippin•• also refene« in her lnter••tiftC) .~:ate....t to the Declaration .cS -.nUone4 one of ita pr_lIbuler paragrapba, 1Ibich states. DRecognbing the nececaity of enaurlng the full and fICIul participation of WODeft lil\d MD in the declsion-.aking proc••••• relating to the promtion of Ptace and dev.loplent-. (A/44/626, p. 4) That pliragraph r••inds .. of the Nairobi Pcxward-loo1clng Strategi... th. basie for ensuring and accelerating the integration of wo.n in the procea. of cJevalcPl'IInt md achieviftIJ the objectives of equality, cSevelo~t and puce. It waa for all th.s. reaSOfta that Coeta Rica introduced the Declaration of Ruaan Reeponsibil1 ties for Peace n Sustainable DeveloplleRt u a 'laUd inetruMnt for consideration and co_ItIIent. We are convinced that opposition to tho draft resolution is not bUR OR the text itself, in which the General Aaaeably would _rely take note of a docu-.nt . which Is well oonoeived and a iDled at finding solutions to proble_ 1llhieb aff.ct .aMine! md fot which no solutions ha~e _ yet been found. We find it difficult to believe that the objections of certa in delegations have anything to do with the text of the neclaratim. We have been told, for aUlIPle, that the cJocull8Rt ia not iJllilOrtant and that it ia not necessary to adopt a resolution to take note of it. We profoamdly re8paet the vie",s of all delegal tiona but we believe that the Declaration is indeed i~rtant. In ....1' .to thOM CQII!llftU ". have ••1d thtAt the Canference W. org_ilea by the Unlveraity for Pace, an institution dedicated tiC the atudy of PBllCe and establilhe4 by the Unltec.t Nation. General Aaa.ely in ita r..o1.ution 35/55, of 5 Dece.er 1980. The Canferenee vas held, in accordance with tbe tenets of the procl••ticn by the General Assellbly, on 24 OCtober 1986, of the Internatian'll Year of Puce, and people of various creeda, racss, political opinions and p:ofeasione participated, .4 decided to cCIltr.ibute to the preparaticn of the DeclaratiClft. tfbe facta about the drafting of the Declaration, -which has been distributed as an annex to docu!ll8ftt A/44/626, of 11 Octob~r 1989, are, a att:er of historical record. It vu introduced to the Aaaellbly by the Q)ver.-ent of Costa Rica, whose Pre.ident considered it to be a valuable and inspiring work and therefore assumed the responaibility of presenting i~. to the forty-fourt,h -s~81on of the General Aaee1lbly. It IIUlIt also be 811id that not all the conferencGs and events in many States in connection with the proclamation of the International Year of ,Peace involved among their participants two winners of the HObel Peace Prize wlnners~ as are the President of Costa Rica and the Dalai La. of Tibet. As 11 fomdir¥J Member State of the Crii tecl Hations, CCIJ~a Rica has always eupported the principle of the scwerei9n equality of States irrespective of size or p<*er. Costa Rica, a cowtr:y ",1th Uttle territory .4 lacking in military or economic IIl<jbt, is oommi;.tted to the fundamental principles of the Charter, the Universal Declaration of Ruman Rights ..cl other relevant legal instruments. It believes that it has the right and the moral authority to propose to the General (Mra. Caatro de Badeh, a-ta Rica) Assembly the ac!opticn of draft resolutim A/44/L.16, the sole objective of which is to take note of the Declaratioi\. We do not beliQve that we are harming anyone with a propcaal that has all the elements that have inspired the debates at this and past seseions of the General Assellbly. (Mrs. castro de sarish, Costa ~) Nevertheless, a powerful State Melllber of. the United Nations - a permanent aellber of the Security Counoil - has' categorically opposed this draft resolution. That will be .. obstacle to the acbption of the draft, for which we bad hoped. Therefore, ay (bvern1lent has decided ~ot to request that it be put to the vote or that a c5ecisicn be taken on it. I repeat that we respectfully request that no vote be taken en draft reeo1utiCft A/44/L.. ~6D -DeclaratiCb of Human ResponsibUities for Peace and SUstainable Development-. The PRBSmBHT (interpretation f£'olll Spanish) I In view of the statement just _de by the representative of Casta Rica, no action w11l be taken Cb draft resolutiGft A/44/L.l6. The representative of China wishes to make a statement. Mr. 1U Meh9;)1a (China) (interpretation from Chinese), Just now the ~ representative of Costa Rica stated that her delegation had decided to request that no action be taken Cb draft resolutic:n A/44/L.16, Wlder agenda item 21. The Chinese delegation would like to express its appreciation for that. I believe this is a feeling shared by .my delegations. ~s"er, in her statement just now the representative of Costa Rica referred to the Dala! La. vb Ue speak ing about the Conference in Search of the True Me..ing of Peace, which took Place from 25 to 30 June 1989. I should like to point out that the Dalsi Lama has all along engaged in activiti~ dividing t..'1e natiCl'lsl 1.llity and the unity of Qlinese nationals. His participation in a conference cannot be my CQ'ltributicn to world p611C8. Therefore I should like to express our regret that the organizers extended an lnvitatio"to the Dala1 Lama and decided that he mould be tha .in speaker at that Conference. The PRrsmEN'l' (interpretation from Spanish) I I call on the repreller.tatlve of CQ8ta Rica who w1•• to apeak in exercise of the right of reply. (Mrs. Castro de Badsh, Costa Rica) c Mrs. CASTRO de BMISH (Costa Ric8J (interpretation from Spanish) I One of the important aspects of denocracy, in which we firmly believe, is that one can have one's own opinion and at the same time accept and respect the fact that others ay not share it. Our delegatiCln clearly expressed its opinicn m our draft resolution as well as on the Declaration of Human Responsibilities for Peace and Sustainable Development. As I said earlier - and I repeat n~ - we do not share the views of the representative of O1ina, but we respect them. It was precisely for that reason that we asked that no action be taken on draft resolution A/44/L.16. The ~mENT (interpretatim frail Spmish) I We have cClncluded our consideration of agenaa item 21. The meeting rose at 5.05 P.m.