A/47/PV.5 General Assembly

I should like once more to draw the attention of members to document A/47/456, containing a letter addressed to me by the President of the Security Council, and to document A/47/L.1, containing a draft resolution entitled "Recommendation of the Security Council of 19 September 1992", which are being circulated under agenda item 8, "Adoption of the agenda and organization of work". In this connection, the General Assembly will take up agenda item 8 tomorrow evening, at a meeting to begin at 9 p.m. ADDRESS BY MR. CESAR GAVIRIA TRUJILLO, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Republic of Colombia. Mr. Cesar Gaviria Truiillo. President of the Republic of Colombia, 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 Republic of Colombia, His Excellency Mr. Cesar Gaviria Trujillo, and to invite him to address the Assembly. President GAVIRIA TRUJILLO (interpretation from Spanish): I should like to begin by extending a warm welcome to the new States Members of the United Nations. Colombia hopes to be allied with all of them as they strive to consolidate the growth of democracy. I should also like to congratulate the President on his election to lead this session of the Assembly, and to express our recognition of the leadership and effectiveness shown by Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali in making the United Nations the home of peace, development and progress for humanity. I address all gathered here today at the General Assembly with a profound feeling of sorrow, because at this moment thousands of defenceless people are victims of the war against Bosnia and Herzegovina and because in Somalia thousands are dying of hunger. I would urge the General Assembly of the United Nations to take at this session a decisive step forward in resolving these world conflicts. Among the trends that nourish our hopes for the future of mankind, we should highlight the decisive role that the United Nations has undertaken to play as a catalyst of the new global agenda. But the Organization still has many of the features inherited from the cold-war period. Reforms must move forward with prudence and patience, but also with the certainty that the decision-making mechanisms of the United Nations will be more democratic, more equal, more representative and more effective. Only then will we be able to advance the future role of the United Nations. The "Agenda for Peace" presented by the Secretary-General is certainly a guideline for our achievement of these objectives. In the past, when the world was divided into two- irreconcilable poles, it was almost impossible to reach agreement even on the simplest of ideas. But now conditions exist for multilateral organizations to become the principal actors of the new world order. But here too we must call for caution. The key problems of the new world agenda cannot be resolved without the active participation of developing nations. This new principal role in the management of the international agenda must be recognized by the industrialized countries if we are to make truly viable a multilateral approach based on mutual cooperation. (President Gaviria Truiillo) At the same time, the industrialized nations cannot continue using multilaterism selectively. Also, the developed countries will have to abandon the practice of using multilateral organizations as mere instruments to legitimize their unilateral decisions. This is a double standard that puts at risk the success of multilateral solutions. (President Gaviria Truiillo) Five hundred years ago, thanks to the courage of Columbus, the meeting of two worlds that were separated by fear and ignorance became possible. Because of his accomplishment the planet became one, awakening mankind to undreamt of horizons of progress and well-being. Only a few decades ago the cold war separated the world into two once again. During that time people were not separated into isolated continents but into opposing blocs divided by an immense ocean of distrust and hate. Now, as the world celebrates the five hundredth anniversary of the discovery, humanity once again has an opportunity to forge a truly global community. The joy of liberated peoples dancing on top of crumbling walls is, alas, fleeting. Democracy in Europe and America has shown that it is not enough to defeat dictatorship in order to achieve true freedom. The tyranny of poverty, drugs, terrorism, fratricidal war, stagnation and paper democracies continues to be an unavoidable threat to peace, security and well-being. Perhaps things did seem easier in the past when we believed we had just one enemy communism or militarism. Now we can see more clearly the real evils afflicting mankind. Even though there are powerful reasons for optimism about the future, we cannot give up our enthusiasm thinking these difficulties have now all been overcome. We have a new agenda which we must begin to undertake with the same effort and dedication with which the cold war was fought. The road to a new international order is plagued by paradoxes. While the developing nations are embracing the benefits of free trade, the industrialized nations are sticking to protectionist barriers and creating new (President Gaviria Truiillo) restrictive trade procedures. At the very moment these trends are occurring the industrialized nations are cheerfully proclaiming to the four winds the triumph of the free market. If the world economy continues along the road of protectionism the possibilities of creating a new international order based politically on democratic principles and economically on individual freedoms will continue to recede. Without access to markets we will not be able to achieve the levels of economic development necessary to defeat poverty and to promote a climate of world peace. Confronting this return to protectionism must be one of the principal contributions to peace and the progress of mankind. It is equally paradoxical that, when events signal a new era of international solidarity, symptoms of growing isolationism exist. The industrialized countries are focusing increasingly on their internal affairs, sidestepping their obligation to contribute to peace and progress in the global community. A world in which hundreds of millions live in poverty without any hope of a better life cannot afford the luxury of egoism. The wealthier countries cannot turn their backs on these multitudes by proclaiming that all of mankind's problems will be resolved by the invisible hand of the market-place. Now more than ever solidarity is essential. When East and West extended their confrontation to the furthest corners of the planet the developing countries enjoyed the most perverse dividend of the conflict. There was never a lack of external resources to feed the euphoria of war. Now that the guns have been silenced, international assistance for democracy and for alleviating poverty is elusive. Now that there is a need for generosity, and solidarity is the only argument put forward in support of it, the helping hand is withdrawn and the back is turned. (President Gaviria Truiillo) The Earth Summit was certainly a milestone in the history of mankind. Rio de Janeiro is the beginning of a long road that must be travelled to reconcile man with nature. Unfortunately there are dangerous trends in the industrialized countries threatening international cooperation on environmental problems. For example, there is the unilateral imposition of barriers and environmental conditions for our countries. This is not good policy. It could lead to an unacceptable situation in which the North continues to advance and pollute and the South remains poor in order to reduce the global environmental degradation caused by the industrialized nations. This new form of environmental protectionism is a source of conflict that must be dealt with. I know all too well that when Colombia's name is mentioned in the great capitals of the world people inevitably think of drug-trafficking. Unfortunately this has been so because my people, armed only with their strength and their courage, have had to take on an unequal and heroic lone battle against the most powerful and most perverse criminals known to mankind. Colombia is a victim of the uncontrollable appetite for drugs throughout the world. Three days ago the bullets that killed a valiant Colombian judge, Myriam Rocio Velez, were bought with money from cocaine consumers. The bribes that corrupt the law enforcement and prison authorities in our country come out of the pockets of drug addicts in the major capitals of the world. The dynamite used in car bombs that assassinate innocent citizens in the streets of Colombia is paid for with the money of those who consider their insatiable vice as harmless and innocent. It hurts us even more that those who point an accusing finger at a courageous people who have endured so many sacrifices are precisely those who (President Gaviria Truiillo) have no problem ignoring a neighbour who uses drugs, launders money, trafficks in arms, illegally exports precursor chemicals or runs drug distribution networks in streets and cities. There is no doubt that in Colombia we have lost some battles and have suffered severe setbacks, including the recent and widely publicized escape from prison of a group of well-known drug-traffickers. In spite of that bitter medicine we can say with pride that no other country in the world has fought the scourge of drugs with such resolve and success. The treason of some corrupt officials who gave up their dignity for a handful of dollars does not negate the sacrifices of the thousands of Colombians who are fighting in defence of democracy and mankind. Hear me well: it is true that Pablo Escobar escaped from jail but he will not escape from the firm resolve of Colombians to see justice done. I am convinced that by keeping to our legendary firmness, Colombia will soon be liberated forever from violence and crime. But, unfortunately, drug-trafficking is an international crime that threatens mankind in every corner of the planet. It is not enough for only the Colombians to be valiant and victorious. Today in Colombia we have drug-traffickers, tomorrow they will be in sister nations. Today their enterprise is cocaine; tomorrow they will be looking for other new, lucrative products such as heroin. Today they are making millions from the demand in the United States; tomorrow they will be getting even richer with money from Europe and Japan. We are already seeing these changes and these adaptations. Drug-trafficking is a hydra-headed monster; it is not enough to cut off just one head or only a few heads. To eradicate this scourge once and for all (President Gaviria Truiillo) we need to take decisive, collective action, international and multilateral action, against this evil on all fronts. Two years ago I stood before the Assembly and called on all Members to work together against drug-trafficking. Now we must ask the question: what have we achieved since then? Two years ago the drug cartels looked invincible, were even threatening to destroy democracy in Colombia and impose a reign of terror and violence. Today most of those enemies of society are dead or in jail. Two years ago the industrialized world, with an accusing gesture, held responsible for the problem those very countries that are in fact victims of the production and processing of drugs. Today we know that the consumers of drugs, are the source of the problem and cannot evade their responsibilities. Two years ago international financial centres were accepting funds from the most dubious sources without regard as to the propriety of their actions. Today we have started to see a change in attitude. (President Gaviria Truiillo) Two years ago, drug trafficking was growing out of control. Today, from one end to the other of the western hemisphere, we have achieved unprecedented levels of drug interdiction. Two years ago, the epidemic of drug use looked uncontainable. Today, we are certain that the demand for drugs can be controlled if the necessary economic resources are made available. Two years ago, no one recognized the close ties between poverty, the absence of economic opportunity and the emergence of drug trafficking. Today, we know that alternative development, trade opportunities and economic aid are needed to overcome the drug problem. But all this progress real progress is not enough. Drug trafficking adapts itself easily to the efforts of society to stamp it out. Criminal organizations, now not only in Colombia but practically all over the world, have entered into this illegal business. While consumption is dropping in the United States, it is growing in Europe and Asia. Today, more than ever before, we must strengthen international cooperation in the struggle against this enemy of humanity. Today, more than ever, we need a vision of the future to guide our efforts and guarantee our people that the problem can be overcome. That is why I want to challenge the international community today. I invite you join me in establishing clear goals and measurable commitments so that all of us will know where we want to go and when we hope to get there. In this way, we will be able to guide political decisions to generate the necessary resources. That is also why I propose that the United Nations define global, regional and country targets for controlling the problem of drugs. We must commit ourselves to reducing the supply of drugs and the demand for them by at least 50 per cent by the year 2000, by 70 per cent by the year 2005, and free humanity for ever from the scourge of drugs by the year 2010. As of now, before the international community, Colombia assumes the responsibility of complying with these objectives in its territory. We intend to enter the next century with sales of arms, the sale and diversion of precursor chemicals and money-laundering activities under control. The need to free humanity from the scourge of drugs requires a plan for global action. This is why I call on the General Assembly to hold a United Nations conference on the problem of illicit drugs where the necessary commitments and programmes would emerge to make it possible for drug trafficking to be defeated completely in the next decade and a half. It is beyond doubt that international criminal organizations have consolidated their extensive network of ties and contacts much faster than the judicial system is capable of investigating and prosecuting those responsible. The Italian judges Giovanna Falcone and Paolo Borsellino and the Colombian judge Myriam Rocio Velez, along with very many others who have fallen in the fight against international organized crime, were facing powerful enemies; the existing laws and the mechanisms were not enough. The individual courage of these heroes of justice is also not enough. There must be no borders or barriers if those who have decided to unite in evil are to be prosecuted effectively everywhere on Earth. We need justice to be universal, and for it to work in as coordinated a manner in all countries as the international criminal organizations do. The Mafia, cartels, camorra, and yakuza are just different names for the same thing. The time has come to treat organized crime as an international crime. As I said in my inaugural address, it is vital to develop an international criminal jurisdiction against drug trafficking, money laundering and the illegal export of precursor chemicals. Wherever the guilty live or serve their sentences, it must be possible for the courts in all countries to be able, voluntarily, to have recourse to international courts where, in a secure manner and with all the evidence available world wide, these many and serious crimes can be tried. Now is the time for the United Nations to tackle this question in a serious, dedicated way. Also, we must improve the machinery at our disposal for judicial cooperation between countries. That is why we would like to see a United Nations convention for judicial cooperation on felonies that would facilitate the flow of evidence, the standardization of testimony and supporting documentation, and reduce the bureaucratic procedures and legal obstacles to coordinated action by the criminal legal systems of different countries. We would also like to see real involvement by the European Community and by Japan and other countries in Asia in the Cartagena and San Antonio agreements and commitments. In Cartagena and San Antonio, the participating countries agreed a set of strategies at all levels in the fight against drug trafficking. This effort has already yielded results, but the moment has come to extend this cooperation to the rest of the world community. Lastly, let me say that I believe that the experience acquired through all these years of the difficult fight against drug trafficking has given our authorities some knowledge which, beyond a doubt, is of great value to many other countries which are starting to experience the consequences of the global spread of drug trafficking. This is why Colombia has decided to establish an international centre for the fight against drug trafficking; this will allow us to make available to the global community what we have learned through so much sacrifice. I invite the United Nations and all Member States to contribute to, and participate in, this initiative. I know that in a short time, supported by my compatriots' courage and resolve to fight, by the valour of the judges of Colombia, by the greatness of the people of my country, we shall not have to talk about violence and drug trafficking here within the walls of the United Nations. Wars do not go on for ever, and I do not recall a single criminal who has resisted the pressure of the will of an entire people; and, if my call today has been heard, those criminal organizations will be even less able to resist the united will of the international community. Perhaps then, soon, when we leave behind the dark night of drug trafficking, the world will see the other, friendlier face of my country, and discover what we really are: we are the strongest and oldest democracy in the region. We are the most dynamic economy in Latin America. Our country has grown at a sustained rate of nearly 4 per cent per year for the last three decades. Our management of the economy has been prudent and thoughtful, and has kept us clear of the problems associated with indebtedness, hyperinflation, stagnation and unemployment. When someone comes to my country and meets my people, and does not encounter all the horrors that have sometimes been painted in the press, he becomes our compatriot, and he learns that to be Colombian is a form of pride, of hidden tenacity and sharp wit. He also knows that you do not have to be born in our country to be a Colombian for ever.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Colombia for the statement he has just made. Mr. Cesar Gaviria Trujillo. President of Colombia, was escorted from the General Assembly Hall. ADDRESS BY MR. ALIJA IZETBEGOVIC, PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

The Assembly will now hear an address by the President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Mr. Alija Izetbegovic. President of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 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 Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, His Excellency Mr. Alija Izetbegovic, and to invite him to address the Assembly. President IZETBEGOVIC: Let me begin by expressing my sincere appreciation to His Excellency Mr. Samir Shihabi for his wise administration and leadership of the forty-sixth session of the General Assembly. It is also my great pleasure to congratulate His Excellency Mr. Stoyan Ganev on his election to the presidency of the General Assembly at its forty-seventh session and to wish him a successful term. I also want you to know that we, the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, are deeply grateful to the United Nations for all of its efforts to achieve peace and for providing humanitarian assistance under very difficult circumstances. The courageous troops of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR), with the tenacious leadership of Secretary-General, Boutros Boutros-Ghali, deserve special recognition and gratitude. As is well known, I come from a country besieged by barbaric aggression. But, I must emphasize, I have come here today not to talk of war but to offer peace. It is an offer of a nation born of ethnic coexistence rather than ethnic cleansing. It is an offer of a multicultural and multireligious Bosnia and Herzegovina in which democracy and tolerance prevail. It is not an offer of a unitary or ideological State, as some will have you helieve. Some have said that the killing and destruction have caused so much hatred that my country's peoples cannot live together in peace any more. I submit to you that my country has a centuries-old tradition of tolerance and coexistence among its peoples. Just one week ago yesterday I celebrated, together with Muslims, Croats and other groups, the five-hundredth anniversary of the first settlement of Jews in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Because Muslims, Croats, Serbs, Jews and others have lived together in Bosnia and Herzegovina for centuries, virtually all of our towns and cities are mixed in population some more, some less. It is therefore not possible to draw lines through our Republic to designate ethnically pure regions. It is not possible to draw lines through our towns and cities to designate ethnically pure streets or neighborhoods. I submit to you that we, the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, can live together, and that we must live together, despite what has happened, provided that equality, justice and freedom are secured for all. In recent years, people of many nations have chosen democracy as the best means to secure their rights, to ensure religious and political liberty, to promote cooperation and mutual advancement, to enjoy the fruits of their labours and to achieve the greatest good for the greatest number. Their efforts have changed the world: they have opened doors where once there was an iron curtain. This guest for democracy has made an old world order crumble and a new one begin. So, too, have we, the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, turned to democratic government as the means to assure mutual welfare, regardless of ethnic, religious or other distinctions. Consequently we have sought to build a government that represents all of the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina equally and justly. I am proposing a constitutional commission for Bosnia and Herzegovina which includes inter-ethnic and inter-religious representation. The commission will work with a group of international experts to develop a constitutional settlement to the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina which will protect the rights of all citizens. We envision it as encompassing the following: First, a State founded on the principles of democracy, individual rights, tolerance, religious and cultural freedoms and a market economy; Secondly, a constitutional and administrative framework similar to that of modern democratic States; Thirdly, a decentralized State organized on the principles of parliamentary civil democracy; and Fourthly, a single legislative, executive and judicial framework for the whole territory of the Republic, with decentralized administration in all regions. We envision the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina as consisting of administrative territorial regions to be formed according to economic, cultural, historical and ethnic criteria. We believe it is impractical and immoral to institute administrative territorial regions on an exclusively ethnic basis. Moreover, it is impossible, because we are an ethnically mixed, intermingled country: a living, breathing Jackson Pollack painting. Government at every level will respect the equal rights of all the peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Government will be based on the principle of parity of representation among the three constituent nations. The legislative branch the Assembly will consist of two chambers: the Chamber of Peoples will be based on ethnic parity, being made up of representatives of the three largest constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina; the Chamber of Citizens will be based on proportional representation. All representatives will be elected in free and open elections. The Chamber of Peoples and the Presidency will reach key decisions by consensus, including all decisions that directly affect the equality of the constituent nations. Bosnia and Herzegovina will seek to establish good relations with all neighbouring States, as well as with other States, on the basis of mutual respect and cooperation. I have related my offer of peace. I now want to tell the Assembly about the offer made by the Government in Belgrade and its proxies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. By their actions and by their statements, they have made an offer that must be clear to all nations of the world. Their offer is based on an entirely different view of Bosnia and Herzegovina: a view that is alien to democracy, but unfortunately familiar in history. It is a view of people divided, hostile and unequal. First, they offer "ethnic cleansing", which is the extermination or elimination of people on the basis of ethnic, national or religious distinctions. Secondly, they offer a brutal division of the Republic along spurious ethnic boundaries created by force and by war. They say that the people Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot live together in one State. But the only evidence they have is the false evidence they have manufactured by their own aggression. Around the world we see diverse peoples living together. How many nations represented here have ethnic purity? Look west from this building and imagine Belgrade's vision applied, for example, to the United States. Imagine Berlin Walls sprouting in every American neighbourhood, separating the French, Russian, African-American, Italian, Jewish, Spanish, Japanese, Polish, Korean, Irish and other groups until all had been moved to ethnically pure neighbourhoods and separated by barbed wire, armed guards and checkpoints. Finally, they offer an expanding Serbia. We know that this will be a Serbia in which those who are not Serbs are denied fundamental freedoms. Their offer leads to endless insecurity, endless conflict, endless suffering. The question, then, is which offer the world will accept today. (President Izetbegovic) If it accepts our offer of peace, equality and justice, and if it rejects the offer of pain and division made by Belgrade and its proxies in Bosnia and Herzegovina, then I ask the world community to do three things. First, in front of the entire General Assembly, I ask the members of the Security Council to implement and enforce fully the existing Security Council resolutions and the principles and commitments endorsed at the London Conference. While we have abided by the confidence- and security-building and verification agreement of the London Conference, the aggressors have not. Contrary to their commitments, the aggressors have: failed to place all mortars and heavy weapons under international supervision; failed to cease military air attacks; failed to close concentration camps; failed to allow refugees to return to their homes; failed to allow delivery of relief supplies; and failed to end "ethnic cleansing". This record of broken promises shows that implementation and enforcement must become the next step towards peace. It shows, for example, that a no-fly zone over Bosnia and Herzegovina is essential for stopping the massive destruction from air attacks. A no-fly zone should be implemented and enforced immediately. Implementation and enforcement are absolutely essential if the Geneva session of the London Conference is to have any chance of success. Secondly, I ask the Assembly to set in motion an international war-crimes tribunal that would work closely with the Geneva Conference. It is essential that we investigate, prosecute and punish those who have been responsible for (President Izetbegovic) war crimes. Only after the criminals are punished and the victims healed will we have a true peace. Exonerate the innocent and bring a reconciliation of our people. Thirdly, our country has been plundered and razed. Its economic base has been destroyed. I would like to take this opportunity to request the establishment of an international fund for the reconstruction and development of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Considering the massive scale of the destruction, it is necessary that the world community help us take the first step in emerging from the ruins. Finally, if the Security Council cannot implement and enforce fully its resolutions and if the London Conference cannot implement its principles and agreements, then I ask the world community to allow us to defend ourselves. I have offered a vision of a secular and democratic State, a decentralized State and a multi-ethnic society based on peaceful coexistence and tolerance. Unfortunately, the offer of peace which I have proposed will become irrelevant unless this Organization comes resolutely to our defence or, alternatively, fully enables us to exercise our right to self-defence. The international community cannot simultaneously sidestep its commitment to defend us and nullify our means of self-defence. It has become clear that no one has come resolutely to our aid. We must have the unhindered right of self-defence. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter grants us that absolute right. The present arms embargo ties our hands at a time when our country is being strangled. It deprives us of the only effective means of self-defence. By doing so, it helps the aggressor. The arms embargo against Bosnia and Herzegovina must be voided. (President Izetbegovic)

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina for the statement he has just made. Mr. Aliia Izetbegovic. President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, was escorted from the General Assembly Hall.* Mr. Rogers (Belize), Vice-President, took the Chair.

The Assembly will now hear an address by the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway. Mrs. Gro Harlem Brundtland. Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway, was escorted to the rostrum. The President returned to the Chair. (Mrs, de St. Jorre. Seychelles) Minister of the Kingdom of Norway, Mrs. Gro Harlem Brundtland, and inviting her to address the General Assembly. Mrs. BRUNDTLAND (Norway): It is a great pleasure for me to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to your high office at such an important juncture in the history of the United Nations. I should also like to greet the many new Members that have been admitted to our Organization in recent months. We welcome them all and look forward to cooperating closely with them in our efforts to strengthen the United Nations. Many of us had hoped to see a new, more equitable world order emerge in the wake of the profound changes we have experienced over recent years. Unfortunately, this has not been the case. The tragic conflicts in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Somalia illustrate the challenges we are up against. In many ways they are similar. Underlying ethnic, religious, social and economic problems were "frozen" during the cold war. They were suppressed rather than dealt with in a constructive way. Democratic traditions were not allowed to develop. Some leaders have exploited the absence of democratic traditions, appealing to narrow ethnic and even clan interests. The disastrous consequences are brought home to us daily on our television screens. In Somalia the political crisis has been deepened by extreme poverty and by environmental degradation. We must strongly condemn the unspeakable cruelties being committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina and other parts of the former Yugoslavia. We cannot accept, and will not recognize, any attempts to change international borders by force. The parties must understand that they cannot achieve their goals by armed force. I urge the parties to the conflict to cease fighting at once. The "ethnic cleansing" in the former Yugoslavia is an unacceptable violation of international law and must be brought to a halt. An international tribunal should be set up to punish all those responsible for the war crimes that are now being committed. All prison and detention camps should be closed down immediately, and the captives must be allowed to return freely to their homes without any further harassment. Strict observance of the sanctions introduced by the United Nations Security Council is essential to exert maximum pressure on the parties concerned. As the former Yugoslavia no longer exists, Serbia and Montenegro must apply for membership of the United Nations, along with other new States. We must all give our firm and uneguivocal support to the London Agreement and the Geneva process. All parties to the conflict must now honour their commitments. The United Nations Protection Force, in which we are proud to take part, is doing a tremendous job under exceedingly difficult circumstances, particularly in Bosnia. We must all stand united behind the United Nations and refrain from actions that will only prolong the conflict. Our first priority must be to alleviate the sufferings of the civilian population by providing humanitarian assistance. A great number of human lives will depend upon how the United Nations manages to protect humanitarian supplies and monitor heavy weaponry. I strongly condemn the cowardly attacks on United Nations forces engaged in humanitarian supply operations around Sarajevo. Those guilty of these crimes must be found and brought to trial. It is now of the utmost importance to prevent the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina from spreading throughout the Balkan area. We must consider all available means, and support those measures which have already been applied. The recent decision by the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe to send observer teams to Kosovo, Sandzak and Vojvodina is an important step. While we are grieved by the tragic war, we must not lose hope. We must assist the people of the former Yugoslavia to accept and respect each other and to come to terms again, making peace through reconciliation. We must encourage the forces of moderation and good will; we must ensure that all parties take part in a peace-making process. We must act justly - and, if need be, forcefully. In Somalia the United Nations must give top priority to providing sufficient food and medical supplies to the starving people. This will be an important test of our collective ability to respond quickly and effectively in the face of natural and man-made disasters. Somalia also needs assistance in finding political solutions to its internal problems, and, equally importantly, in building a more sustainable economy. Norway supports a United Nations peace-keeping presence in this war-torn country, and we are willing to participate in such an operation. The time for peaceful change in South Africa is running out. We condemn the recent killings of innocent people, and call on the South African Government to restrain the police and the army throughout South Africa, including the so-called homelands. We are confident that this can be achieved, if it really wants to. We urge the South African Government to meet the reasonable demands of the African National Congress of South Africa so that negotiations can be resumed in order to work out the framework for adopting a new constitution and establishing an interim government. Norway is prepared to contribute at a practical level by sending observers to monitor the violence and facilitate the negotiation process in South Africa. We will maintain our economic boycott until we see some real progress in the negotiations. All these crises and conflicts demonstrate the need for more effective international crisis-prevention and crisis-management mechanisms. The end of the cold war has opened a window of opportunity for the United Nations to live up to the great objectives of its Charter. We must seize that opportunity. The Secretary-General's report "An Agenda for Peace" (A/47/277) is a starting-point for a serious discussion on how this can be achieved. We need to consider further the circumstances under which the United Nations should resort to real enforcement, mindful of our obligations under the Charter. Burden-sharing is essential with regard to peace-keeping. Every country has a duty to participate, including those which so far, for various reasons, have refrained from getting involved. Some 35,000 Norwegian men and women have participated in a total of 16 United Nations peace-keeping operations. We are prepared to intensify our efforts in this field. But our collective efforts must move beyond traditional peace-keeping into such fields as refugee-repatriation, electoral assistance and human rights monitoring. This concept proved successful in Namibia and is now being put to a new test in Cambodia. As a means of improving our capacity for such broader operations, we have proposed the establishment of a special United Nations institute for education and training in peace-keeping and related activites. There can be no lasting peace in the world as long as a large part of humanity lives in misery and despair. Maintaining international peace and security is a prime responsibility of the United Nations, as is promoting economic and social progress and respect for human rights. We must adamantly oppose any tendency to ignore the fundamental challenges of the continuing North-South divide. Otherwise the very future of our planet is in danger. In spite of remarkable economic and social progress in many developing countries, the inequalities persist. According to the United Nations Development Programme's latest human development report, the richest 20 per cent of the world's population receive 83 per cent of total world income, whereas the poorest 20 per cent have only 1.4 per cent. We cannot allow these inequalities to persist. The African continent has been particularly hard hit by economic decline, and a concerted international effort must be mounted to reverse this unfortunate situation. To break out of the development impasse, increased contributions from the industrialized countries will be needed, in the form of better market access for developing countries, more investment, increased development aid and debt relief for the poorest countries. But the slow rate of economic growth and high level of unemployment in most countries in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development limit demands for products from developing countries. The outlook is uncertain, and the unfinished business of the Uruguay Round adds to this uncertainty. Capital needs are enormous; competition for capital is fierce. Developing countries are the losers. The current financial and monetary instability poses great risks to countries and individuals. We need to impose stability and prevent speculation from throwing national economies into peril. There is no alternative to effective coordination of financial and monetary policies. But that coordination can succeed only when coupled with social purpose, a fair distribution and public efforts to create employment. In fact, most of the economic problems that we are faced with are linked to lack of coordination, to rivalry and to laissez-faire attitudes among industrialized countries. The developing countries are, as always, the ultimate losers. Their best line of defence is to undertake policy reforms to mobilize their people, educate them and and diversify their economies. Development is not likely to accelerate without good governance, democracy, respect for human rights, reduced military spending and improved redistribution systems, with increased emphasis on health and education. Alleviating world poverty is necessary if we are to reduce the rapid population increase in many parts of the world. At present rates, the world population is doubling every 40 years, and could reach somewhere between 8 billion and 14 billion by the middle of the next century. Keeping to the low end of that scale will make all the difference to life on Earth and humanity. We must deal with population growth through an integrated human rights approach, including education and the enhancement of the status of women, improved public health and family planning. Confronted with these great challenges, we find it a sad paradox that development aid flows continue to stagnate and remain at less than half of the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP). Norway's official development aid has exceeded 1 per cent of our GDP for more than 10 years, which reflects our strong commitment to the fight against poverty. At the Rio Conference on Environment and Development it was made clear that we are heading towards a crisis of uncontrollable dimensions unless we change course. The North as well as the rich in the South will have to change consumption and production patterns. Developing nations came to the Rio Summit with open economic demands, and understandably so: for them, the Conference was essentially about development and justice. At Rio, we achieved progress in many fields, but too little in most fields and none at all in some fields. We opened two important conventions for signature. It is imperative that we make them more effective. They will not work unless all major countries sign, ratify and implement them. Furthermore, Rio made it clear that the challenges of dealing with environmental threats and poverty are cross-cutting, long term, predictable and unavoidable unless we establish a world order of burden-sharing, common perceptions and common responsibility. Therefore, critical decisions remain to be taken. Traditional international conferences run by consensus can advance only at the pace of the most reluctant mover in each field. The future requires stronger decision-making procedures. Nothing less will serve us. I welcome the high-level Commission on Sustainable Development and expect it to become effective under a revitalization of the economic and social responsibilities of the United Nations. Norway proposed the establishment of such a Commission and expects to take an active part in its work. The challenge of economic and social development requires a more unified approach and stronger direction within the United Nations system. Over the years the number of agencies, programmes and councils has mushroomed, with too little inter-agency cooperation. This cannot continue. We must streamline our organization to avoid duplication and to improve effectiveness. The Nordic countries have addressed these challenges through the Nordic United Nations Project. Although we have made some headway, we need to proceed during the present session of the General Assembly. In view of the greater demands now being made on the United Nations, we must stress the importance of sound and predictable financing. Being the eighth largest contributor to the United Nations system in absolute terms, and by far the largest in per capita terms, we find it exceedingly difficult to understand why so many countries fail to honour their obligations. It is disappointing, to say the least, to read in the Secretary-General's report: "Perennial shortages, the absence of reserves, and a debilitating uncertainty over the immediate future, are the main characteristics of the financial situation of the United Nations." (A/47/1, para. 46) Immediately preceding this sentence the Secretary-General points out that some $900 million in assessed contributions are unpaid, together with some $844 million dollars towards peace-keeping operations. Frankly, this is an unworthy situation. We must increase our financial discipline. The permanent members of the Security Council have a special responsibility in this respect. And the question must be raised whether countries should be eligible at all for membership of the Security Council if they have not paid their dues.* We must be willing to provide the Secretary-General and his staff with the necessary means to promote peace and to wage war against environmental degradation and underdevelopment. Our daily diet of printed and electronic nens presents a picture of a world in need of better governance and of more coordination. Our present forms of cooperation, developed in a less interdependent world, are still too weak and unlikely to stand the test of time. We should not pretend that they can. * Mr. Rogers (Belize), Vice-President, took the Chair. (Mrs. Brundtland. Norway)

On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway for the statement she has just made. Mrs. Gro Harlem Brundtland. Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Norway, was escorted from the rostrum. Mr. VELAYATI (Islamic Republic of Iran) (spoke in Persian; English text furnished by the delegation): At the outset, I should like to offer the President my most sincere congratulations on his well-deserved election to preside over the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly and to express my delegation's gratitude and appreciation for the constructive efforts of the President of the forty-sixth session. It is our earnest hope that the General Assembly, drawing upon our President's valuable experience and diplomatic skills, will play a significant role in the new international environment. I assure him of my delegation's full cooperation to this end. I also take this opportunity to offer my heartfelt felicitations to the new Members who have joined us in the United Nations since the last session of the General Assembly, most of whom are neighbours of the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is a matter of great joy and satisfaction for me and my delegation that the seat of Afghanistan in the Assembly is at long last occupied by the representatives of the legitimate Government of that country. This session opens at a time, in the aftermath of the cold war, when tumultuous developments in the international arena continue to unfold, facing the international community with opportunities and challenges alike. In the cold-war era the global arms race, the arming of client States and the instigation of regional wars sapped the energy and capabilities of countries, especially in the third world, thus debilitating them in their efforts to stand up to the challenge of such chronic and endemic problems as poverty. hunger, illiteracy, drug-addiction and drug trafficking, underdevelopment and environmental pollution. The collapse of the bipolar world has created a propitious opportunity for mankind to address those problems in earnest. It has also brought to the fore new threats to international peace and security, such as the devising of new ways of expansion and consolidation of domination and hegemony, a further widening of the North-South gap and flare-ups of ethnic and racial differences and conflicts. Due to continuing transformations in geographical, economic, military and cultural configurations, the world today is in a vulnerable state of flux, and until reliable stability emerges the approach of big Powers to the United Nations and that of the Organization to international issues and problems will remain very sensitive and significant. (Mr. Velayati. Islamic Republic of Iran) The United Nations, as the only universal body, should contribute to the solution of major global problems without resort to short-sighted political expediency. It should do so on the basis of justice and respect for human dignity, lofty human values and the rules of international law. Selectivity is certain to turn the Organization into a tool for legitimizing the actions of powerful Member States. This represents the most formidable challenge to the Organization's integrity, credibility and relevance. In this context I need give just a few clear examples: first, in dealing with internationsl crises, the use of double standards based on the political interests of the powerful, as manifested, on one hand, by the Security Council's treatment of Iraq's aggression against Kuwait and, on the other hand, by the decades-old aggression of the Zionist regime; secondly, the non-application, for reasons of political expediency, of the existing means and instruments to certain crises, as witnessed in the Council's half-hearted approach to Serbia's blatant aggression against the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; thirdly, indifference to, or total negligence of, certain explosive and tragic situations, such as those in Somalia and Liberia, which, despite obvious disruptive regional ramifications, do not seem to have a direct bearing on the interests of outside Powers; fourthly, the manipulation of cherished human ideals in the field of human rights for short-sighted, ulterior political motives. Undoubtedly, a fair, objective and non-selective approach by the United Nations to internationsl issues and crises will help to ensure that the Organization can play an effective role in the future and, away from the (Mr. Velayati. Islamic Republic of Iran) peddling of big-Power influence, put it in the unique position of being able to act as the centre for concerted international cooperation. At this point I must express to Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali our appreciation for his efforts to make the Organization more efficient and to enhance its role in the resolution of chronic and new international problems. The Islamic Republic of Iran has studied with care and keen interest the Secretary-General's report of 17 June 1992, entitled "An Agenda for Peace". It is our considered view that the report deals with a wide range of theoretical and practical issues issues that are very sensitive and merit the General Assembly's careful and in-depth scrutiny. It is incumbent on the General Assembly, as the only universal organ of the United Nations, to formulate and adopt the Organization's future work. Such an endeavour, within the framework of the Charter and based on full respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of Member States and on non-interference in their internal affairs, will certainly contribute to refinement of the concepts and suggestions embodied in the Secretary-General's report, and this will help him to discharge his duties. My delegation is willing to participate actively in a special working group of the General Assembly on this matter. Among the most sensitive issues dealt with in the Secretary-General's report is the active role of the Security Council in the new international environment. The Security Council, in accordance with the United Nations Charter, bears primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, but, in the discharge of its responsibilities, the Council does not have unfounded authority. By definition, it must fine-tune its decisions and actions with the principles and objectives of the Charter and of (Mr. Velayati. Islamic Republic of Iran) international law. Discriminatory treatment of issues pertaining to international peace and security, the overstepping of mandated authority and misuse of the privileges accorded to the members of the Council the permanent members in particular are among the practices that tarnish the Council's image and undermine its stature and credibility and, in the final analysis, that of the United Nations. A thorough and vigorous study and formulation of well-defined guidelines will help the Council to adopt an objective and non-discriminationary approach, within a specific framework and specific terms of reference, to various issues of international peace and security. I must emphasize that the preservation of international peace and security is a responsibility entrusted to the Security Council by the international community. That being the case, the Council, in accordance with the Charter, is accountable to that community, which is represented by the General Assembly. The existing international exigencies make especially necessary the strengthening of global efforts to facilitate the overall process of disarmament and arms control - in particular, the elimination of weapons of mass destruction. To this end, reappraisal of the military doctrines of the big Powers in consonance with the new international situation, a change in attitudes of domination, and rejection of resort to force as a means of promoting political objectives constitute the primary prereguisite for the success of all disarmament and arms-control schemes. The preparation of a draft convention on the prohibition of the production, development, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons represents a significant step in the history of arms control. Undoubtedly, this convention (Mr. Velayati. Islamic Republic of Iran) crystallizes many years' difficult, even tedious, negotiations between the members of the Conference on Disarmament. Notwithstanding this obvious fact, the convention - on the one hand, because the Conference on Disarmament acts on the basis of consensus and, on the other, owing to the supremacy of political exigencies throughout the process, but especially during the latter stages - cannot be regarded as a document that reflects the principled views and positions of all members of the Conference on Disarmament. This is particularly true in respect of the composition of the executive council, which, in our view, lacks balance and proportion. Furthermore, if the convention on chemical weapons is to become universal the developed countries will have to provide for the transfer of chemical technology, materials and equipment for peaceful purposes, and the existing unilateral discriminatory and ad hoc restrictions will have to be removed. In the field of the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, the non-proliferation Treaty can indeed acquire a universal character and play an effective and efficient role in preventing the vertical and horizontal proliferation of nuclear weapons, provided that the nuclear-weapon States fulfil their obligations in accordance with article VI of the Treaty. It is highly desirable that the next millennium be nuclear-free, but the achievement of that objective depends upon the following: an undertaking by all nuclear-weapon States to destroy all nuclear weapons in their territory or under their jurisdiction or control; a new pledge by all States not to acquire or proliferate nuclear weapons and not to add to their existing stocks; and a genuine commitment to enhanced cooperation in technology for the peaceful use of nuclear energy. (Mr. Velayati. Islamic Republic of Iran) Further regional endeavours in the field of arms control, regional disarmament and the establishment of zones free of weapons of mass destruction can complement international efforts towards the prohibition of such weapons and can contribute to the alleviation of the international community's concern about the dangerous conseguences of stockpiling armaments at the regional level. (Mr. Velayati. Islamic Republic of Iran) My country, as the initiator of the proposal for the establishment of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East, is fully prepared to participate actively in any constructive and comprehensive initiative in this field. It goes without saying, though, that the success of initiatives concerning arms control and regional disarmament depends on heeding a number of considerations such as the political and security characteristics of the regions in guestion, participation of the regional countries in defining the principles and objectives of the initiative, the concerns of the countries in the region vis-a-vis threats from within and outside the region, including consequences of the presence of foreign forces. What seems more urgent and critical than regional disarmament is the necessity and desirability of searching for a comprehensive and genuine solution to regional conflicts, as an endemic and seemingly intractable source of threat to international peace and security. Over and above the chronic regional crises, recent developments at the international level have given birth to a series of new crises in various regions, thus further accentuating the need for a new sense of vigilance and vigorous endeavour on the part of the international community to confront these threats. In my brief survey of regional crises and conflicts, I cannot but begin with what is closest to the hearts and minds of the Islamic world - that is, Palestine. The legitimate uprising of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, as a form of resistance against occupation, expansionism, murder and unbearable living conditions, is brutally suppressed. Alongside the regular armed forces, armed Zionist settlers carry out on a daily and continuing basis acts of murder and plunder, including confiscation of Palestinian property. In addition to Palestine, parts of Syrian and Lebanese territory are still under Zionist occupation and innocent people are killed or abducted on a regular basis by these forces in South Lebanon. The Islamic Republic of Iran calls on the international community to confront the aggressive and repressive policies of the Zionists in a serious and meaningful manner. The bitter experience of the past decades indicate, however, that peace and tranquillity can be restored to the area only through struggle, full restoration of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the entire territory of Palestine. Another crisis which has endangered regional and global security over the past year concerns the tragic situation in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The crimes perpetrated against the people in that young and small Republic have few parallels in the post-Second-World-War era. The aggression against the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of a Member of the United Nations and the simultaneous torture, mass killings and policy of genocide and "ethnic cleansing", as pursued by Serbia and its ultra-nationalist Serb agents with the objective of forming "greater Serbia", have caused deep consternation throughout the world and drawn condemnation from almost all quarters. Nevertheless, Serbia and its agents continue to show utter disdain for the international community's decisions, as reflected in numerous Security Council resolutions and General Assembly resolution 46/242, continuing their crimes against the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in particular the Muslim population, with a seeming sense of immunity and impunity. It is therefore incumbent upon the Security Council to adopt the necessary measures provided for in Article 42 of the Charter to put an end to the aggression and to restore the sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence and unity of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Islamic Republic of Iran once again emphasizes the inherent right of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina to self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter and expects the Security Council to reconsider its resolution on an arms embargo against Yugoslavia in order to enable the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina to exercise its inherent right to resist aggression. Moreover, I would like to emphasize that in the view of a large majority of the Member States, including the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia no longer exists and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - Serbia and Montenegro - has no right to occupy the seat of former Yugoslavia in international forums. We strongly believe that the Assembly should send a very clear and unambiguous signal to Belgrade, through the expulsion of Serbia and Montenegro from all organs of the United Nations, that to be a Member of the Organization it will be subject to all the criteria for membership and will have to behave accordingly. There are two other continuing crises in the immediate neighborhood of the Islamic Republic of Iran to which my country cannot remain indifferent because of humanitarian as well as national security considerations. Expressing its satisfaction at the victory of the Muslim mujahidin of Afghanistan and the establishment of an Islamic State, the Islamic Republic of Iran welcomes the cessation of fratricidal bloodshed in its fraternal neighbouring country. My country extends its support to the legitimate Government of Afghanistan, stresses the imperative of non-interference of all countries in the internal affairs of Afghanistan, and once again draws the attention of the international community to the pressing humanitarian needs of the war-stricken Afghan people. For our part, we have made endeavours in this direction and underline our readiness to cooperate with other countries as well as international organizations in the provision of food, medicine and other essential needs as well as in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. In regard to the Nogorno-Karabakh region, the Islamic Republic of Iran from the very outset expressed its concern at the continuation and expansion of the conflict and exerted every effort to bring the fighting to an end; this resulted in the establishment of a cease-fire and commencement of negotiations between the Republics of Azerbaijan and Armenia. It is a matter of deep regret that owing to the reticence of the international community - and particularly that of the Security Council the opportunity of propitious situation which existed at that time and which could have been further solidified through the dispatching of international observers was lost and bloodshed flared up and has continued. In our view, the Karabakh crisis can be resolved only through negotiations and on the basis of mutual respect and non-interference as well as the preservation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the two countries. The approach of the Islamic Republic of Iran to these two crises and the efforts undertaken in regard to them emanate from our overall policy towards neighbouring countries, which is based on the promotion and consolidation of good-neighbourly relations, expansion of economic, cultural and scientific cooperation, and fostering of regional confidence. For we believe that security in our region is attainable only through cooperation. As early as 1986 the Islamic Republic of Iran, on the basis of this policy, underlined the imperative need for the creation of a regional security and cooperation arrangement in the Persian Gulf area. In the General Assembly last year I enumerated the principles and objectives of such regional cooperation principles and objectives that continue to govern our approach to this strategic region. The relations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the newly established Republics along our northern borders are based on the same principles, namely, respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, inviolability of international borders, non-resort to force in the settlement of disputes, non-interference in internal affairs, and dialogue and mutual understanding. Cognizant of the fact that the newly established republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus are now undergoing the difficult and tumultuous stage of state-building, establishment and consolidation of democratic institutions and economic stabilization and development, and with a view to the primacy of promotion of good-neighbourly relations and fostering of mutual confidence between the countries of this region, the Islamic Republic of Iran has taken the lead in the sphere of expanding bilateral as well as multilateral ties with these countries. We, along with our regional partners - Turkey and Pakistan have welcomed the Republics of Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan into the Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO). We also pioneered the formation of the Organization of the Countries of the Caspian Sea Basin, along with the Russian Federation, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan. In the bilateral field, the foundations of political, cultural and economic cooperation, particularly in the areas of transportation and energy, have been laid with the newly established republics of the former USSR. That approach by the Islamic Republic of Iran is founded on the conviction that the expansion of bilateral and multilateral relations among countries of the region is bound to contribute to stability, security and development for all. In today's world instability does not emanate solely from regional crises or military conflicts. Economic and environmental problems too threaten international peace and security. Continued further exacerbation of economic difficulties in most third-world countries in the context, and as a result, of the ever-widening gap between the North and the South is perhaps the most serious and most explosive danger threatening the international community. As stated clearly in the World Economic Survey for 1992, world economic output has decreased for the first time since the Second World War; international trade is also plagued with myriad difficulties. Under these difficult circumstances, many developing countries are still grappling with the problems resulting from the economic recession of the 1980s and its socio-political conseguences. Worse still, a decreased flow of financial resources to developing countries has made the prospects for recovery and economic growth and development in those countries all the more uncertain. Notwithstanding numerous problems, the recovery of the world economy is not impossible to achieve. Its attainment, though, requires promotion of international cooperation and coordination of economic policies, which feature among the major purposes of the United Nations. To this end, the International Development Strategy for the fourth United Nations Development Decade, the Declaration adopted by the General Assembly at its eighteenth special session, and Agenda 21 of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, which reflect long and intensive negotiations and represent international consensus on the objectives of development and environment, constitute the necessary framework and basis of future measures. Yet it is clear that in the absence of concerted international cooperation proper economic conditions where all countries enjoy egual opportunity for growth and development will remain unattainable. The United Nations and its specialized agencies provide the most appropriate forum to facilitate international cooperation with the objective of alleviating world economic problems, especially those of the developing countries, thus preventing what otherwise seems an inevitable confrontation between North and South. In conclusion, I would like to reiterate the imperative of intensifying the activities of the United Nations in step with international developments, with a view to achieving a higher degree of efficiency and effectiveness. In this context, the Islamic Republic of Iran is of the view that revitalization of the General Assembly should be pursued in earnest, and that effective measures to augment the efficiency, and thus the practical relevance, of the Assembly should be adopted. The decision of the recent non-aligned summit to convene a high-level working group to study ways and means of increasing the effectiveness of the United Nations represents a timely, logical and positive step, and can certainly assist the United Nations in that purpose. The General Assembly, as the sole universal, democratic and transparent organ of the United Nations, with the competence entrusted to it by the Charter to address all international issues and problems, should fully exercise its Charter-mandated authority in practice. To that end, the General Assembly should guide other organs of the United Nations on a constant and active basis, and take the necessary decisions and make the appropriate recommendations for the realization of common human ideals, most notably universal peace, security and respect for human rights, and balanced prosperity and welfare. Mr. VAYRYNEN (Finland): I wish to begin by congratulating my colleague Mr. Stoyan Ganev on his election to the high office of President of the General Assembly. He can rest assured that the delegation of Finland will render him its full support in his challenging task. On behalf of my Government I wish also to extend a warm welcome to the 13 new Members amongst us. Their participation in the work of the United Nations will further strengthen the Organization. Since the beginning of this year the United Nations has had a new Secretary-General. Faced with many difficult challenges, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali has already shown, in word and in deed, that he is firmly in charge. We wish him all success in his work. The United Nations Charter was drafted under dramatic circumstances during the final stages of the Second World War. After two world wars, the United Nations was given the responsibility for maintaining peace and security for future generations. Now, decades later, the Organization also faces a multitude of other major challenges: those of development, protection of the environment and promotion of democracy and human rights. Courageous and visionary leadership is now called for to create a new United Nations for a new international era.* The Security Council demonstrated such leadership at its historic summit meeting held in January. After decades of cold war, the summit set new priorities for the United Nations in the promotion of peace and security worldwide, and provided guidelines for a more active United Nations involvement in the maintenance of peace. In response to the initiative taken by the Security Council summit the Secretary-General has submitted an excellent report under the title "An Agenda for Peace". In it he has innovatively addressed the question of how the full potential of the United Nations can be most effectively used in the service of peace and international security. The report is a comprehensive effort by the Secretary-General to relate preventive diplomacy, peace-making and peace-keeping, as well as peace-building, to the changing political and security requirements of the world today. Ms. Bongo (Gabon), Vice-President, took the Chair. I am especially pleased to note that the Secretary-General's thinking and many of his recommendations are well in line with what Finland, often together with the other Nordic countries, has itself long advocated. As expressed so clearly in the Secretary-General's report, it is not sufficient that the United Nations should succeed in putting an end to conflicts. The best way to deal with conflicts is to prevent them. This is a complicated but vital task, where the capacity of the United Nations should be considerably strengthened. Different methods could come into question, depending on the specific circumstances of each case. But the necessary basis for any prevention is continuous information-gathering and monitoring exercised both by the Secretary-General and by the Security Council. Early deployment of monitors or peace-keepers should be considered whenever necessary for effective prevention. May I add that we are also grateful to the Secretary-General for the innovative treatment of post-conflict, comprehensive peace-building in his report. When the capacity of the United Nations to keep peace and prevent conflicts has been stretched to its limit, it is natural that other means should be taken under consideration. Here regional organizations and agencies can play a significant role. The Secretary-General's repeated calls for closer cooperation and coordination between the United Nations and regional organizations are well-founded. At its Helsinki Summit in July, the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) responded constructively. CSCE has strengthened its capacity for conflict management and peace-keeping. We also support the Secretary-General's idea of periodic consultations between the United Nations and regional arrangements on confidence-building measures. The tragic situation in former Yugoslavia shows clearly how a complex problem requires an innovative approach. Under the joint leadership of the United Nations and the European Community, the Conference, with its six working groups, is seeking solutions to the multitude of political, ethnic, humanitarian and other problems in the territory of the former Yugoslavia. CSCE is also actively engaged in supporting the settlement of the conflict. In this context, let me say that Finland supports the Security Council recommendation to the General Assembly that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia should apply for membership in the United Nations and should not participate in the work of the General Assembly in the meantime. While regional organizations should play a greater role in dealing with threats to security in their respective regions, the United Nations, through its Security Council, retains, of course, its unique and primary role and special instruments in maintaining international peace and security. The Secretary-General reminds us of the most potent instrument available to the Security Council, Article 42 of the Charter. We agree with him that the last-resort option of taking military action is essential to the credibility of the United Nations as a guarantor of international security. While not underestimating the problems involved, we believe that the Security Council and all Members of the Organization should seriously consider the proposals of the Secretary-General concerning peace-enforcement units, as well as the negotiation of agreements in accordance with Article 43 of the Charter. Proliferation of all weapons of mass destruction constitutes a major threat to international peace and security. International norms of non-proliferation should be strengthened through universal and credible adherence to them. Finland welcomes the recently concluded chemical-weapons convention. It is a vital and long-awaited part of the international non-proliferation regime and should attract as many original signatories as possible. Finland, for its part, will be among the first States to sign and ratify the convention. Unrestrained accumulation of conventional arms can lead to regional instability. It is therefore essential that especially the major arms-exporting countries should exercise restraint individually and collectively. It is also necessary that all relevant transfers should be fully reported to the United Nations Register of Conventional Arms. The Security Council summit represented a firm recommitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The Secretary-General, for his part, has seized the momentum and turned this new commitment into a programme for concrete action. In the promotion of peace and security, this is indeed the beginning of a new era in the history of the United Nations. On the same positive note, I should like to turn to another summit, the Earth Summit, held at Rio de Janeiro. Alongside the task of maintaining peace and security, a new equally courageous and visionary leadership is called for on sustainable development. At Rio a remarkable number of Heads of State and Government responded to that call and drew guidelines for world-wide sustainable development. Although our expectations could not all be fulfilled, the Earth Summit showed that the United Nations and the international community can achieve remarkable results when minds meet. Yet Rio was only the beginning of a long process towards sustainable development. In that process, a fundamental change is needed first and foremost in attitudes a change in our own life-styles. And we need a strong political will to direct that change. A sustainable future can be brought about only by putting the treaties agreed upon at Rio into force and by translating the principles of the Declaration and Agenda 21 into action. In this the Commission on Sustainable Development will have an essential role to play. The conventions signed at Rio are just an initial core for a comprehensive legal framework, which should guide mankind in the right direction. What we do need is a full set of internationally binding agreements which redirects production and consumption patterns in each and every country. We also need effective conventions covering natural resources. Here instruments on desertification and sustainable forestry are the most urgent ones. The future of mankind requires sustainable development, management and conservation of forests of all types of forests everywhere. Forests have both an important national dimension and an important global dimension. Forests are a valuable national resource which must be utilized for the benefit of the local population. Sustainable forestry is also economically beneficial. While the sovereignty of nations over their forest resources should be respected, that sovereignty should not be misused. Finland, for its part, is prepared to participate actively in launching the negotiations on the global forest convention on the basis of the forest principles agreed upon at Rio. Here we have to build a better understanding of the need for such an international instrument. We also have to build mutual confidence founded on the unique role of forests in the global ecosystem. To implement what was agreed at Rio is a tall order for any country, and particularly for developing countries. Many of them will need the assistance of the international community and the United Nations. New and additional resources reguired by developing countries must be provided in a timely manner. That is a heavy task for the donor community, as it has to shoulder the responsibility of also assisting the new democracies in transition. The results of the Earth Summit do indeed underline the unigue and indispensable role of the United Nations in promoting development. They will have a crucial impact on the entire economic and social sector of the United Nations and on the work of the Economic and Social Council. Development deserves the same priority and attention as peace and security. Development is not only economic and social progress; it is also promotion of democracy and human rights. No longer do questions of violations of human rights belong exclusively to the sovereign domain of States. On the contrary, respect for human rights and democracy is an integral part of international relations. It is therefore one of the main responsibilities of the United Nations to see to it that they are respected world wide. The Economic and Social Council is the principal organ of the United Nations for development. It is important and urgently necessary that the Economic and Social Council be strengthened so that it can gain the true leadership role for sustainable development and promotion of human rights and democracy. The demands put on the United Nations today are unprecedented. New challenges have to be met and financed. Finland shares the Secretary-General's concerns regarding the Organization's ability to function in the present financial crisis. We are therefore willing to consider constructively any of his proposals. Finland is particularly anxious to see the General Assembly take the first step recommended by the Secretary-General: the establishment of a peace-keeping reserve fund to meet the initial expenses of peace-keeping operations pending receipt of assessed contributions. The Nordic countries have long advocated this step. With the recent expansion of operations, the need for such a fund is acute. It is not in keeping with the honour, interests or legal obligations of the Member States for the United Nations to exist in "its present mendicancy", to use the words of the Secretary-General. For members of any club, paying dues is <» duty, not an option. While exceptional measures may be needed to guarantee the uninterrupted functioning of the United Nations in the present crisis, the overall funding of the Organization must be built on the collective responsibility of the entire membership. We have a common interest to invest in improved security and development towards a more prosperous and democratic world. The United Nations Charter remains fully valid today as regards the maintenance of international peace and security and, by and large, also as regards the promotion of international cooperation in the economic, social, and human rights sectors. In facing the new challenges, especially in the promotion of sustainable development and democracy, the primary issue is how we can best build on the Charter and even amend it, where necessary. As it approaches the end of the second millennium, humanity is faced with formidable challenges. Meeting them will not be easy; I have no illusions about that. Yet the United Nations now has a. better chance than ever to use its full potential and show leadership for the sake of a better future. Mr. PI TELLA (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): I should like to congratulate the President on his election. I am convinced that his work at this session will be crowned with success, as was that of his predecessor. Ambassador Shihabi, to whom we express our gratitude for his outstanding work. We have noted with satisfaction how our Organization, in keeping with its universalist vocation, has increased its membership in the course of the past year. We welcome the delegations of Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Moldova, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, and San Marino. Their presence is perhaps the clearest demonstration of the deep-seated and positive changes that have occurred in important parts of the world since the end of the cold war. Moreover, we would like to extend our recognition to the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros-Ghali, for his hard and valuable work in the course of the first year of his term of office, thereby continuing the excellent job done by his predecessor, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar. The Secretary-General's stewardship has already had a sizeable impact on the current international situation. In our view, the general panorama of international relations, despite some serious regional conflicts, gives rise to promising prospects throughout the world. The end of the cold war and the considerable extension of democracy and the economic opening-up in many countries encourage that perception. This will necessarily lead to a reformulation of the North-South relationship that will replace confrontation with cooperation. That perception does not imply ignoring the seriousness of some regional conflicts, in particular in the former Yugoslavia or the tragic situation of such countries as Somalia. Neither war, hunger, poverty nor disease has been eliminated. Far from it: situations persist that evoke horror and concern. Morevoer, in some regions there are still significant disputes that, though lacking the tragic aspects of the troubles I have mentioned, none the less impede the consolidation of stability. The case of the Malvinas Islands, to which I shall refer later, is one example. In that regard, the situation has unfortunately been affected recently by unilateral positions taken by the British Government on the sensitive matters of hydrocarbons. (Mr. Pi Telia, Argentina) In any case, apart from these issues, in recent years the world has taken important steps towards creating a better framework for solving serious problems. The fundamental change has undoubtedly been the more effective functioning of the system of collective security established in San Francisco in 1945. That major development is the prerequisite for moving towards full respect for the purposes and principles of this Organization. That explains the fundamental role of the Security Council, to which the Charter allocated paramount responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and the necessity for all States firmly to support that body and implement its decisions. Convinced of that, in keeping with Article 25 of the Charter we strongly support the decisions of the Security Council. We did so with regard to the Gulf by participating in the coalition to liberate Kuwait, and we continue to do so through our increasingly active presence in the peace-keeping operations of the United Nations. (Mr. Pi Telia. Argentina) Our support of the Security Council flows from our deeply-rooted beliefs about the rules of conduct of civilized nations, from an appropriate assessment of the world power balance and from our perception of Argentina's actual interests. After long years of miscalculations and frustrations, today Argentina needs to grow and develop. Our chances of doing so depend to a great extent on our own efforts, but also on the existence of a world and regional context of dialogue and cooperation that will enable us to devote our energy and resources to that task. As a result, we also favour the regional development of more specific formulas for cooperation with the United Nations. There can be no doubt that the United Nations cannot on its own guarantee the climate of detente that we need, which is to say that each region should create mechanisms of its own. We, therefore, together with other American countries, have supported reforms to the charter of the Organization of American States with a view to giving it the power to respond politically to breakdowns in democracy in our hemisphere. The organization is studying specific responses, which we trust will soon be adopted. By the same token, we have contributed, together with our neighbours, to consolidating a promising subregional framework. The climate of harmony and cooperation between the countries of the southern cone is a veritable example for the world, and is the result of promising agreements on economic integration, such as the Southern Cone Common Market, and of specific measures to build confidence and transparency in the area of security. Our countries are firmly united in the struggle against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Argentina, for its part, has turned this struggle into one of the fundamental axes of its foreign policy. The achievements have been particularly significant in the relationship between Argentina and Brazil; in a few short months, we have signed a (Mr. Pi Telia. Argentina) bilateral agreement on nuclear safeguards, set up a bilateral agency for accounting and control of nuclear materials, signed an agreement on full safeguards with the International Atomic Energy Agency - which has already been ratified by my country and have successfully pushed for amendments to the Treaty of Tlatelolco to allow it to come fully into force. In this latter effort we have also joined with Chile and, later, with Mexico. The changes to the Treaty of Tlatelolco are very positive, since they offer guarantees that did not exist before on the control system, special inspections and the protection of technological secrets. Argentina, Brazil and Chile have committed themselves to beginning the process of legislative approval of the amendments promptly. We are sure that in a few months all of Latin America and the Caribbean will be protected by a nuclear-free zone in full operation. In addition to measures taken in the nuclear area, the southern cone countries have signed the so-called Mendoza Peclaration on chemical and bacteriological weapons. This model document, which eradicates these weapons from our region, is in complete conformity with the Convention on Chemical Weapons recently negotiated in Geneva; that Convention has Argentina's support, and is an undeniable triumph in the struggle against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Argentina's firm commitment in this area has also been reflected in concrete form in our domestic legislation. This year the Argentine Government issued a decree which regulates sensitive nuclear, chemical, bacteriological and missile exports, and incorporates major international agreements, such as the Missile-Technology Control Regime (MTCR) outlines and the so-called Australian "List of chemicals", into Argentina's legal system. It also stipulates that Argentina shall coordinate its actions in the area of non-proliferation with other countries that have a similar approach. We plan to accept the invitation to join the group of nuclear-exporting countries in the near future. Naturally, if the main elements of the MTCR are incorporated into Argentine legislation, they would expect our country to become a member of that system. I should like to emphasize that, besides contributing effectively to non-proliferation, the new policy should serve to reopen Argentina's access to high technology through international cooperation. Its former ambiguous policy in this regard was a major obstacle in this field and was responsible, to a great extent, for the technological backwardness of our country, and for hindering procurement even of spare parts and minor supplies for our defence. Another important contribution to stability in our part of the world has been the complete normalization of diplomatic relations between Argentina and the United Kingdom and the development of growing and fruitful economic and trade links between the two. However, the dispute concerning sovereignty over the Malvinas, Georgia and South Sandwich islands still persists. Today I reaffirm the sovereign rights of my country over these territories and their maritime areas. The permanent defence and reaffirmation of these inalienable rights are at the core of Argentine foreign policy. Thus, the recent decision of the United Kingdom Government to move unilaterally into prospecting for oil in the area in dispute is strongly rejected by my country. This rejection has been immediately transmitted to the United Kingdom Government and to the potential prospecting companies. This imprudent step by the United Kingdom stands in the way of the real opportunities for cooperation in the South Atlantic and does not strengthen the good bilateral relationship in which both countries are strongly interested. (Mr. Pi Telia. Argentina) These developments hinder our developing creative and pragmatic formulas which, without undermining our inalienable rights, would foster cooperation in the South Atlantic. We are convinced that the establishment of a cooperative framework rather than of a confrontational one would benefit all those who live in the South Atlantic area, including the inhabitants of the Malvinas. It is the duty of the Argentine and British Governments to do their utmost towards that end by overcoming major problems such as the ones that I have described.

I should like, at the outset to congratulate His Excellency Mr. Stoyan Ganev, Peputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Bulgaria, on his unanimous election to the presidency of the General Assembly of the United Nations at its the forty-seventh session. His election is recognition of his diplomatic skills and the respect for international law in his country. We are confident that the international community will benefit from his presidency. I also take this opportunity to express our sincere appreciation to his predecessor. His Excellency Ambassador Samir Shihabi of Saudi Arabia, who diligently presided over the General Assembly at its forty-sixth session in an exemplary manner. We thank him for his efforts.

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. (Mr. Shamuyarira. Zimbabwe) Mr. MORA GODOY (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): A few minutes ago we heard the statement of the Minister from Argentina, in which he referred to my country and expressed a fraternal aspiration for the future of Cuba. Such an aspiration cannot be a friendly one, and we reject it. It would be really friendly and fraternal if he would express concern for Cuba with a view to rejecting the growing external aggression and the hostile policy of which our country is the victim, and if he would demand respect for the sovereignty and national integrity of Cuba, as he does for his own country, in accordance with the principles of international law and the Charter of the United Nations. That would be an aspiration worthy of being expected from a Latin American representative. However, the statement of the representative of Argentina coincides, and is in line, with the position of the Government of the United States. We do not recognize in it any fraternal concern, inasmuch as the role he is playing would, in this case, be the role of Cain. Mr. RICHARDSON (United Kingdom): I apologize for taking the floor at this late hour; however, in his address a short while ago, the Foreign Minister of Argentina referred to the alleged sovereign rights of his country over the Falkland Islands, the Georgias and the South Sandwich islands and over their maritime jurisdiction. I must repeat that my Government has no doubts about its sovereignty over the British dependencies in the South Atlantic. The Foreign Minister also referred to the "imprudence" of the British Government in advancing unilaterally in oil prospecting in the area in dispute. In fact, the announcement by the British Geological Survey of the intention of the Falkland Islands Government to invite applications to carry out seismic surveys will have come as no surprise to the Argentine Government, which has been kept informed at every stage from the beginning about the invitation to apply. My Government therefore rejects any suggestion that it has acted imprudently. We will continue to work with the Argentine Government to create an atmosphere of stability and cooperation in the South Atlantic, and we have made considerable progress in that respect. That progress is predicated on the understanding that sovereignty is not a matter that we are prepared to discuss. Mr. CHIARADIA (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation wishes to refer to the statement we heard recently from the delegation of Cuba. We do not believe that this is the right time to cast doubt on the value of democracy. The Argentine delegation, through its Minister for Foreign Affairs, simply said, and I shall quote, that: "At all times, my country has expressed a desire that Cuba should bring about the necessary reforms to allow its full integration, both political and economic, into the community of democratic, pluralistic nations." (supra, p. 80) I have nothing to add to that, and simply wish to reaffirm those words. With regard to the statement by the delegation of the United Kingdom, I simply wish to reaffirm in all respects the references the Minister of Foreign Affairs of my country made in this Hall to the guestions to which the United Kingdom delegation alluded. (Mr. Richardson. United Kingdom)

I now call on the representative of Cuba, who wishes to speak a second time in exercise of the right of reply. The intervention is limited to five minutes. Mr. MORA GODOY (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): Really, I am not going to use up my five minutes, but I am going to say that neither is this the moment to be trifling with the interests of the powerful, and I shall also reaffirm that what happens in Cuba, as far as our system is concerned - and I think the representative of Argentina forgot this in his speech is decided by the Cuban people and nobody else. The meeting rose at 7.15 p.m.