A/47/PV.94 General Assembly

I call on the Rapporteur of the Fifth Committee, Mr. Jorge 03ella of Argentina, who will introduce the reports of the Fifth Committee in one intervention. Mr. OSlliT..LA (Argen1:ina), Rapporteur of the Fifth Committee, (interpretation from Spanish): It is my honour to ~ntroduce the reports of the Fifth Committee on the aqenda items before the Assembly this morning that were allocated to thB Committee. The report of the Fift~ Committee on agenda item 102, "Financial reports and audited financial statements, and reports of the Board of Auditors", is contained in document A/47/827. In paragraph 8 of that report the Fifth Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of a draft resolution, which was adopt~d by the Committee without a vote. The Committee considered agenda item 103, "Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations", in conjuction with agenda item 104, "Programme budget for the biennium 1992-1993". The Committee's report on agenda item 103 is to be found in document A/47/830, paragra~h 12 of which contains two draft resolutions, which the Committee adopted withcdt a vote and which it recommends to the General Assembly for adoption. By paragraph 14 of draft resolution I, the General Assembly would endorse the proposed new budget format. Draft resolution 11 relates to the proposed p~og~amme budget outline for the bienniunl 1994':'1995, by paragraph 6 of which th~General Assembly would invite the Secretary-General to prepare the proposed programme budget for the bienniurn 1994-1995 on the basis of the total preliminary. estimate provided by the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) of $2,386,400,000 at the initial 1992-1993 rates, to be adjusted at revised 1992~19g'3 rates. In paragraph 13 of its report, the Fifth Committee recommends to the Genera.l Assembly the adoption of a draft decision entitled "Biennial programme of work for the Fifth Committee for 1993-1994". Document A/47/835 ~ontains the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 104, "Programme bUdget for the Biennium 1992-1993", The report consists of four parts. Part I contains the introduction to the report. Part 11 sets out, section by section, the bUdget decisions taken by the Committee at this session, with an indication of their impact on the budget as adopted. Part III summarizes the Committee's decisions on special subjects, Finally, part IV contains the recommendations of the Fifth Committee: in paragraph 77 of that report, the Fifth Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of two draft resolutions, and in paragraph 78 it recommends the .~ adoption of three draft decisions. Those draft resolutions and draft decisions ware adopted by the Committee without a vote, The report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 105, "Programme planning", is contained in document A/47/828, in paragraph 7 of which the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of a draft (MtL-Qsella, RAPporteur. Fifth COmmittee) resolution relating to the proposed revisions to the medium-term plan. to the programme performance report. to programme evaluation in the United Nations and to the need for enhanced coordination in the United Nations system. The draft resolution was adG~ted without a vote. By part I of the draft resolution the General Assembly would adopt the Secretary-Generales proposed revisions to the medium~term plan for the period 1992-1991 as amended by the recommendations ~f the Second Committee. the Committee for Programme and Coordination and the Committee on Conferences and the additional conclusions contained in the annex to the draft resolution. The Fifth Committee considered agenda item 106. "Current financial crisis of the United Nations", concurrently with agenda item 101. "Financial s-mergency of the United Nations". The Committee adopted a draft resolution on these items without a vote. and reco~~ends it to the General Assembly for adoption in paragraph 5 of the report. By paragraph 16 of the draft resolution the Assembly would decide to consider in the future those two agenda items under one agenda item entitled "Improving the financial situation of the United Nations". The report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 111. "Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the eXp'~nses of the United Nations", is contained in document A/47/S33. On this item, the Permanent Representative of Barbados. Ambassador Maycock. on 21 December. introduced a draft decision. the text of which is to be found in paragraph 8 of the report. by which the General Assembly would adopt the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft decision by 62 votes to 15. with 19 abstentions. Part 11 of the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 112, "Personnel questions", is cC"ntained in document A/47/708/Add.1. In par agraph 5, the Committee recommends the adoption of a draft decision by which t~e Assembly would decide to defer consideration sub-items (a) and (c) of agenda item 112 to the resumed forty-seventh session. The Committee further recommended the adoption of a draft resolution contained in paragraph 6 of part I of the report (A/47/708). (Mr. Osella, Rapporteu.J;:' Fifth Committee) As to agenda item 113, "United Na.tions Common SystemlO lf the Fifth Committee recommends for adoption by the General Assembly the draft resolution contained in paragraph 6 of its report (A/47/831), which it adopted without a vote. With respect to item 124, '!Administrative and bUdgetary aspects of the financing of the United Nations peace-keeping operations", the Fifth Committee recummends for adoption by the General Assembly the two draft resolutions contained in paragraph 11 of its report (A/47/832), which it adopted without a vote. Draft resolution I would establish, under the authority of the Secretary-General, effective 1 January 1993, a Peace-keeping Reserve Fund as a cash-flow mechanism to ensure the O~ganization's rapid response to the needs of peace-keeping operations, and would set the level of the Fund at $150 million. Draft resolution 11 would place ne~ Member States in existing groups or make ad hoc arrangements. As regards agenda item 12, "Report of the Economic and Social Council", the Fifth Committee, in paragraph 4 of its report (A/47/834), recommends that the General Assembly take note of the relevant chapters of the report of the Economic and Social Council that had been allocated to the Committee. Agenda item 17, "Appointments to fill vacancies in subsidiary organs and other appointments", consists of sub-items (a) to (f). With respect to sub-item 17 (a), "Appointment of members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions", the Fifth Committee, in paragraph 9 of its report (A/47/464/Add.1), recommends that the General Assembly appoint the following persons as members of the ACABQ: Mr. Gerard Biraud, Mr. Jorge Jose Duhalt, Mr. ladsnori Inomata, Mr, Wolfgang Munch, Mr. Ranjit Rae and Mr. Yu Mengjia. (Mr. 05el18, RAPporteur, Fifth Committee) Under sub-item 17 (b), "Appointmentcf members of the Committee on C;ontributions"" the Fifth Committee; in paraqraph6.of its report (A/471S36) recommends that the General Assembly appoint 'the followinq persons as members of the Committee on Contributions: Mr. Tarak Ben Hamida, Mr. Serqio Chapparo Ruiz, Mrs. Norma Goicochea Estenoz, Mr. Peter Greqq, Mr. Mohamed Mahmoud Quld El Ghaouth and Mr. Dimitri Rallis. In paraqraph .. of tb~ addendum to that report (A/471836/Add.l), the Committee recommends that the General Assembly also appoint Mr. Atilio NorbertoMolteni. In connection with sub-item 17 (c), "Appointment of a member of the Board of Auditors", the Fifth Committee recommends, in paragraph 6 of its report (A/47/837), that the General Assembly appoint the Comptroller and Auditor General of India as a member of the United Nations Board of Auditors. As to Sub-item 17 (d), "Confirmation of the appointment of members of the Investn,ents Committee", in paraqraph 4 of its report (A/47/838), the Fifth CommittG~ recommends that the General Assembly confirm the appointment by the Secretary-General of the fo11owinq persons as members of the Investments Committee: Mr. Yves Oltramare, MI:, Emmanuel Noi Ornaboe and Mr. Jurgen Reimnitz. With respect to sub-item 17,(e), "Appointments to fill vacancies in subsidiary o~qans and other appointments: Appoin~ent of members of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal", the Fifth Committee, in paraqraph .. of its report (A/47/839), recommends that the General Assembly appoint Mr. Jerome Ackerman and Mr. Francis R. Spain as members of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal. Lastly, in the matter of sub-item 17 (t), "Appointment of members of the International Civil Service Commission", the Fifth Committee, in paragraph 10 of its report (A/47/840), recommended that the General Assembly appoint the following persons as members of the International Civil Service Commission: Mr. Humayun KabirJ Mr. Valery F. Keniaykin, Mr. Ernest Rusita, Mr. Missoum Sbih and Mr. Mario D. Yango.

If there is no proposal under rule 66 of the rules o~ procedure, I shall take it that the General Assembly decides not to discuss the reports of the Fifth Committee that are before the Assembly today. It was so decided.

Statements will therefore be limited to explanations of vote. The positions of delegations regarding the recommendations of the Fifth Committee have been made clear in the Committee and are reflected in the relevant official records. May I remind members that under paragraph 7 of decision 34/401, the General Assembly agreed that "When the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in plenary meeting, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, i.e., either in the Committee or in plenary meeting unless that delegation's vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee". May I remind delegations that, also in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. Before we begin to take action on the recommendations contained in the reports of the Fifth Committee, I should like to advise representatives that we are going to proceed to take decisions in the same manner as was done in the Fifth Committee. This means that where a recorded vote was taken, we will do the same. I would also hope that we may proceed to adopt without a vote those recommendations that were adopted without a vote in the Fifth Committee. The Assembly will first consider the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 102, "Financial reports and audited financial statements, and reports of the Board of Auditors" (A/47/827). The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report (A/47/827) and on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 9 of the same report. We turn first to the draft resolution contained in paragraph 8 of the report, which was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do the same? The draft resQlution was adopted (resolution 47/211).

We now turn to the draft decision contained in paragraph 9 of the report, which~was also adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise? The draft decision was ~dopted.

May I take it that the Assembly wishes to conclude its consideration of agenda item 102? It was so decided.

The Assembly will now turn to the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 103, "Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations" (A/47/830). The Assembly will now take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 12 of its report (A/47/830) and on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 13 of the same report. We turn first to the two draft resolutions recommended in paragraph 12 of the report. Draft resolution I is entitled tlReview of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations and programme budg~t for the bier."iwn 1992-1993". The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft resolution 1 was adQpted (resolution 47/212).

Draft resolution 11 is entitled,"Proposed programme budget outline for the bienniwn 1994-1995". The Fifth Committee also adopted this draft resolution without a vote. Mal" I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft resolution 11 was adopted (resolution 47/213).

We shall now turn to the draft decision contained in paragraph 13 of the report. The draft decision, entitled "Biennial programme of work of the Fifth Committee for 1993-1994", was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? The draft decision was adopted.

We have concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 103. I invite members to turn their attention to the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 105, entitled "Programme planning" (A/47/828). The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended in paragraph 7 of the report of the Fifth Committee. The Fifth Committee adopted that draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 47/214). The PiUIPENT: May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to conclude its consideration of agenda item 1051 It was so decided.

The Assembly will next consider the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 106, entitled "Current financial crisis of the United Nations", and on agenda item 107, entitled "Financial emergency of the United Nations" (A/471816). The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 5 of the repo~t. The draft resolution, entitled "Improving the financial situation of the United Nations", was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? The draft resoluti2nw~s adopted (resolution 47/215).

The Assembly has concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda items 106 and 107. We now turn to agenda item 111, entitled "Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations" (A/471833). I call on the representative of Belarus on a point of order. Mr. BURAVKIN (Belarus) (interpretation trom Russian): On the basis of rule 78 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, the delegation of the Republic of Belarus wishes to raise a procedural motion: under rule 74 of the rules of procedure, to postpone consideration of the draft decision contained in the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 111, entitled "Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations" (A/47/833), until the resumed forty-seveuth session of the General Assembly. (lit. Buraykin, Belarus) One of the reasons for our proposal is the fact that the discussi~n of the issue is not detailed in full in the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 111. There is not even a reference there to the legal opinion stated by the Legal Counsel on 8 December at tte meeting of the Fifth Committee; that opinion, we are firmly convinced, is based on principle and .. . ke6ps the lo~g term 1n V1ew. The PRE~IDENT: The representative of Belarus has moved, within the terms of rule 74 of the rules of procedure, the adjournment of the debate on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report on agenda item 111. He also referred to rule 78 of the rules of procedure, under which. the President may permit the discussion and consideration of motions as to procedure, even though such motions have not been circulated. As members know, it is the established practice of the Assembly to consider oral procedural motions. The motion is therefore in order. According to rule 74 of the rules of procedure, "During the discussion of any matter, a representative may move the adjournment of the debate on the item under discussion. In addition to the proposer of the motion, two representatives may speak in favour of, and two against, the motion, after which the motion shall be immediately put to the vote. The President may limit the time to be allowed to speakers under this rule." Does any member wish to speak? Mr.SUGANQ (Japan): In explaining his motion the representative of Belarus explained that it is procedural in nature. In faet, the Assembly has already decided not to discuss either the report of the Fifth Committee or the substance of agenda item 111. The draft resolution before us is the product of protracted discussion in the Fifth Committee. We are therefore Dot prepared to discuss its substance any further. Yet, because of the absence of a decision on the scale of assessed contributions of Member States, the motion clearly has very serious substantive implications. On Monday of this wee~, the Fifth Committee was compelled to vote on this issue to avoid such serious - financial - implications. The motion raised by the representative of Belarus is intended to reverse procedurally the decision of the Fifth Committee; accordingly, my delegation cannot support it. Mr. LQZINSKIX (Russian Federation) (interpretation from Russian): We, like the representative of Japan, object to tha motion to postpone the debate and the taking of a decision on the scale of assessments of the United Nations. This issue has been discussed comprehensively and at length in the Fifth Committee, and the various proposals made there included a proposal to defer consideration of the scale of assessments until the resumed I forty-seventh session. However, that proposal was rejected even at that stage, since such an important decision as approving the scale of assessments of the United Nations must be adopted before the beginning of next year; if it were not, the United Nations itself and the relatac organizations of the United Nations family would hG lef~ without a valid scale of assessments. Obviously, in such a case there would be no assessments established for approximately 20 States, representing about 10 per cent of the entire scale of (M[s-&pzinskiy, Russian Fed@ration) assessments, and it is clear that such a situation would harm the normal. functioning of the Organization. No matter·how difficult such' a decision would be for some delegations, the General Assembly has no choice but to approve the~eci8ion of the Fifth -. Committee, which in turn app~oves the recommendations of the Committee on -. Contrib~!tlons. We therefore oppose the adopl:ion of what is in fact a substantive proposal, not a procedural proposal, made by the delegation of Belaruso The PRESIDEN,T: I should like to remind the Assembly that under rule 74 of the rules of procedure, in addition to the proposer of the motion, two representatives may speak in favour of the motion, and two against it. Mr. BAVMANIS (Latvia): Latvia supports the proposal of Belarus to defer the debate cn agenda item 111 to the resumed forty-seventh session for the same reasons as those stated by the representative of Be1arus. Hrs BATlQUK (Ukr~ine): The Ukrainiaa d6~egation supports the motion put forward by the delegation of the Republic of Be1arus. We discussed this matter thoroughly in the Fifth Committee and wer6 very close to a solution that might receive a consensus vote in the General Assembly. It was owing to lack of time and to the rush and confusion of the last-minute negotiations that the unfort\U1ate results were presented to the plenary meeting of the General Assembly. We cannot agree with the statement that there would be no scale of assessments. There is a scale of assessments that was approved by resolution 46/221 and adopted by consensus at the last session of the General Assembly. It sets forth the assessment for each and every Member of this Organization, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, except, ~f course, for new Members, which will I', ~ .{ be asselSsed lna£ew days. ,When we discuesea: thb ~at.ter in Cortlnittee, "e ,had ." ' before us a draft reiSol~tion, pert of which is still to be considered at the resumed session. So 'that. we might: try agaIn to fc:rge a consensus, we think it would be logical t,o post.pone the debate on this item. ThePRESlDENT~ In accordance with rule ~4 of the rules of procedure, I shall ,imn'lediataly put to the vote themot!on to adjourn the debate. The motion was rejected by 105 votes to 11, with 36 abstentions. (Mr, Batiouk, UkraiM.) ," The PRESIDlN'f: Since the motion to adjourn ~e debate is not adopted, we shall proceed to the consideration of the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Co~ittee in paragraph 8 of the report (A/47/833) on agenaa item 111. I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes or positions before the voting. Hr. BASSANQV (Azerbaijan) (interpretation from Russian): Tt!ank you for giving me the opportunity to speak before the voting on a question that is of gree.te importance to my country, ltYhich became a Member of the United Nations family in March of this year. The Azerbaijani delega~ion will vote against the draft resolution, which proposes approvinq the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions in that part relating to the determination of the scale of assessments for former republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. I would like to explain in greater detail the reasons for our neqative attitude towards the recommendations of the Committee. Azerbaijan is a new Member of the United Nations, havinq joined this Organization in conformity with all established procedures, and therefore it seems to us that there is absolutely no authorization for the principle of apportioning the assesements of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics among the republics, the principle that guided the Committee on Contributions when it prepared its r~commendations to the General Assembly. It seems quite t::lear to us that Russia - the only continuing State of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and its suc~essor in the United Nations - should assume all financial obligations of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, including contribution of assessments to the United Nations regular budget. This is especially true because a promise to that effect was made i1. a letter from the President of the Russian Federation addressed to the Secretary~Generalof the United Nations on 24 December 1991. We are also convinced that every sovereign country has the right to submit its own statistical data to the United Nations Statistical Office, and that only on the basis of those data can the contributions of each country be calculated. Having received the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions, we expected that in the course of the General Assembly's work we could successfully bring our concern to the attention of delegations and would endeavour to correct the situation. Unfortunately, that did not happen. Our country's position on this question was put forward in a letter from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Azerbaijani Republic, Mr. Gassymov, to Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, as well as in my statement in the Fifth Committee and in many consultations. Ne support the efforts of the organizers of the informal consultations among the representatives of the 15 former republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, during which approaches to resolving the problem of the assessments of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were discussed. Unfortunately, those consultations did not reach the only reasonable decision, which was blocked for obvious reasons by one of the countries. In those circumstances we tried once again to get answers to questions that we thought were extremely important for formulating and adopting a fair decision regarding the assessments of the new countries to the United Nations budget. However, that legitimate action taken by our republic, together with other former republics of the Union of Soviet Soc:ialist Republics, likewise has not been fully supported thus far in the Fifth Committee. We welcome th0 constructive approaches taken by the coordinator of the informal negotiations, the representative of Barbados, Ambassador Maycock, with a view to reaching a just solution to the problem of assessments of the former republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Unfortunately, however, because ef the opposition of interested countries, those attempts were not successful; we were presented with a draft resolution which is unsatisfactory to our delegation, and against which we shall cast our vote. We would ask all those participating in the voting to take account also of the fact that the economy of Azerbaijan is on the brink of disaster. The overall economic difficulties of this transition period, generally similar to those experienced by all former Republics of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, are aggravated by external circumstances, well known to representatives here, which have led to the presence today of approximately 500,000 refugees in our country of 7 million people; taking care of those refugees absorbs significant financial and material resources at a time when they are already wholly inadequate. We hope that even if the decision which we consider unjust, is adopted today, it will not constitute an insuperable obstacle for the Committee on Contributions when that Committee, in the very near future, considers an official inquiry from Azerbaijan concerning the review of its contribution. We, for our part, are prepared to cooperate with the Committee on Contributions, the International Monetary Fund, ~he World Bank and other structures in the United Nations system with regard to the submission of any objective information that would help resolve this problem in the near future. contained in document A/47/833. Latvia's "No" vote will be for the long-term benefit of the Organization, whose principles are enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and spelled out in the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. The assessment rate for Latvia, as well as the assessment rates for the other Member States on the territory that was formerly controlled by the USSR, should have been determined on the basis of data f,ubmitted by them. In the draft decision the rates have been determined on the basis of data obtained from the former USSR, subject to the arbitrary constraint that the sum of the assessment rates must equal 10.90 per cent, which is the total of the assessment rate of the former USSR, Belarus and Ukraine. As a result, the sovereign right of these Members, as well as customary United Nations procedures in this regard, have been violated. Latvia's "No" vote supports a right - possessed by the vast majority of Member States, but not by Latvia at present - to be assessed on the basis of its own data. This right is guaranteed to all States by the principle of sovereign equality enshrined in Article 2 of the Charter. The assessment rate for Latvia determined by the draft decision before us exceeds the assessment rate calculated according to the current methodology on the basis of capacity to pay, as required by rule 160 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. Latvia supports the right of Belarus and Ukraine to be assessed, as are all Member States, in accordance with existing methodology and the rules of procedure, and accepts the opinion of the Legal ("ounsel of the United Nations in this matter. We are deeply grateful to all delegations that have extended their support to us and have defended the principles of the United Nations applicable to determining fair and equitable assessment rates. The delegation of Latvia hopes that justice and equity will, in the end, win over the desire to settle in the easiest ann simplest way questions that are important to small States. Latvia intends to file an appeal to the Committee on Contributions on the grounds that Latvia's sovereign right to be assessed on the basis of its own data has been violated. Mr. PANTIRU (Moldova) (interpretation from Russian): The plenary Assembly has to take a decision on the assessments for the new independent States that arose in the territory of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and former Yugoslavia. This is an exceptional situation. It is not often that many new States are formed as the result of the disintegration of some State entity. We are convinced that the current methodology used for determining assessments is far from being well suited to exceptional circumstances. I wish to state quite clearly that we are not casting doubt on the competence of an expert body of the General Assembly, that is, the Committee on Contributions. While we acknowledge that the experts worked within the framework of their own narrow technical mandate, the solution should have been sought elsewhere, at the political level. For that reason my delegation will vote against the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions. Adoption of those recommendations would be contrary to the interests of a significant group of States. Moreover, in this context, we draw attention to the fact that many of those States, inclUding my own country, are in a hopeless financial situation. It is enough to say that for over a year some 40 per cent of the industrial capacity of my country has been under the control of a foreign army and of separatist forces supported by that army. But perhaps an even more important fact in this connection is that the adoption of,the recommendations would seriously undermine the faith of new States in the ability of the Organization to heed the concerns of its Members. We would like to hope that 5uch troubles can be remedied. We do not think that the adoption of the recommendations will end the matter. We continue to trust in the pOlitical wisdom of the United Nations •• We intend, together with other interested States, to convince other delegations that the injustices that have been committed must be righted. Mr. BURAVKIN (Belarus) (interpretation from Russian): I realize that with my statement during these days just before Christmas I am not going to add to the holiday mood. But what can one do? It is with a feeling of deep regret that I am forced to state that the delegation of the Republic of Belarus will vote against the draft decision contained in the report of the Fifth Committee within the context of agenda item Ill, "Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations" (A/47/833). We are deeply saddened and concerned that despite the truly enormous efforts made by Ambassador Maycock and by the delegations of Ukraine, Belarus and a number of other countries, it still has not been possible to reach the desired consensus on this question, which is very important for the United Nations. As a result of the adamant unwillingness of some of our colleagues to acknowledge the obvious blunders of the Committee on Contributions and the unsatisfied ambitions of tile usual group of those who claim to be masters of the situation, the proposed draft decision is, in our view, an example of a departure from established practice and of an unduly free attitude towards the fundamental principles, criteria and rules of procedure for determining the rates of assessment of Member States for contributions to the regular budget of the United Nations. The basis of the draft decision under consideration is the recommendation made by the Committee on Contributions at its fifty-second session with regard , to the calculation of the assessments of new States Members of the United Nations. The report of the Committee on Contributions to the General Assembly at its forty-seventh session indicates that the Committee considered this question within the context of resolution 46/221 A, paragraph 1, and of rule 160 of the rules of procedure of the General:Xssembly. As can be seen, the reference is to serious and authoritative documents of crucial importance. But, rather than being guided strictly by those provisions and conscientiously limiting its mission to the establishment of rates for States admitted to the United Nations since the last session of the General Assembly, the Committee on Contributions, for some reason - or because of someone's wishes - proceeded to adopt juridically wrongful ~ecisions which exceeded its competence as a technical subsidiary b~dy of the General Assembly. For example, it decided to increase by more than 50 per cent the rates of assessment of Belarus and Ukraine for contributions to the regular budget of the United Nations. It may be mentioned in passing that the Perwanent Mission of the Republic of Belarus, in a note addressed to the Committee on Contributions two weeks before the Committee adopted its final decision, pointed out the unfairness of such recommendations and t~eir unacceptability for our country, which is one of the founders of the United Nations. Moreover, during this session of the General Assembly our representatives, making refErence to extremely important provisions and rules contained in fundamental doclu~ents of the United Nations, repeatedly stated that the aforementioned recommendations of the Committee on Contributi~~~vere groundless, This was also mentioned ina memol'andum ft'OIR the Govermnent of tbo Republic of Belarus and the Govermnant of Ukraine d~tGd 11 December 1992, which we asked to have circulated as an official document of the General Assembly: " & •• We consider it necessary to draw the attention of the United Nations General Assembly to serious conceptual and methodological departures by the Co~ittee on Contributions from existing principles and criteria for defining the financial obligations of States Members of the United Nations - mistakes that re~ulted in erroneous conclusions with regard to the Republi~ of Belarus and to Uk~\ine and in recommendations unacceptable to them," The memorandum further stated: "We propose that at i'cs current session the General Assembly should approve the scale of assessments it approved at its forty-sixth session and should determine the as~essments of new Members of the United Nations in accordance with existing rules and that prior to the review of the scale of assessments appropriate consultations should be held among the interested parties with a view to ensuring l~e adoption of the scale by consensus." Together with the delagation of Ukraine, we t~ansmitted through the Fifth Committee an inquiry to Un3er-Secretary-General 11eischhauer, the Legal Counsel, on the issues that troubled us. In. a legal opinion which he presented at a meetinq of the Fifth Committee on 8 December - and which for some reason was ignored in that Committee's report - the position of the delegations of Belarua and Ukraine waG clearly and fully supported. Recalling .the attention with which everyone listened to Mr. Fleischhauer, I was surprised to find the day before yesterday, in the voting in the Committee, that a rather large nwnher of my colleagues had not heard a thing. His legal opinion clearly and unambiguously stated inter alia that Belarus and Ukraine are original Members of the United Nations in accordance with Article 3 of the Charter of the United Nations and that no constitutional changeso no changes in the relations between them and the former USSR and no changes in their Official titles had altered or could alter their previous status in the United Nations. Thus there was no need whatever for the Committee on Contributions to "readmit" our countries to .the United Nations. The Legal Counsel's opinion also unambiguously pointed out that Belarus and Ukraine are listed in resolution 46/221 A, paragraph 1, which contains the scale of assessments for States Members of the United Nations, for the period 1992-1994. Since the Assembly has not taken any decision concerning any new scale prior to its forty-eighth session, the current scale of assessments is in force for all Member States listed therein, including Balarus and Ukraine. In that legal opinion there is also an inference that the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions to review and sharply increase the rates of assessment of Belarus and Ukraine in the middle of the period of validity of the current scale are contrary to rule 160 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly. (M~. Buraykin, Belarus) It is true that Mr. Fleischhauer indicated that the Fifth Committee, which consists of sovereign States Members of the United Nations, could adopt a decision not to apply rule 160, but on the basis of the wisdom gained from the experience of the United Nations and his own professional practice, he did not recommend that course of action. We fully agree with him, because a very dangerous precedent might be created if an order to solve complex but none the less current a~d essentially technical problems, extremely"important provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the General Assembly's rules of procedure and Assembly resolutions adopted by consensus could be abrogated in a selective and discriminatory manner. by a simple majority vote. Such a development, would, in our view, involve the risk of establishing an atmosphere of arbitrariness and disrespect for the principles of international law and of the law of internatiunal organizations. We are convinced that the United Nations should be the most authoritative such organization and serve as an example of unswerving observance of the spirit and letter of its fundamental documents and decisions. Our negative vote on the draft resolution under consideration is not merely an expression of protest - by a State that is currently passing through a very difficult formative stage, struggling wit~ every ounce of strength to extricate itself from a very difficult economic situation and making incredible efforts to overcome the consequences of the nuclear disaster at the Chernobyl atomic power plant - against discriminatory treatment; it is also a resolute rejection of methods which, to satisfy the interests of the moment, would sacrifice the fundamental principles and decisions of our Organization. I also feel that we cannot allow ourselves to ignore the manner in which we welcome new Members into our international f~lily, treating them from the first day of their legitimate presence here not merely with cold bureaucratic indifference but with patent injustice - to ignoru what it is that we teach them in our everyday work. During the formal and informal consultations, we have constantly been called upon to make compromises, but many, for some reason, expected such proposals only from those who, through the will of the Committee on Contributions, have been placed in a more than difficult position. But the search for compromise is a two-way street on which we must meet each other halfway; it cannot be achieved by compromising the principles and the good traditions of a community. We are a society of equals, and only in the understanding and unconditional acceptance of this law of mutual relations can we see a guarantee of fruitful activity by the United Nations in the future. We call upon other delegations to vote against the proposed decision, if only to protect themselves from the fate which has been so undeservedly and perfidiously imposed upon us. If we allow the infliction of a clear injustice on some, then, whether we like it or not, we are l{~aving open the possibility that such injustice will be inflicted on others as well, and we are thereby tragically undermining the authority, collectively won with great difficulty, of our unique Organization. Mr. BATIQUK (Ukraine): In a few minutes, for the first time in recent years, the General Assembly will vote on e subject which, since its forty-first session, has been assigned for consensus. The draft decision before us, contained in paragraph 8 of document A/47/833, bluntly suggests approval of the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions concerning: the apportionment of expenses to new Member States and _ in the middle of the assessment term - upgrading of the nd assessments of the Republic of Belarus a . Ukraine, by more than 50 per cent. Not only would that be contrary to existing practice, but it would serve to accommodate one country, the Russian Federation, by reducing the assessment it inherited in this Organization from the former Soviet Union. None of these recommendations of the Committee on Contributions are flawless, to say the least. The new Member States - republics of the former Soviet Union - were substantially overassessed by virtue of the fact that the main determining factor - their capacity to pay - was considered not in the light of present-day conditions, but on the basis of conditions prevailing in the 1980s, which, economically, were fairly healthy in comparison to the recent messy eC"''':'''.ililic situation in that region. Furthermore, the new countries were apportioned a significantly inflated share of the former Soviet Union's assessment, for which they should not be held responsible. In the case of Bularus and Ukraine, the Committee on Contributions, as if doing a special favour for those two countries most seriously damaged by the Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe, decided to raise their rates of assessment by more than 50 per cent at one stroke. Nobody in Ukraine was aware of the surprise being cooked up in secrecy and silence at the meetings of the Committee on Contributions. Like that of every other Member of this Organization, Ukraine's rate of assessment was established at the last session of the General Assembly for a three-year period in resolution 46/221 A, adopted by consensus. (Mr. Batiouk. Ukraine) The moment the recommendations· of the Committee on Contributions were made knowuit became clear' that they ran contrary to the letter and spirit of the rules by which the Organisation is governed. Leaving aside the legalistic aspects for the time being, how can one logically explain and defend recommendations that, against the backdrop of a terrible economic setback in a country, propose to increase its share in the United Nations budget from 1.18 per cent to 1.87 per cent and move it from thirteenth to tenth place among the major contributors to that budget? Even the payment of the existing share presents tremendous difficulties to the country, which is not integrated into the world ffiarket economy. But the rate of assessment arbitrarily suggested by the Committee on Contributions is simply unbearable. It will result in Ukraine's further indebtedness to the United Nations and will only aggravate the financial crisis of the Organization. Ukraine tried to make this known to the Committee on Contributions and to the General Assembly. Speaking in the general debate on 29 September 1992, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Mr. Zlenko, said: "Ukraine cannot agree to a merely mechanical approach to the question how the contribution of the former Soviet Union is to be apportioned. We strongly object to the decisions taken at the last session of the Committee on Contributions that, contrary to the existing criteria, recommended increasing Ukraine's contribution for the next year by over 50 per cent. We shall strive for a radical revision of the system used for fo~mulating the scale of asa,!ssment, bringing it into conformity with the present-day realities, levels of development and ability to pay of Member States." (A/47/PV.16. p. 23) The position of Ukraine was also made known to United Nations Member States in the joint memor~dum of the two Governments cited a few ~inutes ago by the representative of the Republic of Belarus, Ambassador Guennadi Buravkin. After all these acts, we were astounded to find that the guardians of an 3ven-handed approach and of the legalistic purity of United Nations decisions in financial and budgetary matters seemed not to notice the notoriety of the aforementioned recommendations. Moreover, some representatives from the European world, which coined the concept of law and order, as if to test our sense of reason, proclaimed in the Fifth Committee that the recommend~tions of the Committee on Contributions are the only feasiDle solution from the legalistic and technical points of view. There was co way out but to seek legal advice. The Legal Adviser has contested the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions on each and every count. Only then were efforts initiated to resolve the problem by a face-saving compromise. Unfortunately, some participants' efforts were but half-hearted, although the real stumbling-block in the negotiations was the position of one country. That country, while rushing to take the seat in the Security Council and all other seats in the United Nations previously occupied by the Soviet Union, pledged in a letter from its President to honour all rights and obligations of the Soviet Union, inclUding financial obligations. However, as soon as the goal was achieved the pledge to honour all the financial obligations of the Soviet Union, as prescribed for three years in resolution 46/221, was set aside as outdated and as having served its purpose. Owing to the unyielding position of the delegation of the Russian Federation, compromise was not achieved and consensus on the scale of contributions was broken. That outcome was not entirely unexpected to our (Mr. Batiouk. Ukraine) dBlegat~on, because we know whom we vere dealing with. After all, as the proverb says, you can lead a horse to water,· but you cannot make it drink. But what astounded us,- and ~hat is really ine::plicable, is the fact that, when they had to choose between the party that lavishly makes but soon forgets promises to honour its obligations and the 14 Member States that suffer the ,..... negative consequences of such behaviour, the champions of legalistic purity in financial matters sided with the party that broke its·promises. Thus it was that we were presented, through ths efforts of the delegation of Barbados, with a draft decision that we would ask the General Assembly to reject. Face-saving efforts were set aside and the authors of the draft decision, in defiance of established United Nations rules and principles, bluntly proposed that we approve the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions without changing even a comma in its biased, lopsided, lame-duck, professional - but undiplomatic - work. That result of our sincere struggle to reach understanding has disheartened us, a country that is struggling to ensure its much-wanted and dearly-won independence through an international order secured by the United Nations. Nevertheless, voting Q~ the decision the day before yesterday in the Fifth Committee showed that we are not preaching in a desert: there are delegations that understand that there are certain limits, and that in trespassing them we enter the dangerous terrain of legal arbitrarinesG. Aftdr the draft decision was adopted in the Fifth Committee by the revealing majority of 62 votes we had no lack of 9xpressions of sympathy and regret by those who pressed the erroneous recomm~ndations of the Committee on Contributions to adoption. We do not need sympathy; we need justice. That is why the delegation of Ukraine ?oill vote against the draft decision contained in the report of the Fifth Committee. (Mr. BatiqukL Okraine) We reject the draft decision because it is unfair, unbalanced and unattainable in ite revisions of the consensus resolution 46/221. We reject the draft decision because it will inflict legal, moral and financial h.arm upon the United Nations. We reject the proposal to baptize this compendium of errors conceived in an artificial, unnatural way, contrary to the new mood of partnership in international relations. The delegation of Ukraine appeals to all delegations that have not yet committed themselves to vote against the draft decision on agenda item 111 contained in paragraph 8 of the report of the Fifth Committee. Adoption of the draft decision would create a situation in which comprehensive consensus on matters discussed in the Fifth Committee will no longer be possible until justice is restored in assessing Members of the United Nations.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth COknmittee in paragraph 8 of its report In this connection I should like to point out that, since the draft decision before the Assembly on the scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of Cbe United Nations is a budgetary question, the decision of the Assembly on the draft decision is governed by paragraph 2 of Article 18 of the Charter. Thus, for it to be adopted, the draft decision requires a two-thirds majority of those present and voting. We shall therefore proceed accordingly. I call upon the repre~entative of the United States of America. Mr. HICKS (United Statezs of America): Under rule 81 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, the United States delegation moves that the Assembly reconsider the deferral motion made earlier by the delegation of Belarus with respect to agenda item 111, "Scale·of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations". The PRESIDE~TT: Rule 81 of the rules of procedure reads as follows: "When a proposal has been adopted or rejected, it may not be reconsidered at the same session unless the General Assembly, by a two-thirds majority of the members present and voting, so decides. Permission to speak on a motion to reconsider shall be accorded only to two speakers opposing the motion, after which it shall be immediately put to the vote." I call on the representative of tile Russian Federation, wha wishes to speak in opposition to the motion to reconsider. Mr. LOZINSKIY (Russian Federation) (interpretation from Russian): With due respect for the right of any delegation to raise p~ocedural points and make proposals, the delegation of the Russian Federa~ion sees no justification for reconsidering the decision just taken by the General Assembly not to defer consideration of this agenda item. That decision was ad~pted by such an overwhelming majority - 105 to 11 - that there is no chance that now, an hour later, the situation has reversed itself and there has been an accumulation of two thirds of the votes in favour of reconsidering the decision. In our view, the procedural motion before the Assembly is pointless and can serve only to drag out the work of this meeting. We cannot support the motion, and should it be put to the vote, we shall vote against it, as we voted against the earlier motion.

As no other delegation wishes to speak in opposition to the motion, I shall now put to the vote the motion of the United States of America that the Assembly reconsider its decision on the deferral motion submitted by the delegation of Belarus. The motion was rejected by 99 votes to 17, with 35 abstentions.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report A recorded vote has been requested. In this connection, I should like to point out that, since the draft decision before the Assembly on the scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations is a budgetary question, the decision of the Assembly Oll this draft decision is governed by paragraph 2 of Article 18 of the Charter. Thus, for it to be adopted, the draft decision requires a two-thirds majority of those present and voting. We shall therefore proceed accordingly. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Lesotho~ Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, Nicaragua, Niqer, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Yemen, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, New Zealand, Norway, Republic of Moldova, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine Abstaining: Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, Bahamas, Belize, Bhutan, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Dominica, Fiji, Fran.ce, Grenada, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Hungary, Is'rael, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Marshal! Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Saint Lucia, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Trinidad and Tobago There were 104 votes in favour, 16 against, and 34 abstentions. ~ required two-thirds majority haying been obtained, the draft decision was adopted.

I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes. Mr. SIMQTIS (Lithuania): The Lithuanian delegation has repeatedly, in numerous interventions on the subject of scales of assessment during the forty-sixth and forty-seventh sessions, expressed its support for the principle that each State while enjoying the benefits of membership in the United Nations must also fulfil its obligations to the Organization. We have also on several occasions stated our full support for the importance of reaching by consensus agreement on auch a fundamental matter as the equitable distribution of financial obligations of Member States of the United Nations. We deeply regret, however, that the present arrangement outlined in the draft decision upon which the Assembly has just taken action does not, in our view, present a solution that the Lithuanian delegation can support. Therefore, Lithuania voted against the draft decision. The determination of the scale of assessments was one of the first issues that confronted my delegation upon Lithuania's admission to the United Nations. Due to the potential long-term financial implications of this item, it was a matter of great concern to my delegation. I find it extremely unfortunate that we have been compelled to complete the work of two sessions with such disappointing results. Lithuania, havi~g 6merged from foreign occupation~ like the many other n,ewly independent States, hii13 fr()m the start sought from the Committee on Contributions as well as f~om the Fifth Committee a determination of our rate of assessment based upon sovereign national statistics, reliable and verifiable data, and, perhaps most importantly, through a transparent and e~uitable process. In the end, we were unsuccessful in this. It is understandable that the United Nations and its Member States should strive for the greatest financial stability and assurances of the future needs of the international cOfrununity. The international state of affairs, however, often frustrates a~tempts to assure such stability in financial matters. The momentous changes of recent years, which have impacted on, every aspect of world affairs and have brought my delegation to assume its place in the I Organization, must not be ignored or sacrificed in the name of false stability. In the view of my delegation, methods such as those used to determine the equitable distribution of financial obligations must be made more flexible in the future, so that they may better respond to the true dynamic character of the international community. My delegation believes that thi~ process of assessinq Member States' capacity to pay must be conducted in a transparent and objective manner. Expert bodies are entrusted by the broad membership with providing impartial and clear recomme~dations. These technical bodies cannot and must not become an arena for tho pursuit of political goals. When the interests of larger Member States are placed above those of smaller contributors, this constitutes an extremely unfortunate and indeed dangerous precedent for the membership at large. Lithuania reserves the right to continue to seek a review of this rate of assessment recommended by the Committee on Contributions. Furthermore, the "No" vote my delegation has cast today will not change my country's firm readiness to meet its financial obligations. Despite severe economic conditions and the consequences of decades of foreign occupation, we will continue to realize our full potential as Members of the Organization. (Mr. Simutis, Lithuania) I~ conclusion, I should lite to thank sincerely those Member States that have demonstrated unde~standin9 for the substantial concerns my country has raised during the debat6 on this item. We also express our gratitude to those delogations that made every effort to reach what proved to be an elusive consensus OD this matter. Ms, ARYSTANBRKQ~ (KazaKhstan) (interpretation from Russian): The delegation of the Republic of Kazakhstan actively participated in the meetings and consultations of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 111 of the f~rty-s6venth session of the United Nations General Assembly, and we tried to make o~r cont.ribution to achieving consensus OD this complicated issue. We note with satisfaction that all delegations showed that same aspiration, and we also note the high professionalism and sense of responsibility shown by the Permanent Representative of Barbados, Mr. Haycock, during the coordination of infarmal consultations. We therefore regretted the need for a vote on this item of the agenda. During the general debate in the Fifth Committee on the report of the Committee on Contributions (A/47/ll), the delegation of Kazakhstan acknowledged the extraordinary conditions under which the Committee had had to work during its fifty-second session, and we noted the diligent work of the members of the Committee on Contributions and of its Chairman, Ambassador Syed Amjad All. The delegation of the Republic of Kazakhstan feels that in principle, the problem of the assessments of the republics of the former USSR must be resolved in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 70 of the report of the Committee on Contributions, which states that (:)as an unavoidable "The Committee thus views the recommendations transitional step .,,", on the und$rstandinq that the ratee of assessmentreccmmended in the report for the republics of the former USSR may undergo considerable correction on the basis of objective information presented by those States concerning the size of their national incomes, their populations and exchange rates, all of which would reflect their real ability to pay. We also feel that the sOlution of the problem of objectively determining the assessments of States Members of the United Nations, including the republics of the former USSR, lies in methodological improvement, and during the work of the Fifth Committee we repeatedly explained our position on this matter, in particular with regard to elimin~ting the scheme of limits and shortening the statistical base period. For these reasons, the delegation of Kazakhstan, while acknowledging its rate of assessment as recommended by the Committee on Contributions, on the understanding that it will be corrected in accordance with paragraph 70 of that Committee's report, abstained in the vote on the draft decision under agenda item 111 in the wording contained in document A/47/833. Kazakhstan became a Member of the United Nations only recently. We value highly the fundamental principles set out in its Charter. The Republic of Kazakhstan is capable of i.tl1y meeting its obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and will always strive to uphold the interests of the United Nations in the name of the Organization's lofty and noble goals. Mr. HUSI,XD (Norway): On behalf of the five Nordic countries, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, I should like to state that they explained their point of view on the substance of this matter extensively in the Fifth Committee. That point of view was reaffirmed in our negative vote on the draft decision recommended in paragraph 8 of document A/47/833. We abstained in the vote on the motion presented by Belarus, 8 clearly procedural motion. Mr. LOZINSKIY (Russian Federation) (interpretation from Russian): The delegation of the Russian Federation supported the General Assembly·s decision to approve the recommendations of the Committee on Contributions with regard to the rates of assessment of States that were part of the former Soviet Union. We did so because those recommendations had been prepared by an expert body of the United Nations in full accordance with the fundamental principles of the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations and are technically justified. At the same time, as tho Committee itself noted, ..... it had to work within constraints that made the insufficient reflection of present circumstances inevitable" (A/41/11, Rare. 10) and those recommendations are ..... an unavoidable transitional step .. o •• • (ib,ig. ) Indeed, the Russian delegation feels that Russia's assessment and the assessments of the other States which have been mentioned fail to take due account of their true ability to pay because the available statistical data did not adequately reflect the actual situation. We are also taking into account the statement by the Committee on Contributions to the effect that IOIt is envisioned that these insufficiencies will be addressed in the context~ of the next scale ..... (ibid.) The Russian Federation is prepared to cooperate constructively with the Committee on Contributions and with all interested States in providing the information necessary for doinq so. In that connection, we feel that the considerations and recommendations contained in tile draft resolution agreed upon in the Fifth Committee (A/C.5/47/L.22) are useful. Durinq the discussion there were references to "inheriting" the assessments of the Soviet Union, and there were attempts at an arbitrary interpretation of the well-known letter of President Yeltsin of the Russian Federation dated 24 December 1991. In that connection, we wish to state that any "inheritance" by Russia of the rate of assessment of the USSR is out of the question. The rate of assessment of Russia, like those of all States Members of the United Nations, can be established only on the basis of its ability to pay. With regard to Russia's meeting the financial obligations of the former USSR, such obligations naturally could be incurred only while the Soviet Union existed, that is, until the end of 1991, and consequently there is no justification for any attempt to hold Russia liable for financial obligations supposedly applicable to the USSR after the USSR had ceased to exist. Mr. ATAQEKQV (Eyrgyzstan) (int&rpretation from Spanish): On behalf of my delegation, present here in its entirety, I have the honour to express my gratitude for this opportunity to share with the Assembly some of my humble impressions on the procedures of the Fifth Committee and the Committee on Contributions in their meetings on the subject of the scale of assessments for Member States. To begin with, I wish to express my great admiration for the hard work, often done at night, of both Committees, and the human and professional efforts of Ambassador Maycock of Barbados in preparing for submission the preliminary draft resolution on this very difficult issue. My delegation believes that all these efforts were aimed at achieving better conditions also for the Republic of Kyrgyzstan. At the same time, as one of the new delegations present here, we have seen and understood that the discussions in both Committees have been complicated and controversial, and that the two captains have skilfully steered their respective ships through stormy seas. In our humble opinion, the issue of contributions has always been and will always be one of the most vulnerable areas for all States, particularly for those that have emerged from the break-up of the Soviet Union. It is a sensitive point for them, in the light of their widely known economic difficulties. However, we believe that we must look at the entire picture of the question of contributions in the light of the first experience the States of the Commonwealth have had with independence and from the standpoint of the sovereign right of each and everyone of them to seek, within accepted international norms, the most favourable conditions for their countries. We express our sympathy to those States that have decided to vote against the draft resolution. There is no doubt that many other countries in the world are also going through major difficulties, sometimes even worse ones, which is why my delegation expresses its profound sympathy. In the case of our small Republic of Kyrgyzstan, we have cast our sovereign vote in favour of the draft decision contained in document A/47/833 because we believe that this is one of the options available to follow this subject very closely in the immediate future in order to see what can ha done to resolve it in a manner that is acceptable to all. In conclusion, I should like to say that the Government of the Republic of Kyrqyzstan - which spares no effort to continue moving ahead along the road of democracy, for cooperation with the international community and to implement preventive diplomacy, peace and stability in the world, despite the problems of the transitional period, which we need not dwell on - will respect our assessed contribution to the regular budget of our Organization.

I now call on the Rapporteur of the Fifth Committee. Mr. OSELLA (Argentina), Rapporteur of the Fifth Committee (interpretation from Spanish): Before concluding consideration of this agenda item, I should like, in my capacity as Rapporteur, to say that the Fifth Committee has decided to keep this agenda item open for consideration at its resumed session. In this connection, and in accordance with a proposal made by the Chairman of the Committee, the debate and decision on document A/C.5/47/L.2 were deferred. Finally, I should also like to say that the report of the Fifth Committee (A/47/833) that I have submitted contains only those recommendations and decisions that were adopted by the Committee. The debate on all issues and on all political, leyal and technical opinions carried out during the consideration of questions in the Fifth Committee is contained in the summary records of the Committee. of its consideration of agenda item 111. The Assembly will now consider part II of the report of the Fifth Committee (A/47/708/Add.l) on agenda item 112, entitled "Personnel questions". Members will recall tht the Assembly considered part I of the report at its 72nd plenary meeting, on 25 November. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 5 of part 11 of its report. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt the draft decision? The draft decision was adopted.

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 112. The Assembly will now consider the report of the Fifth Committee (A/47/S31) on agenda item 113, entitled "United Nations Common System". The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution of the Fifth Committee contained in paragraph 6 of its report. The draft resolution, "United Nations Common System: report of the International Civil Service Commission", was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 47/216).

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 1131 It was so decided.

The Assembly will now consider the report of the Fifth Committee (A/47/832) on agenda item 124, "Administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of (:. United Nations peace-keeping operations". The Assembly will now take a decision on the two draft resolutions recommended in paragraph 11 of the report of the Fifth Committee. Draft resolution I, i'Establishment of a Peace-keeping Re~erve Fund", was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 47/217)

Draft resolution Il, "Administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of the United Nations peace-keeping operations", was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution 11 was adopted (resolution 47/218).

I now call on the representative of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for an explanation of position before the voting. Mr. RICRARDSQN (United Kingdom): I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Community and its Member States. We are proud and pleased that the the General Assembly has approved by consensus the adoption of draft resolution I, contained in the report of the Fifth Committee (A/47/832). This reso~ution represen~s a pr.gitive resp~nse by the membership to specific proposals put forward by the Secretary-General in his report (A/471277) entitled "An Agenda for Pea.ce". The establishment of a peace-keeping reserve fund should strengthen the Organization's financial capacity to respond to new and increasing requirements. In this connection, we attach particular importance to the provision that the financing of tile Fund shall be without any prejudice to the requirements of the regular bUdget. We would expect no transfer of resources from the general Fund to be effected before its other obligations, inclUding in respect of the existing reserves, have been met in full. This has been a consistent concern of the European Community and its mernber States throughout the negotiations. We appreciate the action by the Government of Japan in helping to identify sources of financing for the Reserve which avoid imposing an additional financial burden on Member States. We also appreciate the generosity of the Governments of Norway and Sweden in allowing the transfer of an additional sum from the United Nations Transition Assistance Group (UNTAG) account. A considerable effort was necessary to bring this endeavour to a speedy and successful conclusion. The European Community and its member States are gratified that by working together with others we have been able to contribute to a productive outcome.

The Assembly has concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 124. We turn now to the report of the Fifth Committee (A/47/835) on agenda item 104, concerning the p~~gramme budget for the biennium 1992-1993. The Assembly w~ll now consider the two draft resolutions and the three draft decisions recommended by the Committee in .its report. The recommendations of the Fifth Committee are contained for the time being in section IV of document A/C.5/47/L.20 and Cor~.l. We shall first take a decision on the two draft resolutions. We first turn to draft resolution I, concerning other questions relating to the programme budget for the biennium 1992-93. The Fifth Committee adopted draft resolution I without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 47/219).

Draft resolution 11 deals with the programme budget for the biennium 1992-1993. The draft resolution was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft resolution 11 was adopted (resolution 47/220).

We shall now turn to the three draft decisions. Draft decision I, "Travel of representatives to the second part of the thirty-third session of the Committee for Programme and Coordination", was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft decision I was adopted. The PRESI.DENT: Draft decision 11, "Staff assessJ1lent", was also adopted by the Fifth Committee without a v~~e. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise? Draft decision 11 was adopted. items, was also adopted without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft decision III was adopted.

The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 104. The Assembly will now consider the report (A/47/834) of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 12, dealing with those chapters of the report of the Economic and Social Council that were allocated to the Fifth Committee. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft decision contained in paragraph 4 of the report of the Fifth Committee. The Fifth Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of that draft decision. May I take it that the Assembly adopts the draft decision? The draft decision was adopted.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of those chapters of the report of the Economic and Social Council that were allocated to the Fifth Committee? It was so decided.

The Assembly will now turn to agenda item 12, "Report of the Economic and Social Council" (A/47/3). Members will recall that chapters I, V (sections C and G), VIII and IX of the report of the Council were assigned to plenary meetings. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to take note of those chapters of the report? It was so decided.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of chapters I, V (sections C and G), VIII and IX of the report of the Economic and Social Council? It was so decided.

We have thus concluded our consideration of all the chapters of the report of the Economic and Social Council. The Assembly will now consider the reports of the Fifth Committee on sub-items (a) to (f) of agenda item 17, "Appointments to fill vacancies in sUbsidiary organs and other appointments". I first invite members to turn their attention to part 11 (A/47/464/Add.l) of the report of the Fifth Committee, on sub-item (a), "Appointment of members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions". May I remind members that the Assembly considered part I of the report at the 11th plenary meeting on 24 September. The Fifth Committee recommends in paragraph 9 of the report that the General Assembly should appoint the following persons as members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 1993: Mr. Gerard Biraud; Mr. Jorge Jose Duhalt; Mr. Tadanori Inomata; Mr. Wolfgang Munch; Mr. Ranjit Rae; and Mr. Yu Mengjia. May I take it that the Assembly appoints those persons? It was so decided.

We come now to parts I (A/47J836) and 11 (AJ47/836/Add.l) of the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 17 (b), "Appointment of members of the Committee on Contributions". In paragraph 6 of part I the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly should appoint the following persons as members of the Committee on Contributions for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 1993: Mr. Tarak Ben Hamida; Mr. Sergio Chapparo Ruiz; Mrs. Norma Goicochea Estenoz; Mr. Peter Gregg; Mr. Mohamed Mahmoud QuId El Ghaouth; and Mr. Dimitri Rallis. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to appoint the persons recommended? It was so decided. ~he PRESIDENT: In paragraph 4 of part II the Fifth Committee recommends that 'the General Assembly should appoint Mr. Atilio Norberto 'Molt~ui as a member of the Committee on Contributions for a one-year term pf .• ,4, office b6ginning on 1 January 1993 • .' . 'May I take it that' it is the wish of the Assembly to appoint the person recommended?' . 'It waS sO deoided. ~ne PRES~: I now invite members to turn their attention to the report (A/4'11837) of the Fifth COIi\a'1\ittee on agenda item 17 (c), "Appointment of a member of the Board of Auditors". In parlilqraph 6 of that report the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Asslambly should appoint the Comptroller and Auditor General of India as a member of the United Nations Board of Auditors for a three-year term of office begil1ning on 1 July 1993. Ma~' I take it that the Assembly wishes to approve that appointment? If: was so decided.

May I now invite members to turn their attention to the report (A/47/838) of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 17 (d), "Confirmation of the appointment of members of the Investments Committee". The Fifth Committee recommends in paragraph 4 of its report that the General Assembly should confirm the appointment by the Secretary-General of the following persons as members of the Investments Committee for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 1993: Mr. Yves Oltramare; Mr. Emmanuel Noi Omahoe; and Mr. Jurgen Reimnitz. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to confirm the appointment of these persons? It was so decided. The PRESmID,«: We now come to the report (A/47/839) of the Fifth Committ®o dealing w~~ the a~~olntment of memberc of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, under agenda item 17 (e)~ In paragraph " of that report the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly should appoint ths'fo11owing persoDs as membe~s of the United Nations Administrative Trib\U1al for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 1993: Mr. Jerome Ackerman and Mr. Francis R. Spain. May I consider that the Assembly appoints those persons? It was so decided.

Lastly, we turn to the repor~ (A/47/840) of the Fifth Committee on. agenda item 17 (f), "Appointment of members of the International Civil Service Commission". I In paragraph 10 of that report the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly should appoint the following persons as members of the International Civil Service Commission: Mr. Humayun Kabir; Mr. Valery F. Keniaykin; Mr. Ernest Rusita; Mr. Missoum Sbih; and Mr. Hario D. Yango. May I take it that the General Assembly appoints these persons? It was so decided.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-items (a) to (f) of agenda item 17? It was so decided.

Following consultations, it is my understanding that consideration of this item may be deferred to the forty-eighth session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to defer consideration of the item and to include it in the provisional agenda of the forty-eighth session? It was so decided.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 41? It was so decided.

The Assembly decided on 18 September 1992 to include this item in the agenda of the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to defer consideration of this item to a later date during this session and to include it in the draft agenda of the forty-eighth session? It was so decided. LAUNCHING OF GLOBAL NEGOTIATIONS ON INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC COOPERATION FOR DEVELOPMENT

Representatives will recall that on 18 September 1992 the Assembly decided to include this item in the agenda of the forty-seventh session. May I take it that it is the Assembly's wish to defer consideration of this item and to include it in the provisional agenda of the forty-eighth session? It was so decided.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 431 It was so decided.

It is my understanding that there is no request to consider this item at the present session. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to defer consideration of this item to the forty-eighth session and to include this item in the provisional agenda of that session? It was so decided.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 447 It was so decided. PROGRAMME OF WORK

I should like to remind members that at the 38th plenary meeting on 14 October, during the debate on agenda item 10, "Report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization", including the report of the Secretary-General entitled "An Agenda for Peace", I suggested that all agenda items directly related to "An Agenda for Peace" remain open pending the conclusion of discussions among Member States on the relevant issues. In view of the fact that discussions relating to "An Agenda for Peace" will continue under agenda item 10, it will not be necessary to retain on the agenda of the current session the other items directly related to the recommendations contained in "An Agenda for Peace" on which action was taken by the Assembly at this session. I therefore propose that we conclude our consideration of those items. The first is agenda item 13, report of the International Court of Justice. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 13? It was so decided.

The next is agenda item 21, cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization of American States. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 211 It was so decided.

Agenda item 24 is next. It is entitled cooperation between the United Nations and the Latin American Economic System. May I take it that it ,is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 241 It was so decided.

We now turn to agenda item 25, cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization of the Islamic Conference. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 251 It was so decided.

The next item is agenda item 27, cooperation between the United Nations and the Organization of African Unity. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 271 It was so decided. the United Nations and the League of Arab States. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item It was so decided.

Lastly we turn to agenda item 140, coordination of the activities of the United Nations and the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 1407 It was so decided.

Apart from organizational matters and items that may have to be considered by operation of the rules of procedure of the Assembly, and bearing in mind the action already taken by the Assembly at its 43rd, 7lst, 72nd, 76th, 8lst, 84th, 9lst, 92nd, 93rd and 94th plenary meetings concerning agenda items 10, 16 (a), 17 (g), 22, 30, 35, 36, 40, 42, 63, 79, 89, 103, 104, 106, 107, 111, 112, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 123; 124, 137, 143, 145, 147 and 152, I should like to propose that the following agenda items remain for consideration during the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly: Item 10, Report of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization; Item 11, Report of the Security Council; Item 16 (a), Election of twelve members of the World Food Council; Item 17 (g), Appointment of members of the Committee on Conferences; Item 17 (h), Appointment of members of the Joint Inspection Unit; Item 17 (i), Confirmation of the appointment of the Secretary-General of the United.Nations Conference on Trade and Development; Item 22, The situation of democracy and human rights in Haiti; Item 28, The situation in Afghanistan and its implications for international peace and security; Item 3D, Question of Palestine; Item 31, Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly; Item 35, The situation in the Middle East; Item 36, The situation in Central America: procedures for the establishment of a firm and lasting peace and progress in fashioning a region of peace, freedom, democracy and development; Item 40, Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Sect~rity Council; Item 42, Armed Israeli aggression against the Iraqi nuclear installations and its grave consequences for the established international system concerning the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and international peace and security; Item 45, Question of Cyprus; Item 46, Consequences of the Iraqi occupation of and aggression against Kuwait; Item 47, Restructuring and revitalization of the United Nations in the economic, social and related fields; Item 63, Review of the implementation of the recommendations and decisions adopted by the General Assembly at its tenth special session; Item 79, Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development; Item 89, Training and research; Item 103, Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations; Item 104, Programme budget for the biennium 1992-1993; Item 106, Current financial crisis of the United Nations; Item 107, Financial emergency of the United Nations; Item 111, Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations; Item 112, Personnel questions; Item 115, Financing of the United Nations peace-keeping forces in the Middle East; Item 116, Financing of the United Nations Iran-Iraq Military Observer Group; Item 117, Financing of the United Nations Angola Verification Mission; Item 118, FinanQing of the United Nations Transition Assistance Group; . . Item 119, Finoncing of the United Nations Observer Gr'oup in Central America; Item 120, Financing of the activities arising from SeQurity Council resolution 687 (1991); Item 121, Financing of the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara; Item 122, Financing of the United Nations Observer Mission in El Salvador; Item 123, Financing of the United Nations Trans~tional Authority in Cambodia; Item 124, Administrative and budgetary aspects of the finanQing of the United Nations peaQe-keeping operations; Item 137, Financing o~ the United Nat10ns Protection ForQe; Item 143, The situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina; Item 145, Financing of the United Nations Operation in Somalia; Item 147, Programme budget for the biennium 1990-1991; and Item 152, Convening of an international conference on Somalia. May I take it that the General Assembly agrees that those items should remain for consideration during the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly? It was so decided. STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

We have thus concluded the main part of the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly. The past few months have once again demonstrated the broad scope of United Nations concerns and have also witnessed significant developments around the world, which form the context for our actions. At the openinq of d1e forty-seventh sel$sion ve were addressed by a total of 167 iepresentatives of Member States, includinq 24 Heads of State, 13 Prime Ministers and 103 Foreiqn Ministers. Many s~eakers used the opportunity to react to the proposals contained in the Secretary-Generales :report, ItAn .r..qenda for Peacelt (A/47/277). Durinq the main part of the current session the Assembly has considered a wide variety of issues and has adopted more than 270 resolutions on major problems confrontinq the world today. Among them are the texts on the conveninq of an international peace conference on Somalia and on the undertakinq of specific actions regardinq the situation in Bosnia and Herzeqovina. While the session has been in proqress the world has witnessed the horrors of famine in Somalia and civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Recent advances in qlobal communications allow vivid images from far-flung places to be brought directly into hundreds of millions more homes today than was possible even a short time ago. These disturbing and :ompellinq around-the-clock broadcasts qraphically depict scenes of human sufferinq, the destruction of a country's infrastructure and precious resources and man's b~utality against his fellow man. This portrait of pain, poverty, disease and the loss of all onees possessions ceaselessly tears at people's hearts, and they, in turn, look to their respective leaders and to the United Nations for solutions. The crisis in Somalia offers evidence that the General Assembly is both obliged and prepared to respond to such appeals. Clearly, one of the more significant implications of the post-cold-war geopolitical realignment presently under way is an increased practical role for the General Assembly in world activities. The deliberations. leading to adoption by the General Assembly of its resolution on the situation in Bosnia and Berzegovina demonstrate the complexity of the problems that confront us. But the countries of the world have assigned'to the United Nations the heavy res~onsibilities of maintaining international peace and security as well as of addressing a wide range of global, regional and local problems • . The United Nations has shown its ability to respond to these challenges by adopting the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction, which was sponsored by some 145 Me~~~r States and is unprecedented in its scope. We have also witnessad new develupments in tb~ dynamics of the relationship between the U~ited Nations and regional organizations. The Main Committees ol the General Assembly ~ave accomplished much substantive work. Without .ezception, they all rei,orted that their debates were characterized by an atmosphere of cooperation.. Even discussions on subjects that. traditionally have been most contentious, such as those involving the Middle East conflict, were marked by a new, more conciliatory tone •. I have high hopes for the post-cold-war peace process, and I believe that this is an area where the Jnited Nations can constructively play an increased role in the future. One area on which the forty-seven~h session ~f the General Assembly has rightly focused its attention is the J.'9ltort of tba Secretary-General, "An Agenda for Peace," which serves as a blueprint fOJ~ the future structuring and activities of the United Nations. A strong consensus now ezists to act on many issues that the report singles out as facing the United Nations. The General Assembly is a unique forum. For nearly half a century it has provided the opportunity for nations to achieve agreement, consensus or simply methods of working together on issues. Despite obstacles and disagreements, at many important historical moments the General Assembly has demonstrated its g value in promoting and then reflecting international opinion. It is time for the General Assembly to do more than promote and reflect the expression of good intp.ntions on the part of its Member States merely by adopting resolutions, although that is a very significant activity. The General Assembly must itself adapt to the changing climate in world diplomacy that has been a central theme of our current session and that will guide future sessions for many years to come. The General Assembly is facing a historic challenge: truly to become a functional world parliament on the basis of the United Nations Charter. Such a body must be empowered with mechanisms for implementing the decisions it takes. The process of increasing effectiveness is closely related to increasing efficiency. We must also act decisively to eliminate duplication in structure and to maximize the impact of our resources. I believe that no other single reform within the United llations system would ultimately be as effective in establishing the legal legitimacy and moral force of the Organization, in creating the conditions for realizing the goals of conflict resolution and preventive diplomacy and in delivering development assistance, technical aid or humanitarian relief, in crisis situations as well as over the long term, wherever and whenever it is required. 1 Assembly that at its current session requested States to The very Genera review the membership structure of the Security Council must also seriously consider its own future. During my tenure as President I intend to engage in consultations with ambassadors and groups on what practical improvements can be instituted as regards the work of the General Assembly. I am confident that, given the same spirit of cooperation that has characterized our deliberations over the past several months, we will Succeed in meeting our objectives as we face the great amount of work that remains through the end of the session, in September 1993. I would like to express my profound gratitude to all members who have sustained and supported me during these first three months of the session. My thanks go first and foremost to the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Gha1i, who is one of the very few individuals about whom it can genuinely be said that he carries the weight of the world upon his shoulders. As he concludes the first year of his term of office it must be said that he has more than earned our respect, admiration and confidence. I especially appreciate the role of the representatives of Member States at this world forum, whose readiness to cooperate with my office helped me so much in the strenuous search for consensus on various issues. I have also been very pleased with the performance of the Vice-Presidents of the Assembly, who made it possible for me to fulfil my role in all its various aspects. My thanks go also to the Chairmen, the Vice-Chairmen and the Rapporteurs of the Main Committees for their excellent work and constructive participation, which contributed significantly to the achievements of this part of the session. I want also to express my appreciation to the Under-Secretary-Genera1 for Political Affairs. Mr. V1adimir Petrovsky, and his staff for their continued support. (The President) Throughout this session I have benefited greatly from the competence and diligence of the staff in New York, including those in the Department of General Assembly Affairs and the Department of Public Information, as well as those whose function it is to produce documents, interpret, translate and provide security. I am particularly grateful to my own staff, whose tireless efforts I cannot help but recognize. As we all know, the United Nations is not just the dedicated staff at Headquarters. The United Nations is very much our personnel in the field. United Nations staff around the world are constantly called upon to do more with less, to adapt to widely differing environments, to confront situations of danger and, at times, even to give up their lives. I wish all of you happy holidays and a peaceful and prosperous year in 1993. The meeting rose at 3.45 p.m.