A/49/PV.61 General Assembly
The meeting was called to order at 10.50 a.m.
Address by Mr. Leonid Kuchma, President of Ukraine
The Assembly will first hear an address by the President of Ukraine.
Mr. Leonid Kuchma, President of Ukraine, was escorted into the General Assembly Hall.
On behalf of the General Assembly, I have the honour to welcome to the United Nations the President of Ukraine, His Excellency Mr. Leonid Kuchma, and to invite him to address the Assembly.
President Kuchma (spoke in Ukrainian; English text furnished by the delegation): Mr. President, I wish to avail myself of this opportunity to cordially congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the General Assembly. We share the high evaluation of your balanced and, at the same time, dynamic leadership of the work of the forty- ninth session which has already resulted in a number of constructive decisions on a wide range of fundamental issues of world development now confronting the United Nations.
In speaking today from this lofty rostrum I would especially like to emphasize the vital significance of the multidimensional issue of development which actually embodies the driving idea of world civilization.
Indeed, an attempt to formulate a viable agenda for development is at present the highest priority not only for Ukraine but perhaps for all other States Members of the United Nations. The basic objectives that 50 years ago united the founding Members — Ukraine among them — of this unique international forum must constantly be enriched with new common tasks taking into account the radical changes in the historical situation we have recently witnessed. Among such tasks, as we understand them in Ukraine, is ensuring lasting peace and political stability through social and economic reforms and development in the interests of people.
The history of mankind testifies that peace and development, democratization and the humanization of the world community are integral components of the general global process.
Peace and stability are impossible without development, as they cannot exist in societies whose nature provides for violence and disrespect for fundamental human rights. It therefore follows that democracy which is declared but not supported by development is doomed to failure. The inability to ensure the development of a society in all its dimensions inevitably provokes disillusionment in the ideals of democracy and ruins social stability.
In turn, development in the absence of democracy, as history has proved, is of a temporary and limited nature, and in practice it results in the reduction of basic social and economic guarantees primarily for developing
In this context, the ideas expressed in the Secretary- General’s report are the cementing factor for the cornerstone of restructuring the main direction of United Nations activities as stated in previous fundamental documents — “An Agenda for Peace” and “The Disarmament Agenda of the International Community in 1994 and Beyond”.
The nature of the realities of the contemporary world allow us to assert with confidence that the maintenance of international peace and security and the ensuring of sustainable development of all members of the international community are two equivalent aspects of the proud mission of the United Nations. In this regard, discussion as to our Organization’s priorities seem somewhat academic.
Developing this idea in a practical way, I would say that resources expended for assistance towards development and those for activities in the field of maintaining and securing peace in no way compete with each other. The allocation of funds for development today is a preventive measure which allows for the considerable reduction of expenses for possible effective surgical intervention and emergency actions for maintaining peace in the future. In a similar way, peace-keeping activities will undoubtedly contribute to the prevention of the escalation of existing conflicts, which will make available additional resources for development.
An old truth asserts that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. That is why more efforts need to be made to increase the effectiveness of United Nations preventive diplomacy.
While giving due appreciation to the efforts of the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, as well as of the Security Council in this field, I would like to call on them for more intensive application of such methods of preventive diplomacy as fact-finding missions, good offices and goodwill missions, and the sending of special representatives of the Secretary-General to the areas of tension and potential conflicts. In this respect, in our opinion, the proposal to establish a permanently active institution of international mediators which would include the most prominent political and State figures representing countries of all continents, deserves support. Such an institution could also be assigned the function of monitoring
Ukraine has not only declared its adherence to the principles of the United Nations Charter but has also proved with practical actions its ability to bear its burden of responsibility as a member of the international community. This concerns the issue of peace-keeping operations as well. Ukrainian military observers took part in the relevant arrangements in Transnistria. Since July 1992, almost from the very start of the Yugoslav conflict, a Ukrainian contingent has taken part in the United Nations operation in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. We are ready for a further activation and extension of our participation in United Nations peace- keeping arrangements, and we support Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali’s approach to this problem. At the same time, Ukraine is also ready to join in the search for new forms of conflict-prevention activities.
One of the important links between peace and development is the process of arms control and disarmament. The reduction of armaments and armed forces and the elimination of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, unequivocally promote a decrease in the level of military threat, thus creating favourable external conditions for the existence and development of all members of the international community.
Ukraine attaches special importance to participation in this process. It has become the first country in the world to voluntarily completely renounce nuclear weapons. It is assiduously meeting the international commitments it has undertaken and is removing the powerful arsenal of this most dangerous type of weapons of mass destruction from its territory.
However, during the entire period following Ukraine’s achievement of independence, the international community has concentrated its attention primarily on one question: whether Ukraine will become a no-nuclear State or take another option — that of appropriating the nuclear weapons inherited from the Soviet Union as a reliable means of deterrence.
An abstract answer to that question was too simple: to eliminate the weapons and forget about the matter. But we in Ukraine had many other questions, including the following: how to ensure Ukraine’s security; by whom and at what expense the nuclear weapons would be eliminated; how to compensate for the labour and material
This issue was finally solved very recently. On 16 November 1994 the Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada — its Parliament — approved the decision to accede to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). With this step Ukraine has reconfirmed that it is a responsible member of the international community and that it takes into equal account the interests of its own security and the imperatives of security for all.
In taking this historic decision the Parliament of Ukraine was counting on an appropriate response from the world community to our State’s voluntary renunciation of nuclear weapons, something that had never been done before in the history of mankind. Let me remind the Assembly that from the very beginning Ukraine hoped that in response to its initiative to eliminate the nuclear weapons deployed on its territory it would receive adequate support and assistance in meeting its real expenditures for the elimination of these weapons, as well as guarantees of its security from the nuclear States and appropriate compensation for the cost of the nuclear materials contained in the weapons.
Today there is every reason to assert that, in spite of all its economic and political difficulties, Ukraine is acting consistently and, what is most important, in the interests of all mankind. I regret to have to say from this rostrum, however, that our policy has met with no adequate response. So far Ukraine has not obtained the necessary compensation for tactical nuclear warheads already withdrawn, while assistance under the Nunn-Lugar Act is being rendered very slowly and, on the whole, does not meet the terms established. There are still other problems connected with the provision of political security guarantees. This, by the way, is not the only case in which agreements reached have not been properly implemented by our partners.
All of this makes the positions of Ukraine, as a young independent State, politically sound. However, we would like to make sure that those States that linked the provision
It is time for everyone finally to realize that sustainable development is not only necessary for maintaining the existing security systems at the global, regional and national levels, but is also an objective condition for the existence and development of our entire civilization. The issues of development, in all their dimensions, are especially important for Ukraine.
A whole complex of negative factors, both objective and subjective, has led to Ukraine’s now finding itself at a critical stage of its development. The formation of a genuinely independent State and the transition to a democratic society under the rule of law has been impeded by a difficult economic crisis, the aggravation of which is causing a decline in the population’s standard of living. We see the only possible way out of this situation in a radical restructuring of the whole economic mechanism and the successive implementation of market reforms in all spheres of production.
Awareness of the critical nature of the current socio- economic situation in the State has become the determining factor for accelerating, together with experts of the International Monetary Fund, the elaboration of the programme to overcome the crisis and achieve macroeconomic stabilization in Ukraine. The programme of reforms envisages, first of all, liberalization of trade and price policies, privatization of State enterprises through the appropriate comprehensive programme, development of the market economy’s legal basis and provision of financial stability by means of budget-deficit reduction and the implementation of a strict and balanced credit and monetary policy.
In recent years Ukraine has been criticized for the slow pace of its reforms. This is the argument that was used for the failure to give it substantial external assistance. To a certain extent such criticism was fair. At present, radical economic reform is one of the main priorities in the activities of the President and
Ukraine faces a difficult task, not only in overcoming the economic crisis but also in establishing itself as a civilized, democratic European State that is able to provide for the well-being of its people at an appropriate level and to perform its role as one of the guarantors of stability in the region. We cannot fail to realize that, without moral, political, financial and economic assistance from the international community, this cardinal problem is virtually incapable of solution. The vital interests of both Ukraine and the other States Members of the United Nations depend on its being solved.
The development and strengthening of Ukraine as a politically sovereign and economically powerful State is one of the factors that are essential to the preservation of peace and stability on the European continent and in the world at large — important prerequisites of conflict-free development. These realities are gradually being realized in the world, as is demonstrated by the forums held in Naples, Madrid, Washington and Winnipeg.
I must not fail to emphasize that in Winnipeg, Canada, the developed States of the world and the leading financial institutions came together, for the first time in history at a special forum rather than in a general context, to discuss the development problems of a specific country and the potential for assistance. This is an indication of historic changes that have taken place in the international situation and of the search for new, effective responses to the challenges of the time. We hope that the outcome of this meeting will have a significant effect on the progress of reforms, not only in Ukraine but also in other post- Communist countries.
In our activities in the international arena, particularly in the United Nations, we proceed on the basis of the fact that the emergence of a new category of States — those with economies in transition — is an objective reality following the end of the cold war and the disintegration of the Soviet Union.
Our experience proves that transformation in the group of countries that I have mentioned will be a time-consuming process and will require considerable effort. In this context, we welcome the fact that the problems of the transition period are gradually being firmly established in the comprehensive activities of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. Ukraine is determined to proceed along the road of further intensification of the
An integrated international economy based on the principles of market democracy should be a global outcome of the implementation of transformation processes. It is difficult to imagine democratic systems functioning normally without complying with civilized regulations governing external trade.
It is no coincidence that the whole world took such an interest in the debates at the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). For the first time in the context of regional and collective efforts, the great Powers took account of the interests of small and less-developed countries. The negotiations ended with the signing of the Agreement, but it will not be implemented in the immediate future.
Ukraine regards the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) as a development of great importance, and it intends to take steps to join the GATT/WTO system, which we hope will contribute to the development of open, transparent trade and will create additional opportunities to improve the access of export products of countries in a state of transition, including Ukraine, to the world market.
Ukraine is ready to take an active part in the implementation of economic and technical programmes at regional and subregional levels within the framework of the United Nations specialized agencies. We expect that the economic programmes of the United Nations will be oriented more towards States with economies in transition. Furthermore, this group of States has a significant economic infrastructure and considerable scientific and technical potential. If the programmes and projects of the United Nations are implemented in these countries they may have the most immediate positive results. On the other hand, the integration of States in transition into the world economy would promote the expansion of sources of finance for programmes, including those in the developing countries.
I should like to put forward some ideas regarding the challenges that the United Nations faces — ideas whose implementation would more effectively promote sustainable development in the States Members of the Organization.
Changes that the United Nations is currently undergoing have a direct link with the budgetary and financial implications of the Organization’s activities. Without radical reforms in this field, it will hardly be possible to conquer its complicated financial situation. The principle of capacity to pay — a principle that is widely proclaimed — should be implemented fully in a practical manner, both in determining Member States’ assessments in respect of the regular budget and in apportioning the cost of financing United Nations peace-keeping activities. It is now vital that a political decision be taken with regard to these issues.
We cannot ignore the fact that current conflicts arising in various regions of the world have negative political and socio-economic consequences, not only for the countries directly involved but also for neighbouring States.
A specific example is the fact that we are suffering excessive financial losses as a result of our adherence, in good faith, to the United Nations sanctions regime against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Traditional markets have been lost; economic links with Yugoslav partners have been broken; the transportation of goods by one of Europe’s principal waterways — the Danube — has practically been stopped. As a result of the enforcement of sanctions, the economy of Ukraine is losing billions. This is an enormous extra burden for an economy that is in a state of crisis. That is why we again call upon the world community to do everything it can to provide effective assistance to those States that are suffering as a result of their observance of the sanctions. In this regard, we shall do our best to ensure that the General Assembly’s recommendations to international monetary and financial institutions will not continue to be mere words on paper.
Finally, I want to refer to the problem of Chernobyl, which has long been known to everybody. Recently, the word “Chernobyl” has again acquired broad international resonance. This is due partly to the recent decision of the Ukrainian Parliament to continue operating the Chernobyl nuclear-power plant. Account had to be taken not only of the difficult economic situation of our State but also of a
A constructive solution to these problems is possible only through the modernization of the entire power complex of Ukraine, the realization of which is so far beyond our abilities without extensive international support. We think that the issues related to the Chernobyl nuclear power units and their closing should be regarded not as local measures, but as the implementation of the integrated international programme on the Chernobyl disaster and on eliminating its consequences, since Chernobyl, according to ecologists and philosophers, is a problem of global dimensions. In this matter, we are relying on the support of the United Nations.
Next year, the United Nations will be celebrating its fiftieth anniversary. I should like to recall the principal idea of the anniversary celebration “We the peoples of the United Nations ... united for a better world.” For each of us, a better world means sustainable development for all nations, which can be achieved only by the joint efforts of all States through consolidating the principles of equal partnership and mutual respect.
In this connection, we suggest that the possibility be considered of adopting, in the context of the United Nations fiftieth anniversary, a document entitled “Partnership for development”. In this document, we propose in particular to call upon all States, both large and small, to set aside suspicion, mistrust and conflicting claims in the name of sustainable economic development in order to manifest solidarity in the cause of strengthening international security, justice and equality, and to declare the importance of developing real partnership and equal relations in all spheres of international life. Ukraine is ready to put its signature to such an important document.
On behalf of the General Assembly, I wish to thank the President of Ukraine for the statement he has just made. Agenda for development: special plenary meetings at a high level to consider ways of promoting and giving political impetus to an agenda for development (a) Report of the Secretary-General (A/49/665) (b) Note by the President of the General Assembly (A/49/320)
Mr. Leonid Kuchma, President of Ukraine, was escorted from the General Assembly Hall.
The General Assembly will now hold, under agenda item 92, “Agenda for development”, and pursuant to its resolution 48/166 of 21 December 1993, the first of the special plenary meetings at a high level to consider ways of promoting and giving political impetus to an agenda for development.
Members will recall that at its 30th plenary meeting, held on 13 October 1994, the Assembly decided that this agenda item would be considered in special plenary meetings at a high level, and that subsequent negotiations on this item would take place in the Second Committee.
The report of the Secretary-General on an agenda for development has been circulated in document A/49/665. Also in this connection, the Assembly has before it a Note by the President of the General Assembly contained in document A/49/320.
The importance of the debate on the agenda for development, which opens today with the special plenary meetings on this subject, is well known to all. During my inaugural statement, when I undertook my functions as President of the General Assembly, I said that
I also regretted the spread of poverty and the aggravation of the phenomena of exclusion and social injustice, which are not only morally unacceptable but also constitute a growing threat to peace and security.
I noted, finally, that the United Nations, despite certain limitations, remained an irreplaceable institution that could work simultaneously for the implementation of the two interdependent objectives of the building of peace and the pursuit of sustainable development at a global level.
However, as I have often emphasized, this judgement should be somewhat softened, since there are many examples of the United Nations and the bodies of the system demonstrating their readiness to adapt, to innovate and to promote change.
But before opening the discussion, and in order to place it in its proper context, I should like briefly to recall the various stages of our thinking on the drafting of the Agenda for Development.
First, it should be noted that, through its resolution 47/181 of 22 December 1992, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to submit to it, in consultation with Member States, a report on an agenda for development. The Secretary-General submitted a first report on an agenda for development in document A/48/935 of 6 May 1994. This excellent report coherently highlights the five dimensions of development: peace as the foundation for development; the economy as the engine of progress; the environment as the basis for sustainability; social justice as a pillar of society; and democracy as good governance. The report also indicates the need to establish a new framework of international cooperation for development that is stronger and more consistent, in order to enhance the effectiveness of United Nations development activities.
Secondly, the General Assembly in its resolution 48/166 invited its President to promote broad-based discussions and an exchange of views on an agenda for development, on the basis of the report of the Secretary- General on the subject. In implementing this resolution, my predecessor, Ambassador Insanally, skilfully led the World Hearings on Development, whose high quality are acknowledged by everyone. The note by the President of the General Assembly, published in document A/49/320 of 22 August 1994, reports on these World Hearings.
The Hearings had the merit of identifying a number of pivotal issues requiring urgent answers, in particular development financing; the difficulties related to
Thirdly, it should be recalled that the substantive session of the Economic and Social Council engaged in an in-depth analysis of the Agenda for Development last July during its consideration of the Secretary-General’s report on this subject, in document A/48/935.
Fourthly, in paragraph 5 of resolution 48/166, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to submit his recommendations to follow up the consideration of his report at the various levels mentioned. In his last report on the Agenda for Development, in document A/49/665, the Secretary-General submits his recommendations, which are based on the following three objectives: revitalizing international development cooperation, establishing an effective multilateral development system, and ensuring more efficient and effective United Nations development activities.
As to the revitalizing of international cooperation for development, there is a need for action both on national development policies and in the international context. On the national level, the improvement of countries’ macroeconomic performance and the well-being of their people must be reaffirmed as a national priority. The aim of development must be anchored in sustainability and implemented within the framework of a solid partnership between public authorities, the private sector and civilian society. On the international level, extremely relevant comments were made; I focused attention on three of them in particular.
First, I fully share the feeling that such external macroeconomic parameters as access to external markets, debt management, direct investment, capital flows and access to technology must promote the objectives of development. In this context, I believe that the problem of foreign debt should be considered in a new light, taking due account of the real situation of the debtor countries. Similarly, I understand perfectly well that Africa, which is still one of the five priorities for United Nations action, and the least-developed countries must be the subjects of a more concrete and effective commitment on the part of the international community. The specific case of the economies in transition in the former Soviet Union should be properly addressed.
The third point within the international context which I regard as central is that a genuine consensus platform for development is now gradually being built around an ongoing series of United Nations conferences and summits. This new international dynamic, which was marked by the success of the Cairo International Conference on Population and Development and will be enhanced by the Copenhagen World Summit on Social Development in March 1995 and the 1995 Beijing Conference on women and development, is in my view a propitious factor for launching a new North-South dialogue in which the requirements of interdependence will be specifically reflected in the framework of a more rational partnership. In this regard, I cannot but endorse the idea of convening within the General Assembly an international conference on development financing, which could be organized in close cooperation with the Bretton Woods institutions.
Concerning the establishment of an effective multilateral development system, I feel that the recommendations aimed at strengthening the General Assembly’s role both in identifying critical questions on the promotion of an integrated concept of economic and social development and in mobilizing the international community to give concrete form to these objectives are essential for the drafting of a new framework for cooperation for development. Similarly, the reforms planned for the Economic and Social Council will help it better to support multilateral action for economic and social development.
Thirdly, and finally, as to measures to ensure more efficient and effective United Nations development activities, there is simply a need to give a more concrete content to the original mandate of the United Nations in the economic and social spheres. Indeed, it should be pointed out that the mission and responsibilities of the United Nations in the area of development flow directly from the Charter and that the experience acquired over the 50 years of its existence should serve to remind us that the United Nations can be a real force for peace only if it is also a real force for development. It is therefore indispensable today to restore development activities to the centre of United Nations activities.
Finally, I should like to note that a new impetus has been given to the efforts made within the framework of these major international conferences to relaunch international dialogue on development and strengthen the United Nations role in this area. This impetus must be maintained, and it is up to the Member States represented in our General Assembly to give the necessary political directions.
The time has therefore come to move from theory to action, and from compiling and analysing reports to formulating action-oriented policies and seeking a sustainable consensus. Today’s debate should mark the dawn of a new phase in the process of drawing up an Agenda for Development.
On the basis of the wealth of information and proposals in the reports of the Secretary-General, the Hearings held by Ambassador Insanally, the debates in the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and our recent general debate, we must begin to define policies — international and national — and institutional measures to help us advance towards our two fundamental goals: placing development at the top of international priorities and giving the United Nations the role of the driving force for economic and social progress, as intended by the authors of the Charter.
The end of this part of the session is approaching. Although drafting an Agenda for Development must in all probability continue next year, we should begin the process at the speed demanded by the gravity of the problems to be resolved and by the outstanding prospects before us.
I should like to propose that the list of speakers in the debate on this item be closed today at noon.
It was so decided.
I therefore request those representatives wishing to participate in the debate to inscribe their names on the list as soon as possible.
I have the honour and the privilege to speak on behalf of the member countries of the Group of 77 and China, which place legitimate hopes in the exercise our Assembly is launching with this debate. I should like first and foremost to thank the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, for the special interest he has shown in discharging the mandate entrusted to him by resolution 47/181, of 22 December 1992, and for his personal efforts. We should also like to thank all those who helped conceive and draw up the report.
In Article 55 the Charter of the United Nations contains a vision of international economic and social cooperation as a springboard for world peace, by creating the conditions of stability and well-being which are necessary for peaceful and friendly relations among nations.
For almost half a century the East-West confrontation prevented the United Nations from reaching its potential in international cooperation for development; now the unrest and uncertainty resulting from the end of the bipolar structure of international relations have created an urgent need for action to maintain international peace and security and to provide humanitarian assistance.
In a timely and necessary effort to seize the opportunity given by the new and unexpected course taken by post-cold-war international relations, and in an attempt to adapt and enhance the capacity of the United Nations to meet the new challenges of the time, the international community has been provided with an Agenda for Peace. This initiative has undoubtedly served the United Nations well. The Organization’s relevance has been confirmed by some conceptual breakthroughs in the text of the report “An Agenda for Peace”, and its renewed vitality has been demonstrated by some successes in preventive diplomacy and in restoring and consolidating peace.
Given those guidelines, backed by the consensus of the General Assembly, the Secretary-General began his work. The drafting of the report before us led to the adoption of original formulas for multilateral consultations, skilfully organized and led by the President of the forty- eighth session of the General Assembly, Ambassador Samuel Insanally, and the President of the Economic and Social Council, Ambassador Richard Butler. The World Hearings on Development, presided over by Ambassador Insanally, and the high-level debate in the Economic and Social Council, presided over by Ambassador Butler, contributed new ideas that have enriched our thinking about the Agenda for Development. The Group of 77 and China made a high-level political contribution on the occasion of the commemoration of the thirtieth anniversary of the Group, last June, in a Ministerial Declaration stating its views on this future multilateral platform, based on the following ideas.
First, the United Nations, because of its universal character and democratic structure, is the ideal framework for encouraging and targeting international cooperation for development by means of constructive dialogue and expanded efforts to create a true and equitable partnership. Accordingly, the Agenda for Development should provide an opportunity to refocus United Nations action on development problems, thereby remedying the imbalance caused by the attention that has been focused on the Agenda for Peace.
Secondly, the content of the Agenda for Development must be substantive and action-oriented. In other words, it must have clearly defined objectives and propose concrete measures. Priorities have been identified, including, at the national level, renewed growth in third-world countries as the driving force for any endeavour to achieve the well- being of our peoples and, at the international level, improving the external economic environment by removing all constraints on the development of third-world countries.
On a preliminary basis and subject to later review, we are pleased to note that the Secretary-General’s report has paid due attention to some of the concerns expressed by our Group. We have noted with satisfaction the primacy given to development which requires unremitting, long-term, collective and effective action by the international community as a whole as well as by international organizations. The same holds for the recognition of economic growth as a prerequisite for development and the reaffirmation of the responsibility of each State when making its economic choices. At the international level the accent, which was accurately placed on ensuring a favourable, growth-oriented international economic context, is in keeping with the unchanging position of our Group.
These are the guidelines that we note with appreciation and we hope that we will be able to work with them in preparing an agenda for development that will reconcile the hopes of the Members of the Organization as a whole and mark the future course of international cooperation.
We must none the less recognize that we have not found sufficient focus in the report on defining concrete objectives to ensure that international cooperation will truly serve development, particularly the development of third world countries. The report would surely have gained in substance if, as stipulated in General Assembly resolution 47/181, it had referred to the various arrangements and agreements adopted by the international community by consensus, emphasizing the responsibilities of the various partners in the process of cooperation. The demands of international financing for development, a more daring proposal on taking responsibility for the crucial problem of debt, might, beneficially, have been more resolutely addressed.
Moreover, the reaffirmation of the crucial role of the United Nations in developing activities of cooperation for development is most welcome. However, the ideas related to defining the roles of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council, and other intergovernmental agencies, must be approached with due caution with a view to ensuring that the principles of
Finally, the report has emphasized the various areas in which there might be productive cooperation between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions. The proposals that have been included in the report are relevant but they would have gained had they been reinforced so as to ensure true functional complementarity among the various multilateral institutions for development.
The Secretary-General’s report is an important contribution in the preparation of a programme of action for development that would significantly promote action in the Organization as it serves as the framework for harmonizing endeavours of nations to achieve the common ends stipulated in the Charter. As with any human endeavour, the report could be improved upon and does not exhaust the main lines of work and the various ways and means that could be used to promote the well-being of all and the prosperity that should be shared universally. But the report has the merit of showing the way and all persons of good will must now make an effort to shoulder their responsibilities.
On behalf of the Group of 77 and China, I propose that the General Assembly decide at this session to establish a high-level working group open to all delegations. That group would be mandated to consider and enrich the report of the Secretary-General and to develop with the broadest possible agreement an agenda for development that could be adopted solemnly by the General Assembly at a meeting at the appropriate political level. It is our hope that such a result could be achieved early enough to make a distinctive mark on the commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations.
I speak on behalf of the European Union. We would like to thank the Secretary- General for his report “An agenda for development: recommendations”, which we received just a few days ago.
Taking into account the various proposals by the President of the General Assembly, by the Economic and Social Council, by individuals or groups of Member States and by the United Nations system itself, the Secretary- General prepared a brief, concise and pragmatic report which may take us one step forward; nevertheless we would have preferred more operational recommendations. The report is another building-block for a more comprehensive framework to accelerate development, in particular through the United Nations system.
Peace as the foundation, the economy as the engine of progress, the environment as a basis for sustainability, justice as a pillar of society, democracy and good governance — these dimensions are the cornerstones and foundations for development. Respect for human rights, including the right to development, is a prerequisite for actions taken by Governments. An agenda for development must recognize the linkages between these various areas which are interdependent and mutually reinforcing.
Like the Secretary-General, we underline the importance of the role of the United Nations in the field of development and in the promotion of an agenda for development as a necessary complement to the agenda for peace.
Global economic relations are in the process of change. The globalized economy implies that world-wide economic events have internal implications beyond the control of national Governments. Multilateral cooperation in an increasing number of policy areas must therefore be reinforced. Political factors and decisions have a decreasing influence on economic policies which should be based, inter alia, on low inflation, prudent fiscal and monetary management and rapid and effective internal and external economic adjustments.
There is a need to recognize the increasing diversity of the developing world and the increasing disparities between developing countries. Several developing countries are now key actors in the world economy and should play an increased role in development cooperation efforts, in particular in relation to South-South cooperation. There is also a need to recognize the role of new actors in development, including non-governmental actors. The fight against poverty is the centrepiece of development assistance. The agenda for development should pay particular attention to the least developed countries and Africa. Particular problems of countries in transition should also be addressed.
We are in the middle of an ongoing process. Major United Nations conferences — the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, the World Conference on Human Rights, and the International Conference on Population and Development — have
Consultations on financing United Nations operational activities are under way, aimed at putting financing on a more predictable and assured basis. Next year the General Assembly will take up the triennial policy review. We see the discussion on the Agenda for Development, including this new report (A/49/665), as a welcome impetus and timely input towards the further promotion of a process that is already under way.
With regard to the three main chapters of the report, we do not want to go into too many details, but we would like to make the following observations.
The revitalization of international development cooperation demands both national and international action. We would like to see a greater balance between the necessary national and international policies for development. We must remember that, as the report correctly points out, development can succeed only if it is driven by adequate national priorities, capacities and action. In this context, we welcome the affirmation in the Cartagena Commitment that developing countries have the main responsibility for the well-being of their people. International assistance can only be supportive of and never a substitute for national efforts.
When we discuss the Agenda for Development, democracy, human rights and good governance have to play a central role. We consider these elements as factors that determine the success of development efforts. Private- sector involvement and sound domestic economic, social and environmental policies are also important. We would have liked to see in the relevant paragraphs of the report more operational recommendations to developing countries on how to achieve favourable framework conditions for sustainable human development.
International actions promoting global and broad-based trade liberalization are already under way. The conclusion of the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations and the creation of a new international organization, the World Trade Organization, has forged an international consensus
The same is true for the international handling of the debt problems of individual countries. The official debt of the majority of poorest countries has been cancelled. Efforts further to improve international debt strategy are to be made. Nevertheless, much still remains to be done.
Official development assistance is an important factor in supporting development, in particular in the least developed countries. However, we would have expected to see a greater focus on private financial flows, which have substantially increased in recent years to a growing number of countries that are implementing economic reforms. We should also examine ways and means to encourage private flows to least developed countries, in particular in Africa.
We are carefully studying the various recommendations for an effective multilateral development system which might be in a better position to cope with increased and global interdependence. The European Union has always been committed to the revitalization of the Economic and Social Council to enable it to fulfil the role assigned to it under the Charter. General Assembly resolution 48/162 was an important step towards this objective. We are ready to participate in the consideration of further improvements, but we should be aware that institutional reorganizations are not a magic wand for solving international, regional and national economic and social development problems. Nevertheless, adjustments are necessary.
The European Union shares the commitment of the Secretary-General to the view that development must be human-centred, equitable and socially and environmentally sustainable and that the empowerment of women, the eradication of poverty, preventive development and the development of Africa, the poorest and neediest continent, must be priority goals for the system.
Strong and effective coordination, the elimination of duplication and fragmentation and a better linking of emergency relief and development, as well as the rapid and more aggressive implementation of resolution 47/199 on improving operational activities, are some of the main tasks ahead, in particular for increasing the performance of the system in the field.
The European Union shares the Secretary-General’s view that the fiftieth session of the General Assembly will provide a fitting opportunity to decide on an agenda for the coming years, one that may ultimately become a new and adjusted framework for a new and improved partnership in development cooperation based on common interests and mutual needs and commitments and on a changed global economic and political environment.
I should like at the outset to thank you, Mr. President, for your introductory remarks and for your reference to your opening statement to the General Assembly, in which you so clearly signalled the importance of the discussion we are beginning today. I should also like to express appreciation for the work that has been done to promote this initiative, whose importance has been demonstrated at every political level since its very timely introduction by the Government of Brazil in 1992.
I should especially like to thank the Secretary-General for his two reports on the item and to express our appreciation for the report of the President of the forty- eighth session of the General Assembly, our friend Ambassador Insanally. The world-wide consultations he held initiated a method for establishing communications between the United Nations and the world at large that has great possibilities. His report, which is very creative and imaginative, is a tremendous contribution to the discussions we are beginning today.
I should also like to thank Ambassador Butler for the high-level discussions in the Economic and Social Council and the results they yielded.
Lastly, I should like to express support for the statement just made by Ambassador Lamamra on behalf of the Group of 77, in particular the reference to the document produced by the Ministerial Meeting on the occasion of the Group’s thirtieth anniversary.
We consider this political and conceptual exercise to be timely and indispensable. It is timely because it is
For almost 50 years, this forum has devoted much of its energy to the search for a climate of security in the midst of conflicts related to decolonization, economic recovery, the arms race, the struggle against apartheid, and the threat of nuclear destruction. And, as we all are aware, not all of these problems have been solved.
The radical political changes that have taken place in the contemporary world and the acknowledged global dimension of the economy and of social problems bring us to the second stage of peace-building. In this new stage, the same or greater priority must be accorded to development as was given in the first stage to the neutralization of armed conflicts.
Why should this priority be accorded to development? Because, basically, there is no chance — absolutely none — for peace and stability in the twenty- first century if underdevelopment is not eradicated from the face of the Earth. Democracy is not ethically compatible with widespread poverty. An open, competitive economy is weakened by long unemployment lines; social harmony cannot be maintained in the midst of uncertainty and insecurity.
Can we change this situation? Chile believes that we can, but to do so we must start with a basic assumption: that the problem of the agenda for development is far more than a question of the wealthy giving assistance to the poor. It is fundamentally a shared problem. Insecurity is an interdependent phenomenon, and our problem, honestly speaking, is that this real interdependence in a globalized world has not fully been recognized. In the developed world, there prevails a view of the problem of assistance for development that is related to aid. There is an increase in what has been termed “development fatigue” — a kind of weariness with a question that has found no solution. Also on the rise are extremist reactions, blaming the developing countries themselves for the ills besetting developed societies — whether these ills are called migration, or cheap raw
I think that, in order for this discussion to be practical, it would be useful to make clear that international cooperation for development is not an option but an imperative — a sine qua non. Development fatigue is an impossibility. There is no other option than to face the problem, because the countries of the North will never know true security if the peoples and countries of the South lack such security.
We in the developing world must fully acknowledge that we are moving quickly towards world markets, in which the rules and conditions of the game are different from those of the past. It is a different world from that of 50 years ago, different even from that of 10 years ago. But we still have very defensive attitudes and little ability to meet these new challenges aggressively. Three decisive factors should guide the future efforts of the United Nations to ensure development, as the major goal of the coming decades.
First, it is clear that human beings are at the centre of global activity and that concern for their rights and well- being is becoming increasingly important in our multilateral world. The convening of conferences on the questions of children, human rights, the environment, population, women and human settlements and the social summit are proof of the course that has been taken. These conferences represent an attempt to define the agenda of the United Nations for the twenty-first century. Taken as a whole, they clearly show the need to look at this aspect of the Agenda for Development that we are discussing today. They also imply the growing presence of civil society as a major player in international relations. We must become accustomed to this new power and ensure that we are able to respond to the new challenges facing the system.
Secondly, the building of a lasting peace presupposes advances in development. In the words of the Secretary- General, development must be about improvement of human well-being; removal of hunger, disease and ignorance; and productive employment for all. To this end, growth is the sine qua non.
There is a clear consensus today on the fact that peace cannot be consolidated unless true development for all is achieved. However, this is not always the existing perception. Usually when one looks at the work of the United Nations, particularly from outside, what one sees is the tremendous work and activity of the Security Council.
That is the inextricable link between the agenda for development and peace, because peace does not consist only in solving the problems we are making every effort to deal with in the Security Council. Peace is what we are discussing here today. We have not yet been able fully to accept this profound interdependence.
A third factor is the change on the global political scene, which has created excellent conditions for exerting all multilateral efforts possible to achieve development. In the light of these unpredictable changes, we have repeatedly agreed, in a number of declarations, that a stage of consensus has indeed begun, and this has given rise to new hope and created new expectations of being able to overcome the problems of underdevelopment.
We have many intellectual contributions to make to the agenda for development. We have an excellent political framework for action. We have a climate for consensus. Now that the traditional North-South confrontation has been replaced by the concept of assistance for development, we have an unprecedented historical opportunity to discuss this item thoroughly, and especially to make progress on it while there is a favourable climate. The growing consensus on the scope of the concept of sustainable development, including its political, economic, social and ecological dimensions, shows that development is an integral process and therefore must be considered in all its aspects and as an essentially joint undertaking.
In this context, the ethical considerations involved in the problems of development must also assume greater importance. Accordingly, the process must be accelerated until it is completed, and the efforts to integrate the various approaches and harmonize the broad range of interests must be intensified.
However, if we are to succeed in this task our own peoples must understand and support what is being negotiated here. One of the growing problems facing the Organization is that our communities feel that they do not know what is being discussed here. Political parties, Parliaments, the major protagonists in our societies — managers, religious leaders, trade unionists, grass-roots movements and other emanations of real society — are not connected closely enough to our daily tasks.
When we say here that we must begin political negotiations — that is among Governments — on the Agenda for Development, what we are really saying is that we are going to begin negotiations among representatives of States and the Ministers concerned. That is only natural because this is an intergovernmental organization. But the fact is that the national political will — this phrase that is used so frequently in our statements — depends upon other elements that do not feel particularly connected to the activities taking place here.
The great challenge of our discussion of the Agenda for Development is precisely to bring our decisions closer to the daily realities in our countries. We must listen but we must also give guidance. I believe that we must be proud of what the United Nations has already done in both areas. However, we must know how to disseminate this information better. If the civilian and political societies in all of our countries were to take on the discussion of all aspects of the Agenda for Development, our decisions would be better informed and more representative and, above all, would receive far greater political support. There would be greater visibility and, as a result, perhaps even more criticism. But the visibility of what we do in this great Hall of international understanding contributes much more to the strengthening of the United Nations than the lack of bonding that currently exists. If there is criticism, that will only reinforce what we do here, not weaken it.
Finally, we believe that the conclusion of our work could coincide with the commemoration of the fiftieth
The delegations of the Central American isthmus — Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama and Honduras — wish to speak today on agenda item 92, entitled “Agenda for development”. In this context, we reiterate our support for the entire Ministerial Declaration of the Group of 77 which was adopted on 30 September 1994. We would also like to congratulate the Secretary-General on his excellent, well- conceived reports in documents A/48/935 and A/49/665, submitted in compliance with resolution 47/181, adopted by the General Assembly on 22 December 1992, at its forty-seventh session.
This year, as Member States are preparing to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations, we must channel our efforts to dealing with the problems that beset the peoples we represent here. Hence, we entirely agree with the five pillars set out by the Secretary-General as general recommendations to encourage development: peace, the economy, protection of the environment, social justice and democracy.
Development, although an aspiration of the community of nations, was not its highest priority in past decades. We are all aware of the international circumstances that were the focus of United Nations efforts to establish peace and security. Now, as new events occur throughout the world, there is an urgent need to strike a balance in international relations, which are defined not only by conflicts, including political conflicts, but also by development, whose aim is to achieve a higher level of well-being for mankind through economic and social transformation. To this end the developing countries’ rate of economic growth must be accelerated to provide more sources of employment, alleviate poverty and improve income distribution by ensuring greater equality of opportunity. We would remind the Assembly that if poverty continues to spread and if the well-being of human beings is ignored, social tensions will place at risk the relative stability that exists today in some regions of the world.
As developing countries, the countries of Central America have implemented wide-ranging programmes of economic adjustment directed towards ensuring that world markets are opened to their trade. But, if there is not a reciprocal opening of the markets of the South and the
These problems were discussed and some proposals were made on the institutional aspects of an Agenda for Development at the last substantive session of the high- level segment of the Economic and Social Council and during the World Hearings on Development. In this context, Central America is convinced that there must be a closer working relationship between the Bretton Woods institutions, the United Nations and its specialized agencies.
The peoples of Central America have chosen the quest for just and lasting peace in the region. Hence, our Governments see the democratization of their processes as the solution to financial and macroeconomic imbalances and as a way to partially alleviate poverty, thus laying the foundations of a permanent peace.
Central America is grateful for the international cooperation that, added to the efforts of our peoples and Governments, made it possible and continue to make it possible for us to pass through the main stages outlined by the Secretary-General in “An Agenda for Peace”. Now, only with a strong commitment from our Governments and all the sectors of civilian society, in addition to the solidarity of the international community, will we be able to promote peace through a genuine programme of development. In this context, I should like to cite the declaration made by the Central American Presidents at the XIV Summit of the subregion, held in Guatemala on 28 and 29 October 1993:
“Central America offers the necessary conditions for establishing a relationship of interdependence between An Agenda for Peace' and An agenda for development'. Our efforts, together with a concrete expression of international solidarity, will enable us to make our region a model of conflict resolution that consolidates peace and democracy through integrated development.”
On the subject of external debt, Central America endorses what the Secretary-General says in his report:
“The international community must find a solution for an issue that has bedeviled development efforts for two decades: debt.” (A/49/665, para. 26)
“Reforming countries in debt crisis require an adequate and permanent reduction in the stock of debt”. (Ibid., para. 27)
Barely two years after the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the peoples and the Governments of Central America, keeping alive the spirit of Agenda 21, met in Managua, Nicaragua, on 12 and 13 October this year for the sole purpose of building a model for development in the political, social, cultural and environmental areas to guarantee sustainable development for the region.
In view of the total fulfilment of the agreements contained in Agenda 21, I should like to refer to the concept of sustainable development adopted at that ecological Summit, which is being applied to the Central American region in the context of its peculiarities and its particular characteristics:
“Sustainable development is a progressive process of change in the quality of life of the human person. It makes the human person the centre and primary subject of development by means of economic growth with social equity and the transformation of means of production and patterns of consumption, and it sustains environmental balance and the vital support system of the region. This process implies regional, national and local respect for ethnic and cultural diversity, as well as the strengthening of the full participation of citizens, in peaceful coexistence and harmony with nature, without jeopardizing the quality of life of future generations.”
In order to find solutions to the complex and grave problems facing the region, the Presidents of the Central American region drew up a programme for restoration of peace and internal reconciliation. The programme was put into effect almost from the moment the Esquipulas agreements were signed. The agreements have been in essence fulfilled, except in relation to peace in Guatemala, which is still under negotiation.
The decade of the 1980s was characterized in our region by excessive military expenditures. In this context, we agree fully with the comments in paragraph 33 of the Secretary-General’s report, especially the statement that,
Today Central America is still haunted by the ghost of that decade. Hundreds of thousands of land-mines are still scattered over Central American land. We endorse the Secretary-General’s statement that
“More extensive comparative analysis of military and social budgets must be undertaken. Land-mines are a major obstacle to development, shattering lives and removing land from productive use. An outright world-wide ban on the production and transfer of land-mines and their components should be declared.” (ibid.)
A new phase is being inaugurated with the ordering of the region’s priorities at the XV presidential Summit, held in Guácimo, Costa Rica, on 11 and 12 August this year. The prioritization has taken concrete form in the Alliance for Sustainable Development and the signing of the environmental commitments in Nicaragua, which were consolidated in the International Conference for Peace and Development in Central America. There a cycle of dialogue was completed which opens a new phase between the Governments and between Governments and the various sectors of Central American society, integrationist organizations and the international community. This relationship will make possible a greater understanding of the problems we face as we approach the next century, so that we will be able to redefine international cooperation and solidarity in order to meet the requirements and aspirations of sustainable development that are identified in the Tegucigalpa Declaration and in “Commitments for Peace and Development”, both of which were adopted at that Conference and signed in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, on 25 October this year.
Allow me to re-emphasize the continuous expansion of our nations’ efforts to promote peace, democracy, social justice and, above all, the environment we live in, so that our peoples can live in the conditions of dignity that, as human beings, they deserve.
In conclusion, I would like to quote the writer and philosopher Bourke Cockran, who said,
“There is enough for everyone. The Earth is a generous mother; she will provide food in abundance for her children if they till her soil with justice and peace.”
Just under two years ago the General Assembly adopted, by consensus, a resolution whose brevity masks its significance. Through resolution 47/181, the Members requested the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros- Ghali, to present his vision on the role of the United Nations in the field of development through a proposal for an agenda for development. This initiative demonstrates unequivocally that the Members of the Organization are convinced of the need to seriously rethink the concepts of international cooperation for development and the part to be played by the United Nation.
Two years later a remarkable amount of work has been put into this common endeavour. First, we must recognize the efforts of the Secretary-General, who has undertaken the daunting task that we assigned to him. He has done so through a process of interaction with States and other relevant actors.
This extensive process involved, initially, eliciting the views of Governments. Then a preliminary report was presented to the General Assembly at its forty-eighth session, and further feedback from the Members led to a comprehensive diagnosis of the underlying infrastructure requirements for development and of the role of the United Nations in development matters.
On that basis, we engaged in two highly productive debates in the course of the current year — the World Hearings on Development and the debates of the high- level segment of the Economic and Social Council. The Hearings, which were organized by Ambassador Samuel
The high-level segment of the Economic and Social Council provided another welcome opportunity for an in- depth exchange of views. We should like to express our appreciation to Ambassador Richard Butler, who, as President of the Council, gave focus and direction to our deliberations, striving always to promote a genuine dialogue among Member States.
Last week the Secretary-General, opening the final phase of this conceptual debate and exchange of views, presented us with an additional report on an agenda for development. This report contains a series of recommendations. As it was issued so recently, it is impossible to make detailed comments at this stage. However, a preliminary analysis indicates that it provides important new elements for our debate. None the less, obvious advances in its more descriptive segment were not fully matched by similar improvements in the more action- oriented segments.
At this stage of our deliberations I should like to concentrate on several elements. Before proceeding, however, I wish to express Brazil’s support for the ministerial declaration adopted by the Group of 77 on 30 September last and for the statement made today by Ambassador Lamamra of Algeria on behalf of that Group. The views and proposals on an agenda for development that have been put forward today reveal a constructive and broad-minded approach, and we shall certainly keep as our common goal the strengthening of the role of the United Nations in the social and economic spheres.
One of the underlying motives for the launching of the initiative of an agenda for development was the prevailing perception that the United Nations was being increasingly marginalized from the central issues on the international economic agenda. Such marginalization derived from the view of several States that these central issues should be left to the appropriate sectoral international organizations and from a tendency within the United Nations to concentrate on peace and security matters, on one hand and — in the economic arena — specifically on operational activities and humanitarian assistance, on the other hand.
“To achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character”
and, in paragraph 4, states that the United Nations is
“To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends”.
These provisions clearly indicate that the United Nations is a forum in which the international community should seek to establish consensus on the means of promoting within the international economic environment conditions that will enable every nation to secure economic and social progress for its people. This is evidently a much wider mandate than the provision of technical and financial support to developing countries — support which, though essential for many countries, will never constitute a complete, or even a comprehensive, framework for an environment in which development can take place.
In his introductory statement to the Second Committee during its general debate, Under-Secretary- General Nitin Desai referred to a recent analysis undertaken by The Economist with respect to international economic relations. This analysis outlined the vastly altered conditions of a world economy in which the economies of industrial countries are now much more dependent on trade and investment links with developing countries.
The study argues that issues such as improved market access, debt rescheduling and reduction and increased financial flows can no longer be seen from a perspective of concessions granted by the rich to the poor — that these must be regarded as a sound investment for a more dynamic world economy that is in the interests of all. It is this perception of the phenomenon of “globalization” that should guide us in the elaboration of an agenda for development as a new framework for international cooperation for development.
It is quite evident that the United Nations cannot and should not take over the functions of other international
Earlier this year my delegation circulated a paper entitled “A Brazilian Approach to an Agenda for Development: a Contribution to the Current Debate at the United Nations”. This paper contains specific views on the essential elements of an agenda for development. I do not intend to restate those views today, but I should like to reaffirm our understanding that an agenda for development, if it is truly to reflect a new consensus on international cooperation for development, must include at its core the so-called hard economic issues of trade, economic regionalism, economic multilateralism, financial flows and the transfer of technology.
These areas have been included in the debates and reports on an agenda for development I have referred to earlier. This process has, however, been essentially one of an exploratory nature. Time is now ripe for beginning a new stage in our deliberations, one that will seek to give, on the basis of the valuable input thus far generated, concrete expression to this new vision for a genuine international cooperation. In this respect, my delegation is of the view that we must avoid artificial deadlines for such an ambitious task. It seems advisable that we should seek to establish an appropriate intergovernmental mechanism, as was mentioned this morning by Mr. Lamamra of Algeria, to analyse the wealth of concepts, ideas and proposals emanating from the exploratory phase, which, along with the consensus agreements and commitments adopted in the context of the General Assembly and United Nations Conferences, would provide the substantive basis for the elaboration of an agenda for development.
A tentative programme of work for such a mechanism could include initially the identification of principal areas to be addressed within an agenda for development. This, in the opinion of my delegation, is the main task at hand. Subsequently, it should focus more specifically on the role and objectives of the United Nations in each of these fields,
The Minister of External Relations of Brazil, Mr. Celso Amorim, in his statement at the opening of the general debate of this session of the General Assembly, proposed that a United Nations conference on development be convened, at an appropriate time, with a view to promoting, in a wider conceptual framework, the integration into one coherent synthesis of the initiatives and programmes agreed to in the General Assembly and in sectoral Conferences.
This proposal is inherently linked to that of an agenda for development and aims at strengthening this process. My delegation considers that such a conference would be the appropriate forum for the adoption of an instrument with the scope and far-reaching implications of an agenda for development. It is the hope and expectation of my delegation that this proposal will be given due consideration by the intergovernmental mechanism that will continue the process of elaborating an agenda for development.
I now call on Mr. Clement Rohee, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Guyana, who will speak on behalf of the 12 States members of the Caribbean Community, and Suriname.
Mr. President, it is a distinct honour for me to greet you and to address this high-level meeting on agenda item 92, “Agenda for Development”. I do so in the name of the 12 States members of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) that are Members of the United Nations - Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Jamaica, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Trinidad and Tobago and my country Guyana. I also speak on behalf of Suriname.
We very much welcome your introduction to the debate on this item, and are happy to see you presiding over our current deliberations.
Our appreciation is extended to the Secretary- General for his efforts in placing before us document A/49/665. Our delegations are also united in their appreciation of and support for the views expressed by the representative of Algeria, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77.
Indeed, the subject in its present incarnation has established a history of its own. Many views have been expressed directly to the Secretary-General, and other documents were issued in response to two resolutions of this Assembly. Earlier this year we witnessed the convening of the World Hearings on Development and the high-level debate in ECOSOC, both exercises having been devoted to the elaboration of an agenda for development. It is to be expected therefore that all that has ensued in development activities over the past decades, as well as our work on this item since 1992, will form the basis on which we proceed with our discussions today and of our resulting decisions.
Our examination of this item must also be informed by an assessment of the impact of development activities and the specific circumstances now prevailing which, together, have forced a reconsideration of our policies, programmes and methods of work in this sphere. The reality we face is that after massive amounts of expenditure on aid and numerous international declarations, principles and agreements, only a handful of countries have been able to graduate out of poverty. Despite some decades of political independence, wide disparities and economic and social inequities persist between countries sharing the global commons, and within countries. Yet, the wider global political conditions now prevailing cannot be more propitious for a major, concerted effort in resolving this perennial problem.
We in this Assembly have the opportunity and final responsibility to put in place a new framework and programme of cooperation for development. The Secretary- General in his report has cited three key objectives for the exercise we are now engaged in, that is,
“to strengthen and revitalize international development cooperation generally; to build a stronger, more
We in CARICOM can agree fully with this assertion. But, in addition, we consider it imperative that we offer our perspectives on what these objectives must entail, as well as our insights on the actions that are necessary for their full attainment.
In our view, development in its broadest interpretation assumes as an absolute prerequisite the existence, first of all, of conditions of sustained, durable and equitable economic growth nationally and globally. It is only by realizing such conditions of growth with equity that sustainable development can truly take place. It is our view, therefore, that in order for success to be achieved in the strengthening and revitalization of international development cooperation, a determined and concerted effort must be directed at reviving economic growth globally, particularly in the vast majority of developing countries that have experienced chronic levels of low or negative growth.
Secondly, we believe that revitalized and strengthened international development cooperation must have as its very core a comprehensive approach and strategy for the attainment of the goal of growth and development. This approach and strategy must be informed by the concepts of interdependence and mutual and common interest. Sustained economic growth globally can be achieved only if all the members of the global community are made to share in such growth and to participate in its benefits. This is but one element of the interdependence that is so much a part of international affairs. In the absence of such a phenomenon, as is the case currently, this community of nations cannot but find itself plunged deeper into a continually widening gap between developed and developing countries, with a growing number of those in the latter category trapped in the morass of increasing poverty. We are all very well aware of the consequences of social and political tensions and threats to peace and stability that derive from this situation.
The United Nations is central to our quest for achieving development through revitalized international cooperation. It is also, in our view, central to the goal of achieving sustained economic growth in our countries and for pursuing within a revitalized-cooperation framework a comprehensive and integrated approach to development.
Our countries, and particularly my own country, Guyana, are severely hindered in their development efforts by the effects of a crushing debt burden, by the lack of access to finance and appropriate technology, and by the limited access to international markets for our goods. Our countries have little or no influence over the shaping of policies that have an impact on our state of indebtedness, be they the setting of interest rates or the rescheduling of loan payments. Yet our ability to meet our commitments in this area adequately is in turn affected by our participation in global trade — that is, our ability to boost exports, to have access to and compete in new markets, and to enhance our earnings in order to repay our existing debts. What is worse, we are unable in all this to derive an income that is sufficient for meeting the basic needs of our populations and to direct resources to our development requirements.
We cannot therefore contemplate in this forum an Agenda for Development through enhanced international cooperation without considering the role of the United Nations in assisting in the coordination and determination of the wider policies which influence the results of our efforts. I believe that we were vindicated in counselling a primary role for the intergovernmental process, and for the United Nations in particular, in the recent decision of the leaders of the Group of Seven to attempt an examination of some of these matters at their next meeting. We in this forum owe it to the people we represent to seek a better coordination of global economic and development policies in order finally to resolve the seemingly intractable economic and social problems of the vast majority of mankind.
We can do so only by taking firm decisions on policies affecting trade, debt, finance and technology, by centring the United Nations in policy coordination, and by emphasizing that our very interdependence and enlightened self-interest necessitate such a comprehensive approach. Specifically, we would recommend as a first step the establishment of a high-level inter-agency working group on external debt to examine the suggestions of the Secretary- General and to propose further immediate solutions. The rationale for its work would be the understanding that the alleviation of the debt burden would release additional resources for development, to the mutual benefit of North and South.
In addition, the role and functioning of the Economic and Social Council in social and economic policy coordination must be appropriately enhanced. Its high- level segments should be devoted to single issues in economic and social policy, with the participation of appropriate sectoral officials at a high level. Its current working methods may require some innovations in keeping with an enhancement of its role. While we welcome the concept of an expanded Bureau of the Council, to meet inter-sessionally, we believe that such a concept should be more carefully examined and that, in the final analysis, decisions on key issues should be reserved for the larger body.
Concomitant with the perceived role of the United Nations in economic and development policy coordination, we are of the view that the Secretary- General, as the head of the Organization, and through him the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, should at all times have access to the best and most objective advice and analysis on development policy. However, we are convinced that such mechanisms exist in the prevailing structures and that the proposal for the creation of a council of international development advisers may simply require the transformation and suitable enhancement of an existing related body. Indeed, what is needed above all, in addition to expert policy advice and guidance, is a mechanism for effective economic policy coordination and monitoring.
Coordination between the United Nations, the Bretton Woods institutions, the new World Trade Organization and the rest of the United Nations system must assume the highest importance for the attainment of an across-the-board policy, efficiency and effectiveness. In its present context, the Administrative Committee on
An issue of grave concern and importance to all of us is that of development financing. We note the recommendations of the Secretary-General for dealing with this matter. In particular, we believe that the system of voluntary contributions should be maintained as the basis for realizing such financing. In line with this, it is necessary that our developed partners be persuaded to make commitments of 0.7 per cent of gross national product for development assistance in order for the system to function on a more assured financial basis.
Further resources, over and above those realized in the form mentioned above, may be obtained through other supplementary means. The taxation of global speculative transfers of money, and funds realized through further cuts in military expenditure and directed to funding multilateral development activities are some of the measures our delegations could support in principle. The details and
The Secretary-General has highlighted some common goals among which are the empowerment of women, poverty eradication, programmes for the support of employment creation, education and training at the national level, and food security. We note his recommendation that these goals should all be integrated into a comprehensive operational package. To these we would add capacity-building and targeted support for the poor and disadvantaged in our societies.
The situation confronting Africa deserves special mention and determined action. Here indeed we do find the most compelling need for concerted inter-agency initiatives. We therefore expect that a more concrete plan will be elaborated at that level for supporting and implementing the United Nations New Agenda for the Development of Africa in the 1990s.
In the final analysis, the central dynamic of development has always been and continues to be in the developing countries themselves. It is the sacrifices and efforts of our peoples and the policies and approaches of our Governments that will determine the outcome of our development goals. The support of the international community is essential for this task. Moreover, the sharing of experience and support among the countries of the South has an intrinsic value in the ultimate success of our efforts.
In our regions, attempts at fostering closer economic cooperation and integration are germane to our development aspirations. We look to the United Nations for support in this area, particularly in the newly created Association of Caribbean States.
I would like, as a final note, to offer a comment on the way forward in this important undertaking. I am convinced that the General Assembly would do well to agree to the creation of a working group to function in the coming months with the aim of finalizing this report for adoption before the end of the current session.
Adoption of the agenda and organization of work: reports of the General Committee
Fifth report of the General Committee (A/49/250/Add.4)
The fifth report of the General Committee concerns the request by a number of countries for the inclusion in the agenda of the current session of an additional item entitled “Support by the United Nations system for the efforts of Governments to promote or consolidate new or restored democracies”.
The General Committee decided to recommend to the General Assembly that the item should be included in the agenda.
It was so decided.
The General Committee further decided to recommend to the Assembly that the item be considered directly in a plenary meeting.
May I take it that the General Assembly decides to consider this item directly in plenary meeting?
It was so decided.
The meeting rose at 1.20 p.m.