A/48/PV.79 General Assembly

Members will recall that the General Assembly concluded its debate on this agenda item at its 68th meeting, held 2 December. The Assembly has before it three draft resolutions, issued as documents A/48/L.32, A/48/L.34 and A/48/L.46. I shall call first on the representatives of Norway, the Russian Federation and the United States of America, who will introduce draft resolution A/48/L.32.

I have the privilege and pleasure to introduce draft resolution A/48/L.32, entitled "Middle East peace process". I do this together with the Russian Federation and the United States of America, and on behalf of the 87 additional sponsors listed in document A/48/755 and the following additional sponsors: Albania, Barbados, Botswana, Cape Verde, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Ecuador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Haiti, This record is subject to correction. Corrections should be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned within one week of the date of publication to the Chief of the Verbatim Reporting Section, Room C-178, and incorporated in a copy of the record. When the result of a recorded and/or roll-call vote is followed by an asterisk, see the annex to the record. NEW YORK Madagascar, San Marino, Suriname, Tajikistan and Thailand. This brings the total number of sponsors to 108. It gives me particular pleasure to introduce this draft resolution because it is one that clearly addresses the future - hopefully, a future of peace and security in the Middle East region. The draft resolution welcomes and gives full support to the achievements of the peace process so far. Particular mention is made of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements signed by Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, and the Agreement between Israel and Jordan on the Common Agenda. The draft resolution underlines, however, that this is only the initial step - albeit an important one - in achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Perhaps even more important is the emphasis placed in operative paragraph 4 on the need for achieving rapid progress on the other tracks of the Arab-Israeli negotiations within the peace process initiated in Madrid more than two years ago. Those are, on the one hand, the negotiating track between Israel and Syria, for which a promising opening has been made; and, on the other, the one between Israel and Lebanon. With regard to this latter track, where we hope negotiations will not be far off, Security Council resolution 425 (1978) of 19 March 1978 will be an important point of reference. In this connection, I should like to reaffirm my Government’s commitment to Lebanon’s political independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. An important part of the draft resolution before the Assembly is of course also the call upon Member States to provide economic, financial and technical assistance to the Palestinian people and to States in the region, and to render support for the peace process. Distr. GENERAL A/48/PV.79 6 January 1994 ENGLISH The purpose of this draft resolution is not only to welcome the peace process but also, we hope, to register unanimous support of the United Nations membership for further efforts towards a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. This draft resolution will not make all other resolutions redundant or irrelevant. We are fully aware that many important issues remain to be solved. However, we consider it vitally important that at this critical stage the world community express its support for the peace process through this forum. We therefore commend the draft resolution for unanimous adoption.

The delegation of the Russian Federation, as a co-sponsor of the peace process in the Middle East, would like to join in introducing the draft resolution contained in document A/48/L.32 and support the evaluation given the draft resolution by the representative of Norway. The major objective of the draft resolution is to enhance the achievements made in the peace process in the Middle East and impel the parties to achieve further practical results in all areas of negotiation. The Russian delegation would like to draw attention to the fact that the draft resolution welcomes the convening in Madrid, on 30 October 1991, of the Peace Conference on the Middle East and emphasizes the importance of, and need for, achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in that region. It is an important matter of principle that what was worked out two years ago in the Madrid Conference - that is, the basic parameters which provide in particular for negotiations on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), as well as the format for the peace process - have proved to be vital and practicable. The bilateral talks and also the meetings of the multilateral working groups under the aegis of the co-sponsors - Russia and the United States - are not easy. All the same, the parties to the conflict are slowly but surely making their way towards the achievement of concrete agreements. The most important political event of 1993, which took the negotiations to a qualitatively new level, was the mutual recognition by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel, and the signature of the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles. This first important success in Arab-Israeli negotiations was achieved thanks in large part to the vigorous efforts of the co-sponsors, the United States We now see our principal task as doing everything possible to promote the rapid implementation, without delay, of the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration, and the earliest possible agreement on the other two bilateral negotiating tracks. In that connection, the General Assembly, in paragraph 3 of the draft resolution, would express its full support for the achievements of the peace process thus far, in particular the Declaration of Principles, and the agreement between Israel and Jordan on the Common Agenda, which constitute an important initial step in achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, and would urge all parties to implement agreements reached. No less vital in terms of our search for a comprehensive, lasting settlement is the task of spurring talks between Syria and Israel and between Lebanon and Israel. To achieve success, we obviously require stalwart diplomatic efforts, but the necessary framework has already been defined by the Madrid process. It is well known that Lebanon and Israel are continuing their efforts to reach agreement on a political framework for the settlement of key problems, especially in southern Lebanon. The goals are set out in Security Council resolution 425 (1978), and are supported by the Government of Russia. We wish to express our satisfaction at the fact that the United States Government has invited representatives of the Syrian Arab Republic and Lebanon to Washington for negotiations at the beginning of next month. Those negotiations, plus additional meetings to take place afterwards, will surely energize the entire peace process. We need external material support to ensure Palestinian self-rule. In paragraph 5 of the draft resolution the General Assembly would welcome the results of the International Donors Conference to Support Middle East Peace, convened in Washington, D.C., on 1 October 1993, and the establishment of the high-level United Nations task force to support the economic and social development of the Palestinian people, and would urge Member States to provide economic, financial and technical assistance to the Palestinian people during the interim period. In that connection, the Russian Federation places high value on the outcome of the Washington conference, which determined the scope of and channels for international financial assistance to the Palestinians. That machinery, which is integrated into the peace process, will help achieve an optimal solution and the use of the donated resources to help restore the economy in the Palestinian territories and establish Palestinian self-rule. We are deeply satisfied that delegations at this session of the General Assembly have correctly grasped the new spirit in the Middle East negotiating process: the point is not to dwell on the past, but to look to the future and to work towards that future calmly and constructively, here and now. We are convinced that with the adoption of this constructive, balanced and non-confrontational draft resolution a new page will be opened in the history of United Nations consideration of the situation in the Middle East, enabling the Organization to be more fully included in the achievement of agreements between Israel and the Palestinians, and in the Middle East peace process in general.

The draft resolution (A/48/L.32) we offer today would allow the General Assembly, for the first time, to record its support for the Middle East peace process inaugurated in Madrid two years ago. Its adoption would mean that after decades of division and discord, we in this Assembly are now able to speak with one voice about the imperative of a Middle East peace. By supporting the peace process, the General Assembly would honour the bedrock principles upon which the United Nations Charter resides, while encouraging the Palestinians, Arab States and Israel to continue on the road towards an enduring and comprehensive settlement. We know that violence and rejectionism are easy choices for both Governments and individuals to make. It takes little effort to re-open a scar; it takes time and wisdom to heal one. It is precisely because the path towards a Middle East peace is so rocky and steep that the international support demonstrated by this draft resolution is so urgently required. It is both necessary and appropriate, therefore, that the world should offer its encouragement to the Madrid process, the Israeli-Palestinian Declaration of Principles, the Israeli-Jordan agreed Common Agenda and the process which has followed from those historic commitments. In so Israel and the PLO are working hard to find a formula for implementing the principles signed in Washington on 13 September. Lebanon and Israel are continuing their effort to reach agreement on a political frame of reference dealing with the key issues, especially in southern Lebanon. In that respect, I wish to reaffirm my Government’s commitment to Lebanon’s political independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Those objectives were set forth in Security Council resolution 425 (1978), which my Government supports. My Government has invited representatives of the Governments of the Syrian Arab Republic and Lebanon to Washington for discussions with us early next month. These discussions will be followed by simplified and streamlined talks on all tracks between Arabs and Israelis. Expanded negotiations could then resume within weeks. Taken together, these steps will energize the peace process. In the draft resolution before us it is recognized that peace is the key to the future in the Middle East; that a lasting peace must be comprehensive; and that an agreement must be associated with tangible improvements in people’s lives. My Government continues to support and contribute to international efforts to support the economic and social development of the Palestinian people, and urges economic, financial and technical assistance to States in the region. The United States is proud to have worked with the representatives of Russia, Norway and many other nations in sponsoring this draft resolution. We invite the representatives of all States to join in expressing support for a just and lasting peace. Let us together give the people of the Middle East greater grounds to hope for what President Clinton called in a statement on 13 September "the quiet miracle of a normal life".

I now call on the representative of Indonesia, to introduce draft resolutions A/48/L.34 and A/48/L.46.

It is a distinct honour for me to introduce two draft resolutions under agenda item 34. The first, contained in document A/48/L.34, on Jerusalem, is being introduced on behalf of Afghanistan, Algeria, Egypt, Indonesia, Jordan, Malaysia, Mauritania, The second draft resolution, contained in document A/48/L.46, on the Syrian Golan, is being introduced on behalf of Bahrain, Cuba, Indonesia, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Qatar, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen. With regard to Jerusalem, the document (A/48/L.34) recalls the resolutions adopted by the General Assembly since 1981, which repudiated in unmistakable terms the so-called "Basic Law". Over the years, however, Israel, the occupying Power, has used the provisions of that "law" in its continuing attempts to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem. In this context, Israel has adopted a number of legislative acts and administrative measures intended to gradually annex Jerusalem, which was proclaimed as its capital. Furthermore, the draft resolution also recalls Security Council resolution 478 (1980), which also does not recognize the legality, and hence the applicability, of the "Basic Law". In consequence, the operative part determines that the laws, jurisdiction and administration unilaterally imposed upon Jerusalem are not binding on the international community, as they lack any legal basis and are therefore null and void; it also notes the establishment of diplomatic missions in Jerusalem by some Member States in contravention of resolution 478 (1980); and it deplores their refusal to abide by that resolution and renews its call for the implementation of its provisions. As far as the Syrian Golan is concerned, the draft resolution (A/48/L.46) reaffirms the sacrosanct principle of the inadmissibility of acquisition of territory by force, as well as the applicability of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. In this context, the draft notes that Israel, instead of complying with Security Council resolution 497 (1981), has instead imposed its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the occupied Syrian Golan. Subsequently, the decision by the Knesset on 11 November 1981 to formally annex that Syrian territory cannot but constitute a grave violation not only of that resolution but also of other relevant United Nations resolutions and principles of international law recognized by the community of nations. Undeniably, these ill-advised actions impinging upon the territorial integrity of a State Member of the Organization have ramifications for regional peace and international security. The draft resolution therefore emphasizes the imperative need on the part of Israel to rescind forthwith all of its illegal actions and decisions in full conformity with the Geneva Convention and the relevant resolutions adopted by The sponsors of both draft resolutions sincerely hope that Member States will accord serious consideration to their adoption and thereby enhance the prospects for peace in the region.

I now call on the representative of Belgium, who has asked to speak on the draft resolutions before us on behalf of the European Union.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union. The European Union is pleased that the General Assembly is finally being called upon to give its full support to the Middle East peace process with a view to reaching a just, lasting and comprehensive peace for the entire region. The mutual recognition between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Declaration of Principles of 13 September last are an important first step in that direction. To this end, the European Union confirms its intention to support the peace process by mobilizing the political, economic and financial resources of the Union in a joint action, especially in the areas of international arrangements and of strengthening the democratic process stemming from the Israeli-Palestinian agreement. As the major provider of assistance to the occupied territories, the European Union will work for the speedy, effective and transparent provision of assistance. In the framework of the multilateral talks, the European Union will continue its activity for the consolidation of peace by establishing regional cooperation. We are following with great interest the improvement of the situation in Lebanon, where stability is still fragile, however, for lack of a comprehensive settlement, so long awaited, for the benefit of the entire Middle East region. We continue to urge the complete restoration of the sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and national unity of Lebanon. The European Union would like to recall that for many years now it has been insisting on the full implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978), adopted on 19 March 1978. We encourage all the parties to make progress in bilateral negotiations and to bring them to a successful conclusion.

I now call on the representative of Oman, who will speak on behalf of the Arab States. On behalf of the Group, I wish to declare our full solidarity with Lebanon on the need to implement Security Council resolution 425 (1978) and on the need to refer to that resolution in the draft resolution in document A/48/L.32 on the peace process in the Middle East. The Arab Group has made great efforts, together with the original sponsors of the draft resolution - the United States, the Russian Federation and Norway - to ensure the inclusion in the draft resolution of a reference to resolution 425 (1978), because that resolution was the basis upon which Lebanon entered the peace talks at the Madrid Conference. We regret to inform the Assembly that these attempts of ours were not successful and that our proposal was rejected. That stance has made it impossible to reach consensus on the sponsoring of the draft resolution. The Arab Group was strongly desirous of achieving that consensus as the aim of the draft resolution, in our belief, was to move the peace process forward and to ensure its success. The Arab Group reiterates its resolute support of Lebanon with regard to the need to implement Security Council resolution 425 (1978), without which there can be no just, comprehensive and durable peace in the Middle East, the sort of peace we all aspire after and work for.

France, like the other members of the European Union - on whose behalf the representative of Belgium spoke earlier - welcomed with great satisfaction the recent developments in the situation in the Middle East, in particular the agreement signed in Washington, D.C., on 13 September 1993. That is why from the very outset we associated ourselves with the idea of drafting an additional resolution which, in spirit, would hail these developments. Moreover, my country had hoped that all the resolutions on the Middle East which the General Assembly normally considers might be reviewed and adapted to the new context. In this respect, the assessment of the current situation, though far from negative, could have been improved by reducing the number of these texts or by deleting or merging them, as well as by changing their tone more markedly. Regarding the additional draft resolution itself, we unreservedly support it but have decided not to be a My country has always felt that the United Nations should play a central role in any Middle East settlement. In political terms, this implies in particular that all aspects of the issue should be taken into consideration and that no one should be forgotten. The principles set down in resolution 425 (1978) were included in the Madrid negotiations. They should not be omitted at a crucial moment in the peace process, when Israel is more than ever before prepared to implement this text, its leaders having asserted on several occasions that they have no territorial claims against Lebanon. If it is to endure, any peace settlement must indeed be comprehensive and just. All the countries of the region must be included in such a settlement. Progress has already been achieved in the Israeli-Jordanian negotiations, particularly with the adoption of a common agenda on 14 September. On the other hand, the negotiations with Syria and Lebanon do not seem to have made any headway. For its part, France will fully support the implementation of the Declaration of Principles of 13 September 1993, especially in the area of assistance to the Palestinians in the establishment of interim self-rule. My country hopes to see parallel progress in the other negotiations and will continue to support the negotiating process, in particular by hosting in Paris the Israeli- Palestinian economic group.

We shall now proceed to consider draft resolutions A/48/L.32, A/48/L.34 and A/48/L.46. I shall call on those representatives who wish to speak in explanation of vote before the voting. May I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

As is well known, Lebanon has suffered tremendously as a result of the Arab- Israeli conflict and the absence of peace in the Middle East. By the same token, we have much to gain from the Allow me to explain why my Government is not in a position to support draft resolution A/48/L.32, which makes no mention of Security Council resolution 425 (1978). We shall vote against it for the following reasons. Lebanon agreed to participate in the Madrid Conference and the subsequent rounds of negotiations in Washington, D.C., on the basis of Security Council resolution 425 (1978). This was confirmed by the letter of assurances, dated 18 October 1991, from the Government of the United States to the Government of Lebanon. Subsequently, Lebanon entered the peace process with an open mind and an open heart and participated in a positive and constructive manner. This was done on the clear understanding that the Middle East peace process would provide the framework to convince Israel once and for all to implement Security Council resolution 425 (1978). It should be pointed out that Lebanon was not party to the wars of 1967 and 1973. As a result, neither Security Council resolution 242 (1967) or resolution 338 (1973) nor the "land for peace" formula is applicable to Lebanon. Therefore, Security Council resolution 425 (1978) must be mentioned in this draft resolution on the Middle East peace process if the Assembly is seriously to consider the draft resolution to be a show of support for the Madrid Conference and the subsequent bilateral negotiations with the purpose of achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. After all, it is absurd that Lebanon, an essential participant in the Middle East peace process for more than two years, should find Security Council resolution 425 (1978) omitted from a General Assembly resolution on the Middle East peace process. The Lebanese delegation and the entire Arab Group have worked very hard to impress upon the sponsors of draft resolution A/48/L.32 the imperative of including a reference to Security Council resolution 425 (1978) in the preamble, for the reasons I have mentioned related to Lebanon’s participation in the Madrid Conference and subsequent bilateral negotiations. If the draft resolution is adopted as it stands, it can be misconstrued to mean that Lebanon participated in the Madrid Conference and subsequent negotiations on the basis of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), which is contrary to the facts I have just stated. Unfortunately, however, all our efforts were in vain, because the same Member State that refuses to implement Lebanon had keenly hoped that a resolution on the Middle East peace process could be adopted by consensus, because we believe that the aim of such a resolution is basically to support and enhance the chance for peace. Unfortunately, Lebanon could not give this draft resolution its blessing, for the reasons I have just mentioned. In any case, we are ready to continue, and committed to continuing, the bilateral negotiations until there is a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973) and 425 (1978). We will, however, continue to refrain from entering into multilateral negotiations until there is real progress in the bilateral negotiations. In conclusion, I take this opportunity to appeal to all Members of the United Nations, and in particular the members of the Security Council, to see to it that Security Council resolution 425 (1978) is implemented, for the sake of that precious peace which we all so genuinely desire.

Syria has affirmed its commitment to the achievement of a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East on the basis of international legality, the relevant resolutions of the United Nations and in keeping with the Madrid formula. Syria remains committed to the achievement of that goal. Syria, therefore, cannot agree to a draft resolution on the entire peace process in the Middle East that does not make reference to Security Council resolution 425 (1978), concerning Lebanon, which participated in the Madrid Conference and subsequent bilateral peace talks in Washington on the basis of that resolution.

I should like to announce that Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea-Bissau have become sponsors of draft resolution A/48/L.32. The Assembly will now take decisions on draft resolutions A/48/L.32, A/48/L.34 and A/48/L.46. We shall now begin the voting process. A recorded vote has been requested.

We turn next to draft resolution A/48/L.34, entitled "Jerusalem".

We now turn to draft resolution A/48/L.46, entitled "Syrian Golan". We shall now begin the process. A recorded vote has been requested.

I shall now call on those representatives who wish to explain their votes on the draft resolutions just adopted. May I remind delegations that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

My Government’s views are well known on resolutions that speak conclusively to issues under direct negotiation between parties in the region. The Assembly should support the process of those negotiations in order to allow the parties to resolve their differences directly, without prejudging the outcome of the negotiations. The United States has long maintained that it is essential to pursue a comprehensive and just peace. We are committed to our role as full partner and active intermediary in the Arab-Israeli peace process. Our efforts centre on building a comprehensive, just and lasting peace for all the people of the region. The breakthroughs of this autumn have greatly changed traditional approaches to the Arab-Israeli conflict. At this important moment, we want to avoid focusing on issues or statements that divide and polarize. We want the parties of the region to address their differences at the negotiating table. As has been our practice in the past, the United States abstained in the voting on draft resolution A/48/L.34, concerning Jerusalem. We are convinced that Jerusalem must remain undivided, but that its final status should be decided through negotiations. This text uses unduly harsh language that can only polarize and divide. Instead of addressing the issue in the manner of this resolution, the parties have agreed that Jerusalem will be addressed in the final status negotiations. The United States is committed to the goal of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace settlement, achieved through direct negotiations based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). The actions of the parties in the region demonstrate that the hard work of peacemaking is under way. The parties can succeed through political resolve and in a spirit of give and take. The General Assembly should give its fullest support to this process without trying to prejudge the outcome.

My delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution contained in document A/48/L.32, on the Middle East process. We agree that the resolution rightly stresses the importance of, and the need for, achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. It is our understanding that the resolution takes into account all relevant Security Council resolutions on this matter, including resolutions 425 (1978) and 497 (1981). Regarding the subject of the draft resolution contained in document A/48/L.32, the position of my Government is on record. I should just like to mention that we believe the recent agreements will not lead to the full restoration of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. Moreover, the resolution makes no reference to the withdrawal of occupying forces from Lebanon.

The reasons for my delegation’s vote on draft resolution A/48/L.32 are clear from the preamble and the operative parts of the draft resolution. However, I feel that it is important for me to state how much Peru welcomes the decisions and agreements of September last. We consider that they constitute a significant change in international circumstances. While they are but one step of the process, they are a fundamental one. We also believe that they will have an increasing effect on all the draft resolutions the United Nations will have before it in the future. In addition, we believe that the talks with other countries involved in the Middle East question will also benefit from this process, to the extent that everyone supports it in a cooperative and constructive way.

My delegation voted in favour of the draft resolutions contained in documents A/48/L.34 and A/48/L.46. My delegation wishes to put on record, however, that our voting must not be construed in any way as recognition of those who are occupying the land of Palestine. My delegation abstained from voting on draft resolution A/48/L.32 because we believe that this draft resolution does not include the necessary elements for the achievement of a comprehensive peace in the Middle East. This resolution does not take into consideration the continued occupation by Israelis of south Lebanon and their refusal to withdraw from Lebanon in implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978). We are for peace, peace that is comprehensive and just and that would bring about Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied Arab territories and would guarantee the achievement of all the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people: its right to return to its land to exercise self-determination, and to establish its own independent State in Palestine, with Al-Quds as its capital. The Arab Foreign Ministers considered the aforementioned agreement a step towards the establishment of a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East. However, my delegation considers it unfortunate that the co-sponsors of the draft resolution did not accept the proposal of the Arab Group to include in it a mention of Security Council resolution 425 (1978) so that it would reflect the desire of the international community to achieve a just, comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East. Lebanon’s request that a reference to resolution 425 (1978) be included is a legitimate one because that is the resolution on the basis of which Lebanon started the peace process and engaged in the negotiations that have taken and continue to take place with Israel on the implementation of that very resolution. My delegation wishes to voice its strong support for this legitimate request by Lebanon and for Lebanon’s right to liberate Southern Lebanon from Israeli occupation through the full implementation of Security Council resolution 425 (1978). My delegation also wishes to voice its conviction that a just, permanent and comprehensive peace in the Middle East cannot be established except after a full Israeli withdrawal from all territories occupied since 1967, including Al-Quds, and by the full respect of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and the implementation of all relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions.

Canada is pleased to have joined in the co-sponsorship of the new resolution under item 34, recognizing the recent achievements of the Middle East peace process. We applaud the courageous steps taken by Israel and the Palestinians with the signing of the Declaration of Principles, and by Israel and Jordan with their common agenda. Canada encourages regional parties to continue negotiations to implement these existing agreements and to conclude new ones in order to achieve our goal of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace in the Middle East. We are confident that Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) will come to a mutually acceptable compromise regarding the timing of Israel’s withdrawal from the occupied territories.

We have heard the last speaker in explanation of vote after the vote. I would like to congratulate the Assembly on the adoption of the resolutions before us today. They represent a very important advance in the Middle East peace process. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 34?

Members will recall that the Assembly concluded its debate on this agenda item at its 57th meeting, held on 17 November. The Assembly has before it a draft resolution issued as document A/48/L.19/Rev.1. I call on the representative of the United Republic of Tanzania to introduce the draft resolution.

Before introducing draft resolution A/48/L.19/Rev.1, I should like to make the following correction to the last preambular paragraph, on page 3. The words from "including" to "participation", inclusive, should be replaced by "including document A/48/544 of 26 October 1993". The preambular paragraph will then read as follows: "Taking special note of the request dated 28 April 1993 for the inclusion of the present item in the provisional agenda of the forty-eighth session, and all related documents on the United Nations initiative on opportunity and participation, including document A/48/544 of 26 October 1993". Mr. President, it was a great honour for me to be asked by you to chair the Open-ended Working Group charged In order to facilitate the work of the Working Group, an Open-ended Drafting Group was constituted. It included delegations from Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Finland, Guyana, India, Papua New Guinea and Thailand. Delegations of other interested countries also joined the Drafting Group, which conducted its work in an atmosphere of friendliness, with useful contributions and guidance from the initiator of this resolution, namely, the delegation of Papua New Guinea. The outcome of these consultations is draft resolution A/48/L.19/Rev.1, which was adopted by consensus by the Open-ended Working Group at its second and final meeting. For the record, I would like to point out that the language of operative paragraph 3 takes into account the outcome of discussions on Economic and Social Council resolution 1993/81 of 30 July 1993 and the relevant provisions of General Assembly resolution 47/191 of 22 December 1992. Discussions are now going on in the Council on a proposal for the establishment of a group of experts on development planning. This language leaves room for accommodating the outcome of these discussions. From the outset the Working Group recognized the important contribution which the initiative could make to the ongoing efforts to develop an agenda for development. It therefore devoted considerable attention to ensuring that a proper link was established between the present initiative and an agenda for development. To conclude, allow me to express my profound gratitude to my colleague and friend, Ambassador Renagi Renagi Lohia of Papua New Guinea, for his tireless efforts and flexibility, which ensured that every delegation had an opportunity to participate in the consultations, which enabled this resolution to become a consensus text. I would also like to thank all delegations which participated in the meetings of the Open-ended Working Group and the members of the Drafting Group for making my work so easy and most rewarding. Finally, I would like to thank you, Sir, for giving me the opportunity to preside over the consultations on this very important agenda item on the United Nations initiative on opportunity and participation. I commend draft resolution A/48/L.19/Rev.1 to the Assembly and urge its adoption by consensus. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/48/L.19/Rev.1. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt the draft resolution by consensus?

May I take this opportunity to thank you, Sir, and your Government most sincerely for the support and encouragement that you have given to my delegation and me in developing and promoting this initiative on opportunity and participation to its successful conclusion in the adoption by consensus of resolution A/48/L.19/Rev.1 by the Assembly today. The winds of democratic change have swept the entire globe in recent times, and my Government commends those who have been instrumental in bringing about the exercise of human freedom and human rights by all our peoples throughout the world. Popular and wider political participation in all our countries is giving to individuals, communities and all our countries opportunities that were once not available to them. However, translating democratic freedoms into their social, economic and development realities is still very difficult today. Empowering all our peoples and societies so that they can benefit from development opportunities is most vital in today’s world. We must all join hands through this important consensus to encourage and bring about genuine development from the bottom up, centred around people. My delegation and I are grateful to Mr. Anthony Nyakyi, Permanent Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania and Vice-President of the General Assembly, who brilliantly led the interested parties and delegations to this important consensus on the draft resolution. We would also like to express our sincere gratitude to the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Group of 77, the Organization of African Unity, through the African Group, the European Union, the Group of Western European and Other States, the Association of South-East Asian Nations and the South Pacific Forum and their respective Chairmen or Presidents for their vital contributions to and support for this initiative and the resolution. Accordingly, on behalf of my Government and people, I would like to take this opportunity to say "Thank My Government and our delegation are also grateful to the United Nations and its specialized agencies, especially the United Nations Development Programme, which effectively participated in the development of this initiative on opportunity and participation. My Government requests similar interest and partnership from other United Nations agencies and international and regional organizations in the further development of this initiative. In this regard, we hope that the forthcoming international conferences on the sustainable development of small island developing States, on population and development, and on women, and the World Summit for Social Development will encourage and develop opportunity and participation as a theme for their proceedings. Finally, my Government and our delegation would like to express our special gratitude and appreciation to the sponsors of the resolution on opportunity and participation and to the members of the General Assembly for their generous and genuine support. I wish them all a very merry Christmas and a prosperous 1994, which I hope will see the fruits of this resolution, increase development opportunities and widen the participation of all our peoples and countries.

Let me sincerely thank the Permanent Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania, Mr. Anthony B. Nyakyi, for having undertaken urgent consultations on my behalf, which led to the consensus adoption today of the draft resolution introduced by the representative of Papua New Guinea, whom I also wish to thank for his very ready cooperation. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 151?

Despite the ups and downs in the multi-party negotiations, 1993 has proved to be a decisive turning-point in the process towards the elimination of apartheid and the establishment of a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa. Thanks to the progress that has been made and to the adoption of the 23 September law creating a Transitional Executive Council (TEC) mandated to supervise the establishment of a democratic order in South Africa, the international community was able to grant the request made in person by Mr. Nelson Mandela to lift economic sanctions. The beginning of that Council’s work, on 8 December, also allowed us to lift the oil embargo, and it is our understanding that the South African Parliament is now debating the transitional constitution and will grant the right to vote to all South African adults, which is a vital prerequisite for the elections scheduled for 27 April 1994. Three independent subsidiary bodies of the TEC - the Independent Electoral Commission, the Independent Media Commission and the Independent Broadcasting Authority - will begin their work soon. History will recall the creation of those bodies as milestones in the irreversible process of eliminating apartheid. We commend the political parties and other groupings whose perseverance and patient quest for viable compromise enabled them to overcome the obstacles in their way and to break the deadlock. We appeal to the parties that have eschewed the negotiations to join the camp of reason and moderation and make their contribution to the building of a new South Africa. Despite these encouraging developments, the fragility of the process can be seen in daily events. South Africa must face challenges it can meet only through the voluntary The ongoing political violence is the main obstacle to the advance of democracy in South Africa. That violence is all too well organized, all too quick to act, and all too precise in its choice of victims; it is no mere matter of happenstance or simply a reaction by the people - even in a country where violence remains one of the most visible legacies of the apartheid regime. Nothing will stop it so long as political leaders sustain a harmful climate of mistrust, with mutual accusations of conspiracy and with apologists for racial hatred hoping to perpetuate their privileges and protect their interests. Today, South Africa is at a crossroads. Its political leaders bear a great responsibility. The violence is not insurmountable: political will and transparency could help contain it. The leaders should begin by implementing the measures set out in the National Peace Accord and respecting the code of conduct they endorsed. Opting for an armed solution can lead only to desolation, economic ruin and the death of countless hapless individuals. With the doleful example of neighbouring States in mind, we encourage all races to come together and work together for a common future. My delegation agrees that no country can live in stability and security when social disparities are too blatant. That is an even more menacing notion as it applies to South Africa, where the apartheid regime created far too wide a gap between blacks and whites. The viability of the peace process and the solidity of South Africa’s democratic future largely depend on the priority that will be given to measures and programmes to improve the living conditions of the majority of the population. Lacking social security and salary guarantees and unable even to benefit from such basic technological progress as running water and electricity, that population continues to live in desperate poverty. For more than four decades the United Nations has denounced apartheid and supported the liberation movements; it has provided resources and kept the international community vigilant in the campaign against apartheid. We are pleased to see that it is determined to complete the job. The delegation of Madagascar takes this opportunity to congratulate the Special Committee against Apartheid on its tireless efforts in favour of the dispossessed people of South Africa. Through statements and protests, symposiums, Recently, the Special Committee co-sponsored the Symposium on Political Tolerance in South Africa: Role of Opinion-makers and the Media. Participants laid stress on the decisive role the audio-visual media can play, if impartial, in the preparation and education of voters, especially as certain broadcasters can provide information in local dialects. Broadcasts of that kind would supplement United Nations civic educational programmes, enabling voters to go to the polls with a full knowledge of the facts. Notwithstanding the scope and complexity of the task, the United Nations has responded to the expectations of the South African people by dispatching the United Nations Observer Mission to South African (UNOMSA), which is working in cooperation with observers from the Organization of African Unity (OAU), the Commonwealth and the European Union to create a climate more favourable to political tolerance. We also welcome the fact that the Organization has agreed to the request for electoral assistance made by the provisional authorities in South Africa and plans to take a decision without delay on the role it will play in the electoral process. My delegation subscribes to the recommendation to assist the States that have been victims of the destructive policies once pursued by the apartheid regime, the effects of which persist to this day. We support the appeal for humanitarian, technical and financial assistance to enable those countries to rise again from the ashes of war. Madagascar joins the international community in expressing its warmest congratulations to the Nobel Peace Prize laureates for 1933, President De Klerk and Mr. Mandela. We hope that each and every South African will follow the example of those two outstanding men and succeed, after the eradication of apartheid, in overcoming the existing differences to create a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa.

I find it profoundly gratifying to address the Assembly on the issue of the elimination of apartheid and the establishment of a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa. We have indeed reached a historic juncture. When I addressed this issue at last year’s session of the General Assembly, the situation in South Africa was precarious. Owing to increasing violence the multi-party negotiations had been suspended and there was a real danger that the The negotiations succeeded in setting a date for South Africa’s first-ever non-racial and democratic election and in taking historic decisions on a Transitional Executive Council (TEC), on Independent Electoral and Media Commissions, on an Independent Broadcasting Commission and on an interim constitution for the transitional period. The TEC, formally established just last week, will enable all the people of South Africa to participate in the process of determining the destiny of their country. Japan heartily welcomes each of these developments, and commends all parties for not allowing violence and intimidation to disrupt the negotiations. It was this positive atmosphere that enabled the General Assembly to lift all economic sanctions against South Africa. Its consensus decision was taken with the guidance of Mr. Nelson Mandela and, I might add, with his blessing. Every effort must be made to maintain this momentum. In particular, I should like to stress the importance of ensuring that the elections will be held as scheduled on 27 April 1994 in a free, fair, and peaceful manner. Japan joins the international community in urging all parties, including those that did not participate fully in the multi-party talks, to respect the agreements reached in the negotiations, to reaffirm their commitment to democratic principles, and to participate in the elections. Any outstanding issues must be resolved through negotiations. I should be remiss if I did not comment on the violence that is continuing, sometimes at unprecedented levels. Indeed, between July 1992 and June 1993, violence has claimed more than 3,000 lives and has spread fear and anguish throughout the country. The recent pattern of wanton atrocity suggests that it may be attributed to other than political motives, a source of additional concern to us. My Government calls upon all parties to exercise utmost restraint and to do their best to combat violence wherever and for whatever reason it may occur. The South African authorities should be urged to exercise fully and impartially their primary responsibility of protecting the lives, security and property of all South Africans. Japan commends the work being done by the Secretary-General and the United Nations Observer Mission in South Africa (UNOMSA) in assisting the process of Japan has consistently supported the South African people in their peaceful struggle to attain their fundamental human rights and democratic freedoms. It has seized every opportunity to encourage the parties to participate fully in multi-party talks and to resolve outstanding issues by strictly peaceful means. We will continue to do so. Over the years my Government has also extended, on a bilateral as well as multilateral basis, assistance to the victims of apartheid and to the efforts of the South African people to overcome their serious socio-economic problems, particularly in the areas of education, employment and health. As a member of the Advisory Committee on the United Nations Educational and Training Programme for Southern Africa, for example, Japan has actively contributed to its work and this year contributed $660,000 to its programmes. As a matter of fact, in fiscal year 1993 we allocated approximately $5 million for assistance to the people of South Africa. I should like to conclude my remarks by quoting from the statement which President Nelson Mandela, recipient of the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize, made in this Hall in September of this year. Commenting on the heinous practice of apartheid, he declared: "The historic need to end this crime as speedily and peacefully as possible requires that we, the peoples of the world, should remain as united as we have been and as committed as we have been to the cause of democracy, peace, human dignity and prosperity for all the people of South Africa." Japan wholeheartedly joins the international community in its support of South Africa’s peaceful struggle to achieve these precious goals.

After decades of agony and deprivation suffered by the majority people of South Africa, the recent positive and progressive political developments there are a welcome change. That the abhorrent and despicable policy of apartheid, the forced degradation of man President De Klerk’s announcement on the abolition of apartheid on 2 February 1990 was a turning-point in the history of South Africa. It is indeed commendable that, through three years of patient and sincere negotiations, the majority of parties with diverse political outlooks have been able to achieve consensus on an acceptable democratic form of governance for South Africa in its transition from apartheid. The most significant achievement of these negotiations was the agreement to hold the first-ever democratic elections in South Africa on 27 April 1993. Now, for the first time, all South Africans will have the right to vote on the basis of adult suffrage and to elect candidates of their choice to the various organs of government. Also reflecting positive progress was the agreement on an Independent Electoral Commission and an Independent Media Commission for ensuring free and fair elections, and the enactment into law by the South African parliament on 23 September 1993 of the agreements reached on the establishment of the Transitional Executive Council covering key areas of government. My delegation is happy to note that the Council has already become operational and had its first formal meeting on 8 December 1993. It is also gratifying to note that, for their historic role in all these developments, Mr. Nelson Mandela and President De Klerk have been jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize this year. Although much has been attained which augurs well for the people of South Africa, what seriously concerns us now is the ongoing political violence costing further lives of men, women and innocent children in that country. These human sufferings are indeed unfortunate at a time when all parties concerned were expected to build bridges of good human relations, essential now for the conduct of successful nationwide elections. These developments oblige us to be cautious and not to relax international vigilance on the transition to a democratic and non-racial South Africa. The value of the presence of United Nations and other international observer missions at the South African elections at this crucial phase can hardly be overemphasized. Security Council resolution 772 (1992) is commendable, since with this measure the United Nations, the Organization of African Unity, the Commonwealth and the European Community collectively have more than 100 personnel to monitor the electoral process in South Africa. However, as the election day draws nearer, we believe that it is absolutely necessary We hope that the South Africans, with the support and assistance of the international presence, will be able to create an environment of peace, security and calm by containing the present violence, so that the voters will feel safe and secure enough during the elections to appear and vote at the polling centres. Efforts must therefore begin now, with the South African Government and all parties abiding wholeheartedly by the letter and spirit of the provisions of the National Peace Accord and thereby strengthening the peace structures provided for in the Accord. For its part, the United Nations may wish to consider substantially increasing police and civilian monitors in the period leading up to the elections and to make provisions for continuing the performance of their duties several months thereafter. The United Nations, and particularly the General Assembly, may wish to bring their tremendous good will to bear on the elements inside South Africa that wish to stay outside the multi-party negotiating process there and to encourage them to join the process in the greater interest of every citizen of South Africa, so that the violence that has long stalked them can be banished for ever from their midst. Finally, my delegation would like to commend the role played by the Special Committee against Apartheid in the whole process of creating a non-racist and democratic South Africa. We hope that, as desired by Mr. Thabo Mbeki, Chairperson of the African National Congress, the mandate of that Committee will be extended until a democratically elected government of South Africa has been installed. This will be a fitting finale to the difficult challenge that the international community once undertook to help the cause of the majority South Africans and the anti-apartheid movement through equally difficult and prejudiced times. The United Nations is on the threshold of witnessing in South Africa a victory for all mankind. May it succeed for the benefit of all.

The question before us today is no longer how best to combat the rapidly expiring phenomenon of apartheid, but rather how to dispose of its remnants most effectively and ensure that the period of transition to a democratic, non-racial and post-apartheid South Africa is brought about as harmlessly and peacefully as possible. To that end, we must no longer seek to censure and sanction, but must actively pursue reconciliation and compromise, as is properly reflected in this year’s draft resolutions. We should try to help South Africa hold its This has to be one of the most encouraging and optimistic developments of our age. Of course, the road is fraught with risk and danger. There will no doubt be obstacles, reversals and, unfortunately, violence. But the trend is unmistakably clear and the goal will be inevitably reached, thanks in no small measure to the diligent efforts of the international community and the United Nations. But recognition must be given first and foremost to the heroic sacrifice of generations and millions of South Africans suffering under the yoke of apartheid. Their triumph is a special victory for all Africans. For the people of Israel, who this week are celebrating the festival of Chanukah, commemorating their own historic deliverance from oppression, this is a significant moment at which to express our admiration and offer our congratulations to the people of South Africa as they travel the final miles on the long road to freedom. The signposts on this road have been encouraging. From the landmark release of Nelson Mandela, through the institution of the National Peace Accord and the multi-party negotiations, the dismantling of the legal apartheid structure, the deployment of the United Nations Observer Mission, down to the recent lifting of various sanctions, the adoption of a draft constitution and the establishment of the Transitional Executive Council, we are indeed witnessing the irreversible march to full democracy. The present and continuing labour of nation-building requires extraordinary qualities of vision, leadership and political skill: leadership that can seize on promise and opportunity, inspire faith in followers, control fear and suspicion and overcome competing interests. The process of liberation can release tremendous passion that leads to violence. Ethnic and cultural diversity, while a blessing to any pluralistic society, may also breed distrust and divisiveness in difficult times. Unruly extremists may be tempted to foment disorder and backlash with the intent of subverting political progress. It is times like these that put to the test the leadership and the determination, perseverance and patience of statesmen like President F. W. de Klerk and African National Congress (ANC) President Nelson Mandela, who, together, have rightly earned the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize. The Government and people of Israel have applauded that award and wish these two leaders all success in accomplishing their historic mission. They represent the unshakeable faith that can bridge the racial divide, reconcile Israel stands ready to assist in this great undertaking by helping to prepare members of the disenfranchised majority of South Africans to become fully engaged in the practice of democracy. Twenty black community leaders and activists belonging to the ANC and other representative organizations have recently graduated from a seminar in voter education in Israel, and we hope this will be only a beginning. We shall continue with this crucial task, both bilaterally and in conjunction with the United Nations and the international community. When the time comes, we expect to participate in the dispatch of experts and observers as may be required to assist in the South African electoral process. Yet experience has taught us that social justice and participatory democracy are not achieved through the ballot alone. No political system can truly liberate unless it aspires to become economically viable, raise living standards, adequately house, feed, clothe, educate, provide employment, and respond to the needs of those who expect to become active and equal members of the new nation. To ensure the success of this singular endeavour, more than electoral assistance must be offered: we must help South Africa lay the solid economic foundations which will provide tangible benefits for all its citizens. Over the years, Israel has been contributing its special part by sharing its unique experience and technical know-how with the underprivileged communities of South Africa. We have done this through a variety of educational and training programmes, fellowships and professional courses offered through official channels such as the Division for International Cooperation and other public institutions and organizations. Close to 600 black South African leaders, workers and students have been trained in the areas of science and technology, health, social work, community development and agriculture. Our effort in this respect will continue. Meeting with ANC President Nelson Mandela in New York earlier this session, Israeli Foreign Minister Peres manifested Israel’s interest in promoting greater economic relations with the new South Africa. We are prepared to pursue vigorously all possible avenues of cooperation through the appropriate channels. Though we may also be engaged in cooperative efforts elsewhere, we shall not turn a blind eye to the challenges posed by a new South Africa as it emerges into the light of a new era. In a triumph of common sense and moderation, the adoption of the consensus resolutions on apartheid will signal the evolution of our United Nations away from

Since the end of the forty-seventh session of the General Assembly, some major events in South Africa have accelerated the positive dynamics of an extremely complex political process in that country that should lead to the peaceful elimination of apartheid and the establishment of a democratic, non-racial South Africa. A turning-point in this process occurred in the multilateral negotiations which were resumed in April of this year with the participation of a broad spectrum of political parties and movements. More than half a year of intensive work in that forum has been crowned by a number of agreements that have broken a lengthy deadlock in the process of a domestic political settlement. As a result, the parties have managed to establish a date for the holding of the first universal democratic elections in the history of South Africa - that is, 27 April 1994 - and have achieved agreement with regard to an interim constitution and a draft electoral law which, along with the laws approved by the Parliament of South Africa on transitional structures for power, will become a solid basis for preparing for and holding elections and for a State political system in South Africa for the five-year transitional period. The logical development of these agreements has been the official declaration recently in Pretoria of the beginning of the activities of the Transitional Executive Council, which is responsible in particular for monitoring free and just elections to the constituent assembly. We think that we have every ground to believe that this event represents a true breakthrough in the deepening of democratic reforms in South Africa, as well as the triumph of universal human values and common sense over the anti-human system of apartheid. This success was the result of many years of selfless struggle on the part of the democratic forces of South Africa, headed by the African National Congress (ANC), a struggle that in recent years has been supplemented by the efforts of the reform wing of the leadership of South Africa. In this connection, we should like to pay due tribute to the personal courage, political The positive change in South Africa, demonstrated by the irreversibility of the process of democratization in that country, will undoubtedly be promoted by the energetic efforts of the United Nations as well. The international community as a whole has pursued a consistent policy of eliminating apartheid by peaceful means as soon as possible, and its response to the ever stronger process which is dismantling that shameful system is reflected in the consensus resolutions adopted on this item by the General Assembly. As is well known, at the beginning of October this year, in response to an appeal made by Nelson Mandela in this Hall on 24 September, the General Assembly adopted resolution 48/1, pursuant to which all earlier provisions banning or limiting economic relations with South Africa were abrogated. In connection with the beginning of the activities of the Transitional Executive Council, the mandate of the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa is to be terminated, under draft resolution A/48/L.31/Rev.1. This constructive policy of the United Nations is an acknowledgment of the new political realities which have emerged in that country and its steady progress towards the establishment of a non-racial, democratic society. The expansion of South Africa’s economic, cultural and other relations with the outside world should, we believe, promote stabilization of the situation in the country and strengthen the positive steps taken in relations with countries in the South African region, which have improved in recent times. However, a great deal still remains to be done. There is great concern in our country and throughout the world, over the continued acts of violence in South Africa, which have led to loss of life and are designed essentially to undermine the process of eliminating apartheid by peaceful means. In this connection, we support the appeal in draft resolution A/48/L.29 to the South African authorities to take steps to end the violence and protect the lives, security and property of all South Africans. The main thing, as we see it now, is to strengthen the constructive interaction between the authorities in South Africa, the opposition parties and the transitional bodies for the full dismantling of apartheid and a smooth, non-confrontational transition towards a united, democratic, non-racial South Africa. For this reason, it is extremely important that all parties in South Africa, including those that have not fully taken part in the multi-party negotiations, observe the agreements achieved during them, reassert their dedication to democratic principles, take part in the forthcoming elections and demonstrate their will to conclude negotiations and overcome their differences. For its part, the international community should not slacken its efforts to lend effective assistance and encouragement to the process of far-reaching reforms in South Africa. A positive role in stabilizing the political situation in that country is to be played by United Nations observers, as well as observers from regional organizations such as the European Union, the Organization of African Unity and the Commonwealth. The Russian Federation staunchly advocates the earliest possible final dismantling of apartheid. It opposes any form of racial discrimination and supports the full-fledged guarantee of human rights and South Africa’s peaceful transition to democracy. In order to achieve these noble goals, our country is prepared to cooperate actively with constructive forces in South Africa and with all States and organizations.

The debate this year on agenda item 38 "Elimination of apartheid and establishment of a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa", is different in character from the debates of previous years, as a result of the new reality on the ground which that country is experiencing. The nature of the process that has now begun in South Africa gives reason for optimism. The agreement reached on 18 November this year between the leaders of the parties participating in the Multi-party Negotiating Process on a provisional constitution for the transitional period in South Africa, the creation on 7 December of the Transitional Executive Council, the adoption of the electoral law and the establishment of Independent Electoral and Media Commissions are all steps These are indeed important victories in the struggle waged by the South African people to free itself from the bonds of racism and oppression. They are also important victories for the majority of the members of the international community, since the growing pressure exerted on the apartheid regime also contributed greatly to the change we are welcoming today. We hope that the process will continue at its current pace and will lead, as planned, to free and fair elections on 27 April next, on the principle of "one man, one vote," in which all South Africans can participate on an equal footing without distinction or discrimination based on race, gender or any other cause. Nevertheless, despite the encouraging trends we have noted, until the process has been proved to be irreversible the situation in South Africa will continue to be volatile and filled with uncertainty. The recent upsurge of violence, which has claimed thousands of victims over the past year, is a symptom of the dangers inherent in the South African process. The existence of forces that are not participating in the negotiations or that have shown open hostility towards them is another aspect of the situation that could cause growing difficulties. The violence we observe in South Africa today could not only be prejudicial to the elections scheduled for April 1994, but could also be extremely damaging to the new State that will emerge from that process. The success of the elections requires stability and tranquillity, as will the new Government that the South African people will freely elect, in order to confront the enormous challenges involved in the process of reconstructing the country and reconciling South African society. It is the responsibility of the South African authorities to put an end to the violence, to guarantee the security of all South Africans without distinction and to work tirelessly so that the guilty parties are duly brought to justice. But it is also vital that the United Nations and the organs we have created over the years to support the South African people in its just demands remain vigilant today against any attempts to obstruct the path South Africa has freely chosen, so that the Declaration on Apartheid and its Destructive Consequences in Southern Africa can be fully implemented. It is also essential that the measures proposed by the Secretary-General in his report to the General Assembly be fully carried out and that the relevant organs of Important as was the role of the international community in the process of the elimination of apartheid, important as were the various sanctions imposed on the apartheid regime - most of which have now been eliminated since the historic statement by President Nelson Mandela before the Special Committee against Apartheid on 24 September and the adoption of General Assembly resolution 48/1 - no less important will be the measures that we adopt to assist in the national reconstruction of the new South Africa. Racial inequality, social injustice, discrimination in everyday life - in short, the effects of the policy of apartheid - created over the years a critical situation in the economic and social spheres for the overwhelming majority in South Africa, a situation which must now be corrected. We hope that international cooperation with South Africa to reverse that situation will be forthcoming as soon as the Government of national unity enters into force next year. I do not want to conclude without paying a welldeserved tribute, on behalf of my delegation, to the Special Committee against Apartheid and to the Intergovernmental Group to Monitor the Supply and Shipping of Oil and Petroleum Products to South Africa, and especially to their respective Chairmen, Ambassador Ibrahim Gambari of Nigeria and Ambassador Anthony Nyakyi of Tanzania. Both bodies have played an important role in the activities of this Organization to promote the eradication of apartheid. A very special tribute also goes to the President of the African National Congress, Nelson Mandela, for his decisive and valiant role in fulfilling the objective of creating a united, democratic and non-racial South Africa. The fact that, together with President De Klerk, another important protagonist in this undertaking, he has recently received the Nobel Peace Prize is further proof of the recognition of the international community. Cuba, which has always given its support to the heroic people of South Africa, is gratified at the change that is taking place in South Africa. We hope that the process we are witnessing today will prove to be irreversible and that it will become a guarantee of economic and social development and of justice and equity for all of the South African people.

To study the history of South Africa is to travel the world in just one country. With its ethnic, cultural, geographical and economic features South Africa is a region Every nation has times that are landmarks in its history. For South Africa, 1948 and 1994 will be years to remember - the former because of the institutionalization of the regime of apartheid, with the baneful conditions that it created for the South African majority. When the National Party took power with that platform, it ensured democracy and prosperity for the white minority and segregation and marginality for the black, Asian and mestizo populations. The legal, political, social and economic pillars of apartheid were the underpinning of every aspect of daily life in South Africa. The laws of apartheid told citizens whom to marry, what streets to take, what beaches to visit, what educational and health systems to enjoy - in fact, who to be, in a society divided by the colour of one’s skin. Contrary to 1948, 1994 marks the beginning of a hope of democracy for the entire South African nation, with the formal dismantling of the structures of apartheid. It represents the synthesis of a history and the laying of the foundations for a just future in which all races can develop, contribute to and benefit from the economic potential of South Africa. Thus the agreements and the negotiations are the initial, but not the final, steps in overcoming the obstacles and the challenges of national reconstruction. The low profitability of apartheid and the breakdown of a system which produced enormous profits for a minority at the end of the decade of the 1980s brought about the process of gradual and controlled reform, which was begun by the National Party with President Botha. President Frederik de Klerk consolidated this process and remained faithful to the prospects of change, as the world saw with the release of Nelson Mandela on 11 February 1990, after 27 years of imprisonment for having protested against apartheid. Mr. Mandela and President De Klerk have both shown their commitment and their spirit of conciliation in keeping alive the process of change and renewal in South Africa, for which they were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize on 10 December. The firm will maintained by the two leaders has been necessary in a political climate characterized by the violence caused by the reluctance of certain groups to break with the past, to abandon privileges of race or renounce the power acquired through collaboration with the apartheid regime. The Transitional Executive Council and the democratic elections without racial distinctions for the establishment of a constituent assembly, to be held on 27 April, reflect the centuries-old objective of direct political participation by the South African majority. They also mean the hope of peace and progress for the entire nation, without distinction of race. In this context, the persistence of racial policies adopted by certain groups constitutes a serious threat to the efforts that have been made to lay the foundations for national reconciliation. The road ahead is complex and arduous. If its objectives and goals are to be met, it will be necessary to find lasting solutions to socio-economic problems - solutions that lay the bases for stability, progress and well-being for the entire South African nation. Political violence, extremism, marginality and the economic crisis are consequences of apartheid which it will take a long time for the new South Africa to resolve. In this connection, the international community must participate actively and constructively in the search for solutions to the problems of South Africa. The international community now faces the great responsibility of helping to create well-being and to restore the economic, political and social rights of the South African people. This is no time for reduced efforts. Quite the contrary; there is a need for international solidarity in support of national policies aimed at correcting the odious conditions which apartheid inflicted on 80 per cent of the population. In spite of the important advances made by political leaders, the great challenge belongs to the South African nation. The political leaders can only create the framework for reconciliation. It is the South African nation which must see itself as a multiracial nation without privileges of race - united and democratic. Understanding the depth of the required change of mentality will help to ease resentment, but it is none the less necessary to recall the origins, dynamics and legacy of the apartheid regime so that that history will never be repeated. In line with the requests made by Nelson Mandela on 24 September, Colombia has joined the international community in restoring diplomatic ties, through the Transitional Executive Council, for the transition period and by normalizing its relations with South Africa. Colombia hopes that the spirit of reconciliation will continue to guide the main protagonists of the negotiating process and that it will motivate those who have not yet joined the process to do so, that they might participate in the birth of a new South Africa.

I should like to draw the attention of the General Assembly to document A/48/749, which contains a letter dated 9 December 1993 addressed to the President of the General Assembly by the Permanent Representative of Australia, in his capacity as Chairman of the Preparatory Committee for the Fiftieth Anniversary. In his letter, the Permanent Representative of Australia states that it has been brought to his attention that there is a need for the General Assembly to provide formal authorization for the arrangements made by the Secretary- General to provide Secretariat staff for the work of preparing for the fiftieth anniversary. For this purpose, a draft resolution has been drawn up and will be circulated for consultation and then submitted to the General Assembly for decision. The draft resolution has the support of members of the Bureau of the Preparatory Committee. The Permanent Representative of Australia further states that there is a proposal initiated by the Permanent Representative of Kazakhstan and currently under consultation with a wide range of Member States to the effect that the General Assembly should decide at its current session that there should be convened early in 1995 a short special session of the General Assembly within the ambit of the forty-ninth session. That session would take place as part of the preparations for the fiftieth anniversary of the The Permanent Representative of Australia requests that, in order to enable the General Assembly to consider the two matters mentioned in his letter, the consideration of agenda item 47, entitled "Commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations in 1995", be reopened. Under the circumstances, may I take it that the General Assembly has no objection to reopening consideration of agenda item 47?

I should like to inform members that agenda item 47 will be considered at a later date to be announced in the Journal. The meeting rose at 6.10 p.m. Resolution 48/58 Subsequent to the voting, the delegations of Afghanistan, Belize, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cape Verde and Georgia advised the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. Resolution 48/59 A Subsequent to the voting, the delegations of Afghanistan, Belize and Cape Verde advised the Secretariat that they had intended to vote in favour. Resolution 48/59 B Subsequent to the voting, the delegation of Afghanistan advised the Secretariat that it had intended to vote in favour. __________