A/47/PV.11 General Assembly

I should like to draw the Assembly's attention to document A/47/442/Add.3, which contains a letter addressed to me by the Secretary-General informing me that since the issuance of his communications dated 15, 18 and 22 September 1992 Chad has made the necessary payment to reduce its arrears below the amount specified in Article 19 of the Charter. May I take it that the General Assembly duly takes note of this information? It was so decided. ADDRESS BY MR. MILAN KUCAN, PRESIDENT OF THE PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the presidency of the Republic of Slovenia. Mr. Milan Kucan. President of the Presidency of the Republic of Slovenia- was escorted into the General Assembly Hall.

On behalf of the General Assembly I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of the presidency of the Republic of Slovenia, His Excellency Mr. Milan Kucan, and to invite him to address the Assembly. President KUCAN (spoke in Slovenian; English text furnished by the delegation): Allow me to congratulate you. Sir, and the friendly nation of Bulgaria on your election as President of the General Assembly at its forty-seventh session. We are convinced that under your leadership the General Assembly will be successful. I should also like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to His Excellency Mr. Samir Shihabi, Ambassador of Saudi Arabia, for the creative and constructive manner in which he guided the forty-sixth session. A number of newly independent European States, including Slovenia, have become new Members of the United Nations and are taking part in this session of the General Assembly. This reality, until recently almost beyond imagination in the context of the traditional view of international relations, came about through the process of democratization, which dramatically brought to a close the period of absolute ideologies that formed the basis of various forms of authoritarianism and totalitarianism. The far-reaching changes brought about by the end of the cold war have confronted the international community and the United Nations with new problems. The futility of attempts to solve the Yugoslav crisis and to stop the war against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which in all its tragic dimensions is taking place in our immediate neighbourhood, is another indication of the insufficiency of current institutional arrangements in the world. This applies both to the United Nations and to regional organizations that complement the universality of the United Nations. Our international institutional arrangements were made in the circumstances of a world divided into political and military blocs. The primary function of those arrangements was to palliate the effects of ideological, political and military confrontation by maintaining a balance of power and a balance of fear and through understandings reached between the great Powers. In the context of such a world order, there was insufficient commitment to enhancing cooperation and integration, to facilitating the necessary evolution of the modem world as required by the nature of technology, to the organization of production, to free markets, to the responsibility for coordinated and accelerated economic development, to overcoming poverty, to the protection of the human environment and to the universalization of communications and information. opportunity to express my appreciation to His Excellency Mr. Samir Shihabi, Ambassador of Saudi Arabia, for the creative and constructive manner in which he guided the forty-sixth session. A number of newly independent European States, including Slovenia, have become new Members of the United Nations and are taking part in this session of the General Assembly. This reality, until recently almost beyond imagination in the context of the traditional view of international relations, came about through the process of democratization, which dramatically brought to a close the period of absolute ideologies that formed the basis of various forms of authoritarianism and totalitarianism. The far-reaching changes brought about by the end of the cold war have confronted the international community and the United Nations with new problems. The futility of attempts to solve the Yugoslav crisis and to stop the war against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which in all its tragic dimensions is taking place in our immediate neighbourhood, is another indication of the insufficiency of current institutional arrangements in the world. This applies both to the United Nations and to regional organizations that complement the universality of the United Nations. Our international institutional arrangements were made in the circumstances of a world divided into political and military blocs. The primary function of those arrangements was to palliate the effects of ideological, political and military confrontation by maintaining a balance of power and a balance of fear and through understandings reached between the great Powers. In the context of such a world order, there was insufficient commitment to enhancing cooperation and integration, to facilitating the necessary evolution of the modem world as required by the nature of technology, to the organization of production, to free markets, to the responsibility for coordinated and accelerated economic development, to overcoming poverty, to the protection of the human environment and to the universalization of communications and information. The process of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), which on the international scene in Europe complements the United Nations system on a regional level and whose documents helped the wave of democratic changes in Europe was, to a large extent, created with the objective of accelerating cooperation and integration. The CSCE was constructed and developed on the basic principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter and which constitute a vital precondition for the security, peace, welfare and progress of all. All CSCE participating States were therefore expected to agree voluntarily to those principles in their own interest. However, the CSCE was left without suitable means to respond to situations in which a State violated and did not respect those principles and norms. The war in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and all the horrors which, thanks to the media, are known to the whole world, as well as the Balkan crisis, in which we were also involved, are an important experience for the CSCE, for the United Nations and for the world at large. It teaches us that it is relatively simple to plead for peace. It is much more difficult to guarantee security and to create the stable conditions that would allow urgent and peaceful changes in accordance with the principles upholding peace, security and prosperity. This is the most important function of the United Nations and of all regional organizations and is the basis of our support for the proposal that the United Nations should rapidly create mechanisms for adjusting to emerging changes in the world. In his report "An Agenda for Peace", the Secretary-General has made an exceptionally cogent contribution to efforts to ensure the gradual establishment of security machinery that will enable the peaceful settlement of all disputes, primarily through an insight into the circumstances and the timely mobilization of international institutions, to prevent or quickly cut short armed conflicts between States Members of the United Nations and between sovereign States. It is in the interest of the international community that a war, if it occurs, does not spread to new regions and countries. The report contains many useful ideas about the building of peace after the conflict has been brought to an end and about when it becomes possible and necessary to create conditions for long-term security and stability in relations between the participants in the conflict. The United Nations may establish machinery which will enable it to intervene speedily to help the democratization of international and internal relations and implementation of self-determination and thus prevent lapsing into the kind of violence that is now tragically escalating in the Balkans. The United Nations has in the past been a forum for achieving the self-determination of many peoples. As such it was supported by Slovenia which, through its active role in the Allied anti-fascist coalition as part of former Yugoslavia, was among the Founding Members of the Organization. It is therefore understandable that we expect the United Nations to continue in this role the future. The world Organization has ever more Members. This is not the result or expression of some incomprehensible process of fragmentation: it is an expression of democratization of relations within those non-traditional States which were built not on the principle of national equality and the real common interest of their nations but on ideologies, on fear of bloc threats. In these multi-national States the levers of integration were not economic success and respect for the welfare and dignity of man, but rather monopolistic ideologies and a unitary party and army. In these States the interests and dignity of people and nations were mainly subordinated to the interests of the State and party or its apparatus. States such as Yugoslavia which, from a historical point of view, were artificial creations should have constantly re-examined and demonstrated their raison d'etre in the light of changing historical circumstances. Their disintegration is not a priori in contradiction with the logic and needs of integration. It is part of the same process. Individual nations enter the process of integration at different points. With the formation of their own States, they create the conditions necessary in order to enter the process of their own free will. We cannot exclude the possibility that new links and cooperation among States will emerge. It is essential that such links must first conform to the principles of international law, democracy, and respect for universally recognized standards for the protection of human rights and the rights of minorities and nations. The trend of the pre-modern world was towards the concentration of power through the conquest of territory and war. The trend of the modern world is increasingly economic through cooperation and association, through improvement of the quality of life and respect for natural limitations trends which were at least partly defined at the recent world ecological summit. Slovenia is situated in an area where the pre-modern and modern worlds meet in both perception and in practice. It is in the interest of the United Nations and of all nations of the modern world, so that the modern world will border only on the modern world. Allow me to suggest that after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the democratization of Eastern Europe, the democratic world did not respond with as much commitment as it did, justifiably, in the introduction of the values of democracy and the market economy. The world was insufficiently prepared for this epochal event. It is only now seeking and implementing models and mechanisms for overcoming and preventing the deterioration of relations between some of the new States. The London Conference, which tried to pave the way towards a political solution of the Balkan crisis, was a successful expression of this common search. The denial to the so-called Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Serbia and Montenegro - of participation in the General Assembly of the United Nations, a move that was supported by Slovenia, is convincing proof that the United Nations is capable of showing the necessary decisiveness in order to condemn the States that flagrantly violate the United Nations Charter and, above all, peace, security and human rights. After the final defeat and withdrawal of the Yugoslav army from Slovenia a year ago, armed conflicts flared up ever further from Slovenia. In the process of seeking a solution, Slovenia has worked as a constructive and objective participant in the Peace Conference on Yugoslavia, unselfishly presided over by Lord Carrington, and now the London Conference, to which it is currently committed. Our most immediate and most direct interest is in the solution of humanitarian problems and, in particular, the situation of the more than 70,000 refugees in our country. Our other basic interest relates to the settlement of all issues of State succession of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. It goes without saying that our ultimate objective is the establishment of a durable peace in the Balkans. Slovenia is not in dispute with any of the nations of the former Yugoslavia. In accordance with the decisions of the London Conference, we support measures against the policies of Serbia and Montenegro and we oppose their attempt to usurp the succession of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. It is not hard to see that it was the recent policies of these two republics, which today go by the name of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that caused the disintegration of Yugoslavia, by enforced domination over the others, by a reinforcement of a centralist and undemocratic political system, and by force and seizure; later by war, territorial conquest, "ethnic cleansing", concentration camps and other crimes which must be the subject of judicial investigation and trial; and finally by contempt for all the civilized values that form the basis of the Charter of the United Nations and key documents of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE). The Helsinki Final Act is undoubtedly one of those invaluable codes of behaviour a guide to the development of human rights, respect for borders and their openness and the protection of minorities which, through general respect, regulate the process of the democratization of relations between nations and States in a peaceful framework. The authorities of the former Yugoslavia did not really accept the Helsinki principles. They did not believe that signing the document bound them to respect them. The tragedy in the Balkans would not have occurred had the Helsinki principles been respected and implemented in the former Yugoslavia. It could have been avoided. Even once it had started, it could have been resolved peacefully precisely by respecting the Helsinki principles with the understanding that this might affect the political map of Europe. Such understanding would have prevented the damage, as well as the simplifications and justifications that frequently attribute the crisis in the Balkans, and similar situations elsewhere, to irrational nationalist passion, nationalist animosities, tribalism and the like. Slovenia chose independence with its implementation of the right to self-determination. Slovenia proposed the peaceful dissolution of Yugoslavia in the manner advocated by Russia at the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, when Russia supported the independence of all the republics of the former Soviet Union. Slovenia does not oppose modern movements towards integration. It supports them provided they are based, like the European Community, on respect for the interests of all those involved, and on equal cooperation and agreement. Slovenia wishes to join the European Community and is prepared voluntarily to surrender such parts of its sovereignty as all members of the European Community must surrender. Slovenia does not wish this only because of its need for economic integration, but also because of its historical affiliation with that culture, which was interrupted by catastrophic ideological, political and economic divisions after the Second World War. Ensuring durable international peace and security requires the fulfilment of certain conditions, among which respect for human rights is of critical significance. Those States that do not respect human dignity and human rights at home will not respect the dignity and sovereignty of other nations and other States. It is evident that threats to international peace very often start with violations of human rights within the boundaries of countries which later disturb the peace. The Republic of Slovenia attaches great importance to concern for the implementation of human rights and fundamental freedoms. As a new, sovereign State, it is strongly committed to the view that in our times State sovereignty is primarily defined by criteria of the legitimacy of State authority and respect for human rights. This is due above all to the practical importance of human rights as a guarantee of social stability and peace and thus as an important constituent of international peace and security. At a time when the setting of international standards in the field of human rights is being completed, concern for the effectiveness of their implementation and of international supervision is of high priority. Experience has shown that assuring respect for human rights, including especially the rights of persons belonging to national, ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, is of critical importance for extinguishing crises and establishing peace. Efforts at post-conflict peace-building will be precarious and incomplete if that condition for stabilization is not fulfilled and supervised. The Secretary-General also fully stresses this in his important report "An Agenda for Peace" (A/47/277). There is one further question which highlights the need to review the suitability of institutional arrangements. This is the problem of refugees, as demonstrated in the war against Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is clear that an arrangement meeting the need to protect the personal status and integrity of an individual forced to abandon his country through fear of political and physical violence is inadequate for a mass exodus of entire nations fleeing threatened genocide as a result of a war of conquest and the "ethnic cleansing" of territory conquered by an aggressor. A million Muslim refugees from the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina are without adequate protection and without an internationally guaranteed status. They are ever more widely scattered throughout Europe. There are close to 100,000 in my own country, which is, with great difficulty, providing them with food and shelter. The Bosnian Muslims are becoming a nation without a land, without a State, with all the attendant tragic consequences, including repercussions for the protection of Europe against terrorism. It is of such hopelessness that terrorism is born. It is tragic that in this war against a State Member of the United Nations, composed of three nations, Croats, Muslims and Serbs, the Muslims should remain almost unprotected. That is why they seek refuge throughout Europe. At a number of international conferences we have proposed that United Nations peace-keeping forces create a safe haven in Bosnia and Herzegovina itself, where the relative safety of refugees would be assured, since, after the war, when decisions are made on the fate of that State, the Muslims must be present and active, physically and politically. The division of the State would otherwise become a reality. It would also be a reality that aggression had been rewarded by the allocation of conquered territory and that the world had recognized the policy of fait accompli and shut its eyes to violations of the principles of humanitarian rights, and to the perpetration of genocide. Of equal importance is an effective mechanism for prompt action in the resolution of humanitarian problems created by armed conflict. It is particularly important that the humanitarian assistance - in which the High Commissioner for Refugees, Mrs. Sadako Ogata, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and its Executive Director, Mr. James Grant, and Under-Secretary-General Jan Eliasson have invested so much effort - be provided in a timely manner. The importance of humanitarian measures, even if they require overcoming resistance and military protection, has been demonstrated recently in some of the armed conflicts of the past year, including the conflicts in the Gulf and in the Balkans. Inability to guarantee humanitarian assistance is inexcusable and compromises the international community and, unfortunately, the United Nations. In a period of eased international relations and a search for new orientations for development, there is an important way in which the potential role of the United Nations has been extended: in preventive diplomacy and the creation of measures which are a real contribution to defusing conflicts, dealing with their underlying causes and overcoming their consequences. Preventive diplomacy is a task for the future; it will require supplementing and reinforcing the work of the United Nations. It presupposes a knowledge of history and respect for the principles of the equality and self-determination of all peoples, and for other principles contained in the Charter of the United Nations. In their own interests and in the common interest, the Members of the United Nations will have to fulfill those principles. Only t thus will the authority of the United Nations be enhanced and protected, and the hope which people, including the people of Slovenia, have invested in it be justified. The United Nations has alleviated, as far as it could, the negative effects of bloc rivalries and the bipolar division of the world. Now, the world needs a United Nations which is capable of guiding, harmonizing and assisting change. This can be achieved only if the Organization can revitalize, restructure and democratize its own system. We are firmly convinced that the United Nations, as a universal forum of multilateralism, will successfully take this unique opportunity to lay the foundations for a new and more just world, in building which the entire international community shares a common interest. (President Kucan) I have devoted a great deal of attention to the crisis in the Balkans. I should like, however, to stress that the Republic of Slovenia is also well aware of other problems that beset the world, and that it has a constructive approach to the important aspects of an international world order that will not be burdened by war, poverty, illiteracy, intolerance, and injustice; of an order in which the Declaration of the World Summit on Children and the achievements of the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro will be implemented in full; and of an order in which human rights will everywhere be the standard of behaviour respected by States. Constructive and successful dialogue among developed and developing countries - as well as peace, international security, and disarmament - are among our priority tasks. I wish the the United Nations every success - success the world badly needs.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the presidency of the Republic of Slovenia for the statement he has just made. Mr. Milan Kucan. President of the Presidency of the Republic of Slovenia- was escorted from the General Assembly Hall.

The Assembly will now hear a statement by the Vice-President of the Republic of Suriname. Mr. Jules Rattankoemar Aiodhia. Vice-President of the Republic of Suriname. was escorted to the rostrum.

I have great pleasure in welcoming the Vice-President of the Republic of Suriname, His Excellency Mr. Jules Rattankoemar Ajodhia, and inviting him to address the General Assembly.

The delegation of the Republic of Suriname congratulates you most warmly. Sir, upon your election to the presidency of the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly. You bring to that high post a wealth of experience and dedication, qualities that augur well for a successful accomplishment of the task before us. Allow us to thank your predecessor. His Excellency Mr. Samir Shihabi, for the excellent manner in which he guided the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly. We wish him well in his future endeavours. We should like to welcome and congratulate the Secretary-General of the United Nations on his assumption of that lofty and equally responsible office. He has assumed the leadership of the Organization at a very difficult and crucial time marked by many political changes, a time at which greater involvement of the Organization in international affairs is demanded. We wish

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the Vice-President of the Republic of Suriname for the statement he has just made. Mr. Jules Rattankoemar Ajodhia. Vice-President of the Republic of Suriname. was escorted from the rostrum. Sheikh Salem Sabah Al-Salem AL-SABAH (Kuwait) (interpretation from Arabic): On behalf of the delegation of the State of Kuwait, I wish to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the presidency of the forty-seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly. Your election. Sir, reflects an appreciation of your country, Bulgaria, and your personal merits and skills, which will prove instrumental in guiding our deliberations towards the attainment of our common goals. On a bilateral note, it is my privilege to underscore the close ties that exist between our two countries, as shown in numerous concrete steps. In your current post, you succeed His Excellency Ambassador Samir Shihabi, the Permanent Representative of our sister country, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who demonstrated outstanding skills and capabilities in his stewardship of the preceding session. His leadership was effective indeed throughout his term of office. This was no surprise to us, especially as Mr. Shihabi represented a sister country, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which has made and continues to make generous and sincere contributions, that are appreciated by all, to the promotion of peace and security throughout the world. It gives me special pleasure to commend the outstanding role played by

The Assembly will now hear an address by the Prime Minister of New Zealand. Mr. James Brendan Bolger. Prime Minister of New Zealand, was escorted to the rostrum.

I have great pleasure in welcoming the Prime Minister of New Zealand, His Excellency The Right Honourable James Brendan Bolger, and inviting him to address the General Assembly. Mr. BOLGER (New Zealand): Mr. President, New Zealand congratulates you on your election to lead the Assembly and offers you its support in your task. One year ago I stood on this rostrum and spoke about the Gulf crisis and the way in which the United Nations, with strong leadership from the Security Council, had shown a firmness of judgement and a commitment to the ideals of the founders of the United Nations that reinforced the status and authority of the Organization. I spoke of my own country. New Zealand, a small nation in the south-west Pacific, which supported the United Nations, in keeping with our tradition of opposing tyranny and supporting freedom. This year I have returned to this Organization even more confident of the vital role of the United Nations in today's world, of the important contribution each nation, be it large or small, can make to the achievement of its ideals. Most important, however, I want to affirm the commitmert of New Zealand, a founder member of the United Nations, to ensuring that this Organization adapts to meet the challenge of a world that has changed, is changing and will continue to change in the years ahead. To do that, the United Nations requires a vibrant, active General Assembly and a Security Council that truly reflects the different regions and the different peoples of the world.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the Prime Minister of New Zealand for the statement he has just made. Mr. James Brendan Boloer. Prime Minister of New Zealand, was escorted from the rostrum.

Allow me, first of all, to extend to you. Sir, the warmest congratulations of the Greek Government on your election to the presidency. Your personal qualities and diplomatic skill augur well for progress on the work of this session. Moreover, we are especially pleased to salute in your person the representative of a neighbouring country with which Greece maintains long-standing relations of close friendship. I also wish to pay tribute to your predecessor. Ambassador Shihabi, for the effective manner in which he discharged his functions as President of the Assembly last year. Allow me also to point out how impressed the Greek Government is by the way the Secretary-General of our Organization, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, has been discharging his duties since he took office at the beginning of the year. We are absolutely certain that he will continue his work with the same dynamism and diplomatic dexterity, for the benefit of both the international community and this Organization, which has grown since the General Assembly last met a year ago. Let me also join other representatives in welcoming the new Members that have been admitted to the United Nations as independent States, namely Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, San Marino, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. The admission of these new Members is a renewed expression of the desire of our Organization to welcome in its midst all those States that undertake the commitment to adhere to the purposes and principles set out in the United Nations Charter. Earlier this week the Foreign Minister of the United Kingdom, in his capacity as President of the Council of the European Community, delivered a statement on behalf of its 12 Member States. My Government fully subscribes to the contents of that statement. Greece is firmly committed to, and fully supports, the process of European integration. We believe that the economic and political union we agreed on when we adopted the Maastricht Treaty last year will strengthen progress and enhance prosperity not only on the European continent, but also in all the countries the Community is trading with. Greece was among the first European countries to ratify the Maastricht Treaty, and we are happy that the French people as well ratified the Treaty at the referendum of last Sunday. Allow me to note that the "yes" vote in the Greek Parliament was overwhelming 286 positive votes out of a total of 300 deputies voting - and is indicative of the extraordinary degree of unanimity of the Greek people concerning the position of our country for a united Europe. I have the honour to stand before this Assembly as the representative of a nation that is now completing a year-long celebration marking 2,500 years since our ancestors first invented a form of government called in Greek demokratia. which in rough translation means "rule by the people": democracy, which was destined to become one of the most outstanding contributions of Greece to the collective heritage of mankind and a cornerstone of world civilization. We Greeks felt happy and, allow me to say, proud a year ago, as we saw democracy and its twin principle, freedom, gaining ground throughout the world and consolidating its presence in countries where totalitarianism had long held sway. In welcoming new members to the community of free nations, the Greek Government expressed the hope that the post-cold-war world would be based on the principles of democracy and freedom, on respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and on the rule of law. That hope was expressed a year ago. Can we now, a year later, ascertain the extent to which it has been met? Admittedly, a year's time is too short to allow a conclusive judgement, but the events of the last 12 months offer some evidence of the direction in which the world is moving. And, I must say, the evidence available is not as encouraging as our expectations were. In fact, we have witnessed developments that threaten the fragile positive trends we had begun to see. We have seen peoples that gained their freedom and independence taking the path of nationalism. Signs abound that we are entering a dangerous and unpredictable world situation, where conflicts, extreme nationalism and tensions of a new nature are erupting, and where the clash of interests could take the place of the ideological confrontations of which we have had bitter experience in the past. In spite of the comfort of being safe at last from the threat of nuclear annihilation since the recent enormous strides in disarmament, in some areas the world seems to be moving into a state of uncontrolled proliferation of conventional arms and civil strife. In some cases, that civil strife seems to be on the brink of spilling over and becoming a threat to regional and international peace and security. To make matters worse, the weak economies of many developing countries remain in the grip of a deepening crisis, while growing poverty, and in certain cases even hunger, is becoming a menace to recent gains in democracy. And the environment continues to deteriorate at an alarming pace. Faced with such a situation, the world community has to react collectively. And as it is the United Nations that embodies the collegiality of the world community, it is incumbent upon it to devise ways and means to help humanity deal with the situation. In this respect, the nations and the peoples of the world are fortunate in that, with the cold war behind us, the paralysis that had for a long time plagued our Organization has now disappeared. The United Nations is now indeed showing signs that it is willing to live up to the expectations placed in it. A series of actions is being undertaken to deal with the major problems confronting humanity now. In this context, earlier this year, the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the largest summit ever held, met at Rio de Janeiro. Next year we will see the Second World Conference on Human Rights. In 1994, population and development will be dealt with. In 1995, the World Conference on Women will take place. Finally, a world summit for social development has been proposed. But the first in this series of actions was taken last January and directly concerned international peace and security. The Greek Government welcomed the convening of the Security Council at the summit level to reaffirm the world community's devotion to the principle of collective security and to the settlement of disputes in accordance with the principles of the United Nations Charter, and to consider anew the means by which collective security can be upheld through the Organization. Greece has also welcomed the document entitled "An Agenda for Peace", on preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping, issued by the Secretary-General in response to a request made by the members of the Security Council at their January summit meeting. I take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the Secretary-General for a document of vision, lucidity and challenging ideas. We in the Greek Government have studied it with great interest and are looking forward to participating in the fruitful debates that are bound to follow in the various bodies of our Organization. We are pleased that the Secretary-General sees the concepts of preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping in their proper perspective within the larger concept of peace and security that goes beyond the military sphere and encompasses social and economic factors, primary among which is the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms. We are also encouraged that the Secretary-General has not failed to emphasize the importance of democracy not only within nations but also among the family of nations. The perception of selectivity in the application of the principles of the Charter must be avoided if the moral authority of the United Nations is to be maintained. This is particularly urgent now that the enforcement capability of the Organization is being enhanced and put to use. Enforcement without moral authority is coercion and tyranny. Smaller nations need to be reassured that no Power will succeed in usurping the moral authority of the United Nations and using it for the advancement of its own interests. It is the fervent hope of the Greek Government that the current turbulent situation will prove to be only a brief transition and will soon be replaced by a spirit of international cooperation and solidarity. The deployment of common efforts for the maintenance of international peace and security through preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping are an indispensable manifestation of such international solidarity. The other two foundations on which this solidarity must be based are respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and a common concern for the protection of the environment. The subject of human rights is, of course, not new. We rejoice that the European Community has time and again emphasized that respect for, and promotion and safeguarding of human rights is an essential element in international relations and, therefore, one of the cornerstones of cooperation and of relations between the Community and its member States and other countries. The expression of concern about human rights violations can no longer be considered mere interference in a State's internal affairs. Established principles governing relations among States - such as non-interference in the internal affairs of other States and respect for the national sovereignty of States must accommodate efforts by the United Nations and by regional organizations to protect the human rights of individuals and social groups that are threatened in particular States. A few words about Greece's relations with its neighbours and the state of affairs in our region. We have repeatedly and officially stated that Greece has no territorial claims whatsoever against any of the countries neighbouring ours. We offer our friendship to all of them and we hope, indeed we are certain, they will reciprocate. We maintain the best possible relations with our Balkan as well as our Mediterranean neighbours. Regarding our relations with Turkey, we consider that it is of primary importance for Greece and our neighbour Turkey that our two countries display the necessary will and imagination to create a climate of mutual confidence, security and stability which will redound to the benefit of the Eastern Mediterranean in general and our two peoples in particular. Greece believes that it is high time for our two neighbouring States to find the way, on the basis of international law and international conventions and treaties, to establish closer relations, compatible with the requirements of the Charter of the United Nations, the Helsinki Final Act and the Charter of Paris, as well as with the espectations of our peoples, dictated by geographical proximity and by common interests. This intention, our political will and our sincere desire have been repeatedly stressed by our Prime Minister, Mr. Mitsotakis, who has already met with the Prime Minister of Turkey, Mr. Demirel, four times this year, while I have had the opportunity to speak in the same spirit to my Turkish counterpart, Mr. Hikmet Cetin, with whom I have already met three or four times. We, for our part, laid emphasis on the fact that the problem of Cyprus, which exercises a negative influence on our bilateral relations, should at last find a proper solution on the basis of all relevant United Nations resolutions. I should like to remind the Assembly that despite coordinated efforts the problem remains unresolved. Cyprus continues to be divided and a large part of its territory is still under Turkish occupation. The other consequences of the 1974 invasion, such as those of the refugees, the missing persons, and the continuing efforts to change the demographic structure of the island and to plunder of Cyprus' cultural heritage, still exist and constitute the main elements of the tragic reality of this Mediterranean island, an integral part of the European family and a State Member of this Organization. In this respect, the report of the European Commission of Human Rights published on 2 April 1992 sets out the violations of human rights in Cyprus, concerning missing and displaced persons, separation of families, deprivation of possessions and so on. Despite the present status quo in Cyprus which the most recent Security Council resolution explicitly characterizes as not acceptable we, together with the international community, look forward to the systematic efforts of

I shall now call on those representatives who wish to speak in exercise of the right of reply. May 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.

I should like to extend my apologies to you. Sir, and to members for speaking at this late hour. A short while ago, the Foreign Minister of Kuwait spoke of certain •elements of Security Council resolution 687 (1991), claiming that Iraq has not , implemented them. I should like to refute all his charges one by one in order t to put the facts before the General Assembly. First, Iraq has fully cooperated with the International Committee of the , Red Cross (ICRC), the United Nations, and the League of Arab States in making j available all information necessary to establish the facts with regard to the ,, issue of missing persons that has been exploited against Iraq for political and inhuman purposes. Iraq has completely discharged its obligations under paragraphs 30 and 31 of resolution 687 (1991). We have allowed the Red Cross to visit all prisons and places of detention in order to investigate the situation with regard to the so-called missing persons, without any restrictions or hindrance. We have also published, several times, in our il local newspapers lists of the names of those missing persons. I should like to mention here that the Kuwaiti authorities have presented seven contradictory lists of those missing persons, each of which gave a different number of missing persons. Any fair observer of this whole issue will easily understand that Kuwait and its allies are exploiting the issue without justification. Secondly, the representative of Iraq has participated in the meetings of the first five sessions of the Boundary Commission during the period from May 1991 through April 1992. He did not participate in the sixth session held in July 1992 for very important and substantive reasons, among which was the fact that the Commission's decisions have consistently shown a strong political bias harmful to Iraq's interests, namely depriving Iraq of its rights, damaging its vital interests and creating a situation of instability in the region, in addition to the procedural excesses of that Commission. It is to be noted, however, that non-participation of Iraq's representative has not obstructed the Commission's work. Thirdly, the process of restoring property has been proceeding normally with the participation of the Secretary-General's assistant, Mr. Foran, who has repeatedly commended the cooperation of the Iraqi authorities in that regard. Fourthly, from the outset, Iraqi cooperation with the United Nations delegation in the implementation of Security Council resolutions 706 (1991) and 712 (1991) has been evident. Yet, whenever the two parties are on the verge of reaching an agreement, the representatives of Western States in the Security Council have set up obstacles and imposed unjust political conditions that threaten Iraq's sovereignty. on the destruction of weapons of mass destruction. Ballistic missiles have been destroyed, and Mr. Ziffero, the Chairman of the investigation and inspection team that visited Iraq in July, has declared that the Iraqi nuclear programme has been brought to nought. The team responsible for destroying chemical weapons in Baghdad is currently doing the same with regard to chemical weapons. Finally, I should like to point out that it is shameful for Kuwait and its allies to make such allegations for the sole purpose of perpetuating the inhuman siege against Iraq and the starving of its people. Miss AL-MULLA (Kuwait): Like the regime he represents, the Iraqi representative's remarks are devoid of truth and sincerity. Deeds rather than words attest to a country's record. Let it not be misunderstood; there is no lack of public pronouncements by Iraq attesting to a continued belligerent stance towards Kuwait and the international community. I shall take the points that the representative of Iraq made in response to the speech of my Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister this afternoon. the following points. Iraq to date refuses to accept the standard of procedure of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to visit prisoners of war and detainees. Visits by the ICRC to places of detention in Iraq are restricted. Norms for these visits are based on Iraqi laws and regulations, which the ICRC deems to be below the international standard set by the Committee. As to the lists mentioned by the representative of Iraq, it is normal that Kuwait should review the list periodically. It is abnormal for a list to be submitted containing the same number as was submitted earlier. A review of the list is necessitated due to the return of prisoners of war who come through other parties or through the ICRC. That is why Kuwait is keen to update these lists periodically. Kuwait has submitted two contradictory lists at the same time. As to the second point, concerning the demarcation of the border, Iraq chose not to participate in the work of the demarcation Commission during its session in July. Iraq is on record as saying that it would abide by Security Council resolution 687 (1991), which set up the Commission. However, Iraq has chosen not only not to participate in the work of the Commission, but to repeat its claims over all of Kuwait. Taha Yassin Ramadhan, the Vice-President of Iraq, said publicly in Jakarta, during the last Non-Aligned Movement meeting, that he reiterated Iraq's claims on Kuwait. It is true that Kuwait's property is being returned, but the process is very slow and .tedious. Iraq chooses the list that it submits to the co-ordinator for the return of property for submission. To date, Iraq refuses to take responsibility for returning any of the private property that was looted under the command and the order of officials of the Iraqi occupation force in Kuwait. On the question of resolutions 706 (1991) and 712 (1991), perhaps I am stating no secret when I say that it is Iraq's lack of compliance with those resolutions that is prompting the international community, and the Security Council in particular, to explore other avenues to facilitate some kind of assistance to the Iraqi population itself. Other aspects are being looked into due to Iraq's refusal to abide by resolutions 706 (1991) and 712 (1991). Iraq's record of compliance is attested to today by the decision of the Security Council to the effect that there is no reason for the Council to review the sanctions upon Iraq during the 16-day period. I think that speaks sufficiently on Iraq's record of compliance.

The Fifth Committee recommends in paragraph 4 of its report (A/47/464) that the General Assembly appoint Mr. Ranjit Rae as a member of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions for a term of office beginning on 24 September 1992 and ending on 31 December 1992. May I take it that the Assembly appoints Mr. Ranjit Rae? It was so decided. The meeting rose at 8.15 p.m. (Miss Al-Mulla. Kuwait)