A/49/PV.74 General Assembly

This morning the General Assembly will resume its consideration of agenda item 37. Members will recall that on 28 November the Assembly concluded its debate on the sub-items of agenda item 37, with the exception of sub-item (e). We shall now proceed to consider some of the draft resolutions before us, namely, A/49/L.17/Rev.3, A/49/L.21, A/49/L.24/Rev.2, A/49/L.28, A/49/L.30 and A/49/L.31/Rev.1. The Assembly will now take decisions on six of the draft resolutions submitted under agenda item 37. Under sub-item (b), three draft resolutions have been introduced. The first is draft resolution A/49/L.28, entitled “Economic assistance to States affected by the implementation of the Security Council resolutions imposing sanctions against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro)”. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/49/L.28?

The second is draft resolution A/49/L.30, entitled “Financing of the Palestinian Police Force”. I should like to inform members that Egypt has become a sponsor of the draft resolution. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/49/L.30?

The third is draft resolution A/49/L.31/Rev.1, entitled “Special emergency assistance for the economic recovery and reconstruction of Burundi”. I should like to announce a slight correction in the text of the draft resolution. Members will please note that the word “substantially” was inadvertently omitted from the fourth preambular paragraph. The fourth preambular paragraph should now read: “Noting that Burundi has been making efforts to alleviate the adverse impact of the recent political turmoil on its economy and has thus helped substantially to improve the situation”.

Belgium would like to be included among the sponsors of draft resolution, A/49/L.31/Rev.1.

Under sub-item (c), draft resolution A/49/L.21, recommended by May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/49/L.21?

Under sub-item (f), draft resolution A/49/L.24/Rev.2 is entitled “Emergency international assistance for a solution to the problem of refugees, the restoration of total peace, reconstruction and socio-economic development in war- stricken Rwanda”. I should like to announced that India has joined the list of sponsors of the draft resolution. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/49/L.24/Rev.2?

Under sub-item (g), draft resolution A/49/L.17/Rev.3 is entitled “Special assistance to countries receiving refugees from Rwanda”. I should like to point out that the text of paragraph 3 of the English version of the draft resolution contains some inadvertent errors. The correct text should read: “Urges all States, intergovernmental and non- governmental organizations and calls upon the international financial and development institutions to provide all possible financial, technical and material assistance with a view to facilitating the restoration of the basic services destroyed in the countries receiving Rwandese refugees”; May I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/49/L.17/Rev.3?

My delegation would like to comment on draft resolution A/49/L.30, which has just been adopted. We feel that the agreements referred to in the document will not lead to the full restoration of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. In addition, my delegation would like to express its reservations regarding any part of the resolution which might be construed as any recognition of Israel.

There are no further speakers in explanation of vote. I should like to inform members that the Assembly will consider the remaining draft resolutions under agenda item 37 at a later date, to be announced in the Journal.

I call on the representative of the Russian Federation to introduce draft resolution A/49/L.33 and Corr.2.

I have the honour of speaking on behalf of the delegations of Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Ukraine and the Russian Federation. As the representative of the country that is chairing the Charter bodies of the Commonwealth of Independent States, I have great pleasure in addressing the Assembly with regard to the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War — a major event that we shall be celebrating very soon. In Russia, as in other States members of the international community, the war affected virtually every family. Thus we attach great importance to this event. The President of the Russian Federation, Boris Yeltsin, appealed to the United Nations to commemorate the end of the Second World War in a dignified manner, and his proposal One of the major lessons following the victory that was achieved through the united efforts of many peoples of various countries was that the preservation and maintenance of international peace and security requires that there be united, agreed, active steps on the part of all peace-loving States, that disputes be prevented where possible and that those that arise be settled by purely peaceful means. This is especially important at the present time as there is still the possibility of armed conflict between States, ethnic and local conflicts continue to cause bloodshed, and we face the increased danger of the spread of weapons of mass destruction. We are convinced that no objective justifies the unleashing of war. The maintenance of peace is the highest ambition of our States and of all other members of the world community. The delegations on whose behalf I have the honour to speak, like all the other sponsors of the draft resolution, proceed from the premise that the States Members of the United Nations must do their utmost to put an end to the current armed conflicts, to prevent the emergence of such conflicts in the future and to enhance in every possible way the effectiveness of the United Nations as a central element of the system of collective security aimed at achieving this lofty goal proclaimed in the Organization’s Charter: “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”. I should like briefly to introduce the draft resolution in document A/49/L.33 and Corr.2. I note with pleasure that the 46 sponsors listed in the draft have been joined by the Czech Republic and Hungary. In the preambular paragraphs the General Assembly stresses that the end of the Second World War established the conditions for the creation of the United Nations; solemnly reaffirms the resolute commitment of all Member States to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations; stresses that remaining legacies of the Second World War should be overcome and that all Member States should cooperate in creating a new environment of international harmony; and stresses that it is in the common interests of mankind to promote actively the role and efficiency of the United Nations as a central element of the collective security system and as In the operative paragraphs of the draft resolution the General Assembly proclaims the year 1995 as World Year of People’s Commemoration of the Victims of the Second World War; calls upon all States and peoples solemnly to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War; decides to a special solemn meeting of the Assembly on 18 October 1995 in memory of the victims of the war; and requests the Secretary-General to take the necessary measures for the implementation of the resolution. We call upon all States Members of the United Nations, in memory of the millions who suffered and died in the flames of the Second World War, to commemorate in a comprehensive and solemn manner this memorable date in the history of mankind. We hope that the draft resolution will be adopted by consensus.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union, Austria, Finland and Sweden. The year 1995 marks the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War — the most devastating war ever witnessed by mankind. It is altogether fitting that during the course of the coming year we the States Members of the United Nations should pay special tribute to the sacrifices wrought by the war. The European Union therefore fully supports the draft resolution that is before the General Assembly. We welcome the initiative of the Russian Federation in this regard, and we have cooperated closely in the preparation of the draft resolution, among whose sponsors are all States members of the European Union, as well as the acceding countries. The European Union has brought together countries that fought on opposing sides in the Second World War. Most of today’s member States were directly affected by the War. Despite dramatically different experiences, there is agreement that the victory of the Alliance then referred to as “the united nations” represented an act of liberation. To say this is not to ignore the division of Europe that also resulted from the war. Our peoples remember all too well the horrors of the Second World War. Commemorating all victims of the War goes beyond remembering those who died or suffered. It is As the draft resolution rightly notes, the end of the Second World War established the conditions for the creation of the United Nations. The Charter of the Organization is a living monument to the lessons learned as a result of the War. The scourge of war has not been eradicated. But the United Nations and the principles of its Charter are essential tools in the struggle for peace and fundamental human rights. It is thus appropriate that we should today solemnly reaffirm our commitment to the Organization and to those principles. We hope that the year of commemoration proclaimed by this draft resolution will inspire our peoples. We hope that private and Government activities will address young people in particular. After all, 1995 is intended to be a people’s year of commemoration, and not just a series of official events. The European Union is willing to contribute, within the United Nations framework, to a dignified, solemn meeting of the General Assembly on 18 October 1995. We hope that the draft resolution before the Assembly will be adopted by consensus.

The United States is proud to co-sponsor the draft resolution which proclaims 1995 as World Year of Peoples’ Commemoration of the Victims of the Second World War. The text calls for a special meeting of this body on 18 October next. It is fitting that the General Assembly should undertake a solemn commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the bloodiest and most destructive war in history, a conflict that took the lives of some 53 million people and caused enormous suffering to people in all corners of the world. It is fitting that the Russian Federation is the principal sponsor of this commemorative draft resolution. Twenty-six million Russians lost their lives in what Russians call “the great patriotic war” and what this body must ensure was the last great war. This commitment to peace can only be quickened and given poignancy by our remembering the people of Leningrad, who heroically withstood the horrors of a 900-day siege, and the heroes of Stalingrad, who made an enormous contribution to The Second World War brought great suffering to people everywhere: to soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines who died in battle and to innocent civilians, including the millions who died in the concentration camps of the holocaust. Far, far too many around the world still carry with them the tragic memories and physical scars of a conflict that soaked native soils with the blood of men, women and children. The burden of the war was not confined to any single nation; all suffered. It is our hope therefore that all will pause and reflect. Memories of this terrible collective experience cannot be allowed to fade. The world must never again open itself to the horrors of global war. In paragraph 2 draft resolution A/49/L.33 “Calls upon all States and peoples solemnly to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War”. My Government has already created a Second World War remembrance committee to conduct activities on the national level and coordinate local commemorations in thousands of communities across the United States. This committee has been developing educational resources and programmes, and has mounted travelling exhibits on the war effort and the war’s aftermath. Over the Year, veterans’ groups in cities and towns across the United States will hold commemorations, often in conjunction with veterans from other countries. In addition, various museums will stage exhibits on the contribution of American industry and science to the war effort, as well as the contributions of American civilians on the home front; requiem concerts will be held around the country in memory of the victims of the conflict; and panels will discuss how best to avoid another world-wide conflict, including, of course, the important role to be played by the United Nations in preventing wars. “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”. Our common determination to avoid another global catastrophe forms the roots of the United Nations. Looking back to what inspired us then, we must rededicate ourselves to the aims and ideals of this Organization: the search for disarmament, programmes of economic and social development and, above all, efforts to establish enlightened norms of human rights and dignity and the rule of law. This is the legacy left us by those who fought during the Second World War. Let us honour their sacrifices, and let us demonstrate our gratitude by building the peace for which they gave their last full measure. Our worth will be measured by the quality of the peace we build in their honour. As the last post sounds before the monuments to the war dead in each of our lands, let each of us pledge that they shall be remembered. Our peace and our very lives have been paid for by their sacrifices. They shall be remembered.

At the outset, allow me to express our appreciation to the Russian Federation for taking the initiative of bringing this issue before the General Assembly. Israel has lent its wholehearted support to the Russian initiative to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War. We are also proud to co-sponsor the draft resolution on the commemoration. Commemorating the end of the Second World War is our moral obligation, not only to the fallen soldiers, to the civilian victims and to the honoured veterans, but also to the generations to come so that they may learn from the past. The lessons of the Second World War are When we consider the bloodshed and slaughter that have taken place since the end of the Second World War, we must ask if the world has fully learned the lessons of that war. One of this century’s greatest world leaders, Winston Churchill, once said: “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last.” Appeasement and isolationism have not disappeared from the world. Rather, these sentiments have been heard loud and clear in many places. Such short-sightedness enabled fascism and nazism to rise in the years before the Second World War. The terrible cost has to be lesson for us all, especially today. The price of appeasement, aggression and conflict in the Second World War is staggering: tens of millions of soldiers and civilian dead in the largest bloodbath in history; a generation of young men sacrificed; the cultural centres of the world ravaged; the intelligentsia massacred and art, architecture, beauty and life destroyed. The war launched by the Nazis shattered the entire world and directed special fury against the Jewish people. Not only was the systematic annihilation of European Jewry unique in the history of the Second World War, it was — and remains — unique in the history of mankind. The Nazis mobilized every sector of society in a national effort to destroy all Jews. The Government, the military, science, academia, business, the arts — all collaborated first to dehumanize and then to destroy. The Nazis did not intend to conquer or enslave, but rather to annihilate an entire nation. Jews were murdered because they were Jews. They were guilty of nothing other than being born to Jewish parents. One of the survivors of the Holocaust, Elie Wiesel, put it best when he wrote: “Not all victims were Jews. But all Jews were victims.” The years between 1939 and 1944 marked the final — and darkest — days of Jewish statelessness. The systematic extermination of the civilian Jewish populations of Nazi- occupied areas became one of the Nazis’ main war goals. Six million Jews, one third of the world Jewish population, were wiped out. The Jewish people’s role in the Second World War was not only that of victim. Jewish soldiers joined in the fight against the Nazis. They fought as Jews in the Resistance armies and undergrounds all over Europe. Jews in Mandatory Palestine fought proudly in the Jewish Brigade of the British Army. Those who were citizens of We all owe a debt of honour and gratitude to the nations which fought to end the war, to liberate the occupied countries and to give new hope to the people and nations of the world. It was their finest hour. I hope that we all act in a manner befitting the memory of the millions who sacrificed their young lives to save others, to save humanity. We have an obligation to build a world based on tolerance and mutual respect — but let us never be tolerant of fanaticism, fascism or dictatorship. All these still plague the world today. Our mission is perhaps greater than it was immediately following the end of the Second World War. We cannot change the past, but we can learn its lessons. We have a responsibility to shape the future wisely. This has to be the outcome of the commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the Organization. The United Nations was established on the ruins of a world destroyed by hatred and violence in order “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war”. The dangers of bigotry, prejudice and discrimination are among the enduring lessons of that dark period in human history. The United Nations has a special mission to ensure that such evil never rears its head again. As it carries out this task, may its Member States always remember its roots and may they faithfully chart its course into the future.

The Second World War, which ended some 50 years ago, was an unprecedented calamity in human history that plunged the whole world into a disaster. A great many people lost their lives or experienced unspeakable sufferings under the iron heel of aggressors. What is more, many people with lofty ideals gave their precious lives fighting against aggression, defending national sovereignty and territorial integrity and striving for peace and freedom. China, invaded by foreign aggressors, was a victim of the war. At the same time, it was one of the major participants in the world-wide struggle against fascism. Like many other peace-loving and justice-upholding countries and peoples, China and the Chinese made tremendous sacrifices and important contributions to the overall victory of the Second World War. Today’s world is by no means tranquil. There are still various destabilizing factors. Conflicts and disputes in some regions, in particular, pose a serious threat to world peace and stability, as well as to people’s lives and property. Under such circumstances, the international community, including the United Nations, is faced with the arduous question how better to safeguard world peace and security. China has consistently pursued an independent foreign policy of peace. It stands for the peaceful settlement of disputes and opposes the use or threat of force in international relations. In our view, the basic way to prevent international conflict is through strict observance of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, namely, mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non- aggression, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. These principles have been proved by practice to have immense vitality. All nations, notwithstanding their differences in social systems, ideologies, values or religious faiths can live in amity and carry out mutually beneficial cooperation as long as they abide by these principles. Failure to do so will lead to friction, confrontation or even military conflicts. In a world as diversified as ours, nations have no alternative but to adhere to the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and to find common ground while shelving differences in order to live together amicably and pursue common development. The United Nations emerged from the total victory of the people of the world in the anti-fascist war. It has travelled a long and uncommon road against the background of a volatile international scene for half a century. In the wake of drastic changes in the international situation, we hope that the United Nations will, under the guidance of the Charter of the United Nations, and with the joint efforts of the entire membership, continue to play its As a permanent member of the Security Council, China is an important force for safeguarding world peace. At present, the 1.2 billion Chinese people are engaged in national construction and economic development. We need peace. We are ready to work with people all over the world in a joint effort to eliminate the scourge of war once and for all and build a beautiful world with lasting peace and common development.

I am speaking here today on behalf of Latvia, Lithuania and my own country, Estonia. The global commemoration of the end of the battles of the Second World War is an event we have long awaited. Yet, even as the anniversary of the end of the war approaches, we also remember that for many countries in Europe hostilities did not, unfortunately, end in May or September 1945. Some countries, such as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania have struggled with the consequences of the Second World War for decades. We fully subscribe to the notion expressed in the preambular paragraphs of the resolution, in which the Assembly would stress the need to eliminate the remaining legacies of Second World War in conformity with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. We also hope that the commemoration will allow us to face the past honestly in order to avoid repeating the same mistakes. Much public debate and discussion over the legacy and consequences of the Second World War have taken place in the Baltic countries since the first pro- democracy movements were established in 1987, and we hope to contribute actively to the global commemoration of the end of the war, to be held next year. There are very many lessons to be learned from the dreadful experiences of the Second World War. Many in this Hall will focus on those events which have affected them most. We would like to draw attention to two lessons in particular which have been of great significance to our countries. The concept of dividing countries or regions into spheres of influence set the stage for the Second World War. The excuse that the rights of fellow countrymen were being protected led to the occupation of Czechoslovakia. We must draw the appropriate conclusions from those two lessons. The ethnic and religious conflicts that now threaten many parts of the world, but especially Europe, clearly demonstrate that policies which have attempted to bury the past and forge a false history have led to unholy atrocities that have reached a scale of horror reminiscent of that in the Second World War. Therefore, in the commemorations we will all be holding at the national and the global levels, let us pledge to examine both the war itself and the full extent of its consequences in a manner which will best honour the memory of all who have suffered as a result of it. The best way to honour the memory of all those who perished during the war is to avoid further confrontations and strengthen the system of collective security.

The year 1995 will be a historic occasion for reflection and celebration, marking as it does at the same time the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War, which brought untold sorrow to mankind, and the fiftieth anniversary of the birth of this universal organization for peace and cooperation: the United Nations. It is most opportune and significant, therefore, that we proclaim the year 1995 as an occasion for the commemoration of the victims of the Second World War, as well as an occasion for reaffirming our commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. The United Nations, created as a result of our determination to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, represents the universal values which all the nations of the world, whatever their historic experiences, embrace. It is for this reason that the United Nations has grown as a truly international organization for peace and cooperation. Having transcended the divisions of the cold war, the United Nations is now expected to play a greater role than ever before in maintaining world peace and security. It is thus most gratifying that efforts are now under way within the United Nations to overcome certain The fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War will provide an excellent opportunity to reflect upon the valuable lessons we have learned during the past half-century of international cooperation, and to cement our common will to further strengthen the bonds of world peace as we look ahead to the twenty-first century. My country, Japan, has reflected with remorse upon the Second World War, and is determined never to waver from its commitment to contribute to world peace and prosperity. Japan does not, nor will it, resort to the use of force prohibited by its Constitution. Japan will remain resolutely a nation of peace. In this spirit, my delegation has decided to join the initiative for the commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War. Japan looks forward to the proposed commemoration as marking the beginning of a new era of peaceful and cooperative relations among all the nations of the world. I should like to take this opportunity to express to the delegation of the Russian Federation my delegation's appreciation for the initiative it has taken in proposing the agenda item before us. My delegation heartily supports this initiative, and has become one of the sponsors of the draft resolution now before us. I am confident that the General Assembly will adopt it by consensus.

The United Nations has not thus far commemorated the anniversaries of the wars that have ravaged mankind in the contemporary era. It is busy enough dealing with current wars and conflicts, which, unfortunately, daily take a heavy toll in human lives and cause the widespread destruction of what the human spirit and hands have created. Commemorating a war could mean remembering the victims whether from among the victors or from among the vanquished. Shall we commemorate the former and ignore the latter? Is any State or Government in a position to draw a clear-cut distinction between the victors and the vanquished if it is to be mindful that the victims of war have always been ordinary people, innocent people, irrespective of the side they were on or fighting for? Clearly, the victim has always been human civilization itself. To commemorate the end of a war is therefore not only an opportunity to hail a victory but also an Romania, a peace-loving country, was dragged into the Second World War conflagration after suffering extremely painful territorial losses as a result of the Molotov- Ribbentrop Pact and of the Vienna Diktat in 1940. Romania had no other choice if it wanted to prevent its dissolution and perhaps its disappearance from the map of the world. Prior to any official declaration of war, large parts of Romanian territory, at both its western and its eastern borders, had already been under foreign occupation. Romania did not enter the war to serve any economic or political interests but to preserve its very existence as a State, a nation and a people. Later, on 23 August 1944, through the determination of all its democratic forces, Romania joined the coalition of the United Nations and fought together with the Allies until the final defeat of the Nazi war machine. It is worth recalling that over half a million Romanian soldiers fought in the anti-Hitlerite war. In terms of the forces involved between August 1944 and May 1945, Romania ranks fourth among the Allied countries. Despite this important contribution, the status of co-belligerent was not granted to Romania. Echoes of that attitude were, unfortunately, retained in the United Nations Charter. I am confident that this historical injustice will soon be redressed, if we understand correctly the fourth preambular paragraph of draft resolution A/49/L.33, now before us, which states: “Stressing that remaining legacies of the Second World War should be overcome”. The delegation of Romania supports this draft resolution because it believes that it can be useful to reflect thoroughly upon the lessons of history. I would venture to say that the victims we are commemorating are not only the millions of individuals who paid the ultimate price, but also the peoples — the peoples for whom the United Nations Charter is designed. Since peoples are the victims of wars, let us give them the means to participate in the process of government and to be consulted on matters affecting their destinies while affirming their right to live in peace. Thus far, peacemakers have not found a panacea for that recurrent illness that continues to afflict the world: warfare. We should try the

The fact that fifty years have passed since the end of the Second World War is worthy of commemoration. We should like to thank the delegation of the Russian Federation, which has proposed the inclusion of this item on the agenda of the United Nations General Assembly as such commemoration should inspire us all with feelings of goodness and love for peace. It was this very spirit that triumphed, 50 years ago, over the spirit of evil and aggression that had dragged humanity into a war that claimed the lives of millions, razed to the ground whole cities, towns and villages and devastated whole nations that still suffer the consequences of such devastation. It is clear that the commemoration of any historic occasion cannot focus on the past alone. That is why the commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War, next year, will be an occasion that should make us take stock of the current international situation. In this context, it is worthy of note that, in the post-war era, the international community was able to make several important achievements. Colonialism receded from most regions of the world. Many peoples were able to regain their rights to self-determination and independence. There now exists a near unanimous desire to achieve arms reduction. Efforts are being intensified towards overcoming international economic difficulties, protecting the environment and putting an end to hunger, disease and poverty. All these achievements, which have been made thanks to the common struggle of peoples, encourage us to try to achieve more successes in those areas. That, as of necessity, will require serious international cooperation in resolving current economic and social problems and in developing plans that would ensure effective respect for human rights and the establishment of a new just and equitable international economic order. In addition, the world needs a concerted international effort to consolidate peace and security through the eradication of nuclear weapons and all One of the important historical events that took place after the end of the Second World War, was the establishment of the United Nations, as an international forum for the maintenance of international peace and security, the settlement by peaceful means of conflicts, guaranteeing the rule of international law, promoting friendly relations amongst nations and peaceful coexistence amongst States. We the peoples of the world who have placed our hopes in this Organization, as the guarantor of our security and defender of our independence should reaffirm our abiding commitment to the principles of the United Nations as this is the sole guarantee against the ambitions of certain States that try to use the United Nations as a tool that serves their own goals and interests in complete disregard of the noble principle of co-equality of States that figures prominently among the principles of the Organization. It is indeed cause for concern, that such attempts should be made by major Powers that are supposed to bear a major responsibility towards the maintenance of international peace and security. There are numerous precedents that prove this fact. For instance, there has been military aggression by sea and by air in which more than a hundred war planes took part against my country, a Member State of the United Nations, under a pretext that has been proven to be false. The latest proof has come out in the recently published book of Victor Osteovsky entitled “The other side of Deception”. Two of our citizens have been accused of having a hand in the crash of a United States aircraft. The accusation has been levelled by States that know full well the truth concerning the crash and the involvement of their own intelligence services in it. All the details are known to us and we shall reveal them if the parties agree and if the Security Council compels all parties to accept litigation before a just and fair-minded international court on neutral territory. Then we shall reveal all these facts which are known to them. This fabricated allegation was brought to the Security Council, although the issue relates to legal matters that in no way fall within the Security Council's competence. However the influence of a As the entire international community knows, all this suffering was designed to force Libya to adopt a policy of appeasement, a policy of slavish acquiescence. However, we are not a servile people. We have paid a very high price because we have consistently refused to be any power’s lackeys. All we wanted was to be free under the sun, as is the right of every people in the world. Every nation on earth must be made aware of the dangers inherent in such machinations. If the necessary measures are not adopted by the international community to put an end to such practices, certain major Powers will continue to use their clout and will go to the extremes of trampling the very principles and objectives of the United Nations in which all the small nations of the world, like my own, have invested the hope of protecting their sovereignty, their independence, and their right to live in freedom, without wars, conflicts or destruction. When the Second World War ended, and hostilities ceased, armies and their weapons were withdrawn from the theatres of war. However, the legacy of war still lingers, as can be seen in the underdevelopment of those many countries that suffered the horrors and destruction of war and the millions of land-mines that were left behind in their soil — to kill and maim the innocents daily and impede efforts in the area of socio-economic development. Libya is one of the countries that have suffered and continue to suffer those after effects of war, because Libya’s territory was part of the belligerents’ theatre of operations. They left, but they left behind them hundreds of tons of weapons and millions of land-mines on our farms and in our deserts which explode every now and then, killing innocent people. I can only reiterate what my country stated before the General Assembly when it called upon the countries responsible for sowing those mines in our soil to abide by General Assembly resolutions and to provide the necessary technical assistance to eliminate these devices and compensate our countries for the damage they have caused. The Second World War now belongs to history, but it is important that we reconsider the international

The end of the Second World War in 1945 gave rise to a feeling of profound relief and to renewed hopes for the international community. We had survived the greatest conflagration in history. The magnitude of the loss of life and material destruction testified to the horrors withstood by peoples and by countries. Although the greater part of the hostilities took place in regions distant from Latin America, tragedy also touched the Brazilian people. Many civilians lost their priceless lives at sea during attacks against Brazilian passenger ships, while many Brazilian soldiers and airmen were sacrificed as they fought together with other allied forces to defeat the aggressors. We pay our heartfelt tribute to them and to the countless victims of the struggle against the forces of oppression all over the world. Despite the tremendous sacrifices, the fact that justice and democracy had finally prevailed and that the countries emerging from the war had been able to articulate new forms of international coexistence served to renew mankind’s hopes in the future. It was in that spirit that the international community set out to rebuild the world order by establishing novel mechanisms for cooperation between nations. The goals were far-reaching — to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war and to promote the economic and social advancement of all peoples. These ideals were embodied in the Charter of the United Nations, as the single most advanced document in international relations and as the depositary of the hopes and expectations of nations large and small. Subsequent developments, alas, were not entirely conducive to the full blossoming of all the potentialities of the world Organization. History has been kind to our generation, as it has offered us a second chance to restructure the international order on a more secure and equitable basis. We owe it to those who suffered in the past not to miss the opportunity to achieve the goals of peace and development this time. With this objective in mind, we must recommit ourselves to the goals of disarmament and development. We should, furthermore, undertake a careful but necessary restructuring of our Organization with a view to enhancing its legitimacy and effectiveness. My delegation has co-sponsored the draft resolution contained in document A/49/L.33 and welcomes the initiatives contained therein. It is our belief that we must take to heart the lessons learned from the tragic events of the Second World War. Brazil considers it most appropriate that we dedicate the fiftieth anniversary of the end of that conflict to paying tribute to the memory of its victims and to ensuring that history will not repeat itself.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item. We shall now consider draft resolution A/49/L.33. I should like to announce that Mongolia has become a sponsor of this draft resolution. May I take it that the Assembly decides to adopt draft resolution A/49/L.33?

By paragraph 3 of the resolution just adopted, the General Assembly has decided to hold a special solemn meeting of the Assembly on 18 October 1995 in commemoration of the sacrifices wrought by the Second World War. In order for the Assembly to hold this special meeting, it will be necessary to include in the agenda of the fiftieth session an item entitled “Commemoration of the fiftieth anniversary of the end of the Second World War”.

Several representatives wish to speak in exercise of the right of reply. May I remind members that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first statement and 5 minutes for the second statement, and should be made by delegations from their seats.

An occasion for reconciliation has been abused by a representative whose remarks were wrong in law and an insult to the Security Council: an insult to its members, who have consistently voted to sustain United Nations resolutions that sanction a State supporting terrorism, and an insult to the memories of those who died as a result of terrorist acts supported by that speaker’s Government. Given the nature of the occasion, this time for reconciliation, the intervention I protest was totally lacking in taste.

I also should briefly like to reply to the remarks made by the Permanent Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya on agenda item 150. Like the representative of the United States, with whose comments I concur entirely, I believe those remarks to be factually incorrect and an insult to the Security Council and to the victims of the tragedies of Lockerbie and UTA (Union de transports aériens).

I wish to speak in exercise of my right of reply to the statement made by the representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. My delegation expresses its full solidarity with the delegations of the United States of America and the United Kingdom. We regret that the occasion of a solemn commemoration was exploited by Libya to make totally unacceptable accusations. The Libyan Government must understand that, in so doing, it is in no way manifesting the spirit that the Security Council expects it to show. Libya must comply with its obligations under the United Nations Charter and under the relevant Security Council resolutions.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 150?

I call on the representative of Brazil to introduce draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1.

I have the honour to introduce draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1, sponsored by Angola, Argentina, Benin, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Namibia, Nigeria, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Togo, Uruguay, Zaire and Brazil. I wish to say a few words on the main features of the text and the ideas it contains. The draft resolution recalls the progress achieved so far and reflects the desire of the countries of the region for concrete action with a view to further fulfilling the purposes and objectives of the zone. With this in mind, the preambular part touches upon the elements that constitute the basis for the promotion and enlargement of existing ties of cooperation between the countries of the South Atlantic region. I wish to highlight in the operative part of the draft resolution a number of paragraphs that illustrate the commitment by the members of the zone to promoting cooperation for economic and social development in conditions of peace and freedom. In particular, operative paragraph 3 takes note of the documents adopted at the third meeting of the States members of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic, held in Brasilia on 21 and 22 September 1994. On the marine environment, the member States adopted a declaration in which they agreed, among other issues, to protect the coastal and marine environments from destruction, degradation and other significant adverse impacts, to give effect to integrated management and sustainable development of the coastal and marine environment under their national jurisdiction, and to cooperate to acquire technological knowledge and instruments necessary for scientific research aimed at the exploration and exploitation of living and non-living resources, as well as the prevention and effective control of marine pollution. On denuclearization, the participants adopted a Declaration with the ultimate aim of turning the South Atlantic region into a nuclear-weapon-free zone. In fact, the recent progress towards the full entry into force of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean — the Treaty of Tlatelolco — for all States in Latin America and the Caribbean, and efforts towards the implementation of the Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa, provide the necessary framework for the goal of eliminating once and for all from the South Atlantic region the risk and threat of nuclear weapons. As the Minister of External Relations of Brazil, Ambassador Celso Amorim, stated during the general debate at the present session of the General Assembly, The representatives of the States of the zone also adopted a Declaration on business cooperation in the South Atlantic. In recognition of the desire to foster and intensify economic and commercial exchange through cooperation between businessmen of the South Atlantic region, the member States decided to establish a Permanent Committee to examine ways and means to achieve the objectives of The signing of the Final Declaration of the meeting, in which the participants reaffirmed the importance of the zone as a relevant instrument for cooperation between South Atlantic countries, as well as its capacity to contribute to international peace and security, is also worth mentioning. They also agreed on the need to increase efforts to reinforce the role of the zone as a regional instrument for cooperation. An intersessional follow-up mechanism was established with a view to presenting specific proposals, receiving suggestions and guaranteeing a follow-up for issues dealt with among the South Atlantic countries. Operative paragraph 10 expresses appreciation for the efforts of the international community to achieve a lasting solution to the crisis in two of the member States of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic: Angola and Liberia. The conflicts in both countries have imposed a heavy toll on the civilian population and have brought about a humanitarian crisis of huge proportions. It is vital that the international community provide adequate humanitarian support to Angola and Liberia and back their efforts towards the achievement of a lasting peace. The presence among us of South Africa and the offers made by its Government, along with Argentina and Benin, to host the subsequent meetings of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic bear testimony to the new momentum created and display a commitment to sustain and further advance the support which the zone requires in order to fulfil its obligations in the pursuit of our collective aspirations. The establishment of the zone of peace and cooperation gave renewed impetus to the promotion and enlargement of the ties of cooperation and understanding between West African and South American countries. The potentialities of the zone are enormous; so are its challenges. For the fulfilment of the goals of the declaration of 1986, the member States of the zone count on the support of the international community as a whole. It is our sincere hope that the General Assembly, as it has done in previous years with similar draft resolutions, will adopt this draft resolution, which seeks to support the legitimate aspirations to peace and prosperity of the peoples of the South Atlantic region. As a vibrant but continuously evolving instrument in multilateral cooperation, States of the zone have endeavoured to realign themselves on the basis of their shared experiences in development and against the backdrop of the changed configuration in the international situation. Above all, they have sought to provide a basic pattern in the quest for international peace and security from a sub-regional perspective by agreeing to avail themselves of the structures and competencies existing in Member States in the political, economic, social, humanitarian, environmental and, indeed, developmental fields. At a time when there is an obvious lessening of multilateralism in favour of bilateral cooperation among States, when the North-South divide is becoming more real, when protectionist trade practices of the advantaged countries of the North virtually exclude the developing economies of the South from their markets, States members of the zone are convinced that no State, however richly endowed and however stable in political and economic terms, can go it alone in providing the people with much- needed development in a mutual and self-sustaining partnership, without having recourse to other countries. In other words, we all live in an interdependent world. The concept of development is multifaceted and ramifies into other considerations which touch on social engineering, basic freedoms and welfare. As we see it, development must be people-oriented and people-centred. It must derive its form and essence from a cumulative perception that all efforts designed to achieve it carry with them incremental steps of self-sacrifice, motive force and purpose. On the political front, the zone has tried to give prominence to efforts towards democratization, the adoption of political pluralism and participation in governance. Within this ambit we were happy to welcome into membership of the zone the Republic of South Africa, after its recent political transformation. We wish South Africa well as it pursues its national development and contributes to international efforts to secure peace, security and development. As littoral States, members of the zone place a high premium on the management of living marine resources in the Atlantic Ocean. For this reason, they have continued to show a great interest in the United Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, which was concluded recently. A basic prescription in an Agenda for Peace has been preventive diplomacy, the purpose of which is to deal with a crisis before it erupts into violence. In recognition of the value of this approach, member States of the zone have continued to encourage peaceful resolution of disputes rather than recourse to war. In this regard, the continuing saga of instability in Liberia remains a source of concern while the recently concluded Peace Accords in Angola offer a welcome respite from the long drawn out civil strife in that country. It is the hope of States members of the zone that a negotiated peaceful settlement will soon be found for the Liberian crisis and that the current peaceful situation in Angola will endure in the higher interest of national reconciliation, peace and security. Recognizing that they are developing countries, States members of the zone have agreed that a denuclearized zone of the South Atlantic offers the greatest prospect for their national and regional development. They therefore took a significant step in this direction at the third ministerial meeting of the States members of the zone, held in Brasilia in September 1994. Thus, with the entry into force of the Treaty of Tlatelolco and the near-conclusion of a treaty on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Africa, the commitment of States members of the zone to a denuclearized region is becoming a reality. With such an achievement, the scarce resources available to States members of the zone will be ploughed into socio-economic development for the benefit of their respective populations. In sum, the cooperation envisaged in the political, economic, social, cultural, commercial, technical, scientific and environmental fields among member States will make the zone not only viable but also a useful In view of the foregoing, Nigeria is delighted to support draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1.

As we are reminded in substance by draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1 — submitted under agenda item 30 by the representative of Brazil — the zone of the South Atlantic, situated between Africa and South America, is of strategic and economic importance in the world. Indeed, this region is not only an international passage where for centuries navigators of historic renown, such as Magellan, Vasco da Gama, Diego Suárez Barthélémy Díaz and many more sailed, but it is also vital for the coastal States because of its valuable marine resources. Therefore it has been and continues to be a zone afflicted by all types of rivalry, which pose a threat to international peace and security. Proof of this is to be seen in the zealousness of the colonial Powers, which, since the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, have vied with each other to create spheres of influence on the two coasts of the ocean through skilful exploitation of the “three Ms” system: threefold action — mercantile, missionary and military. Further proof is to be seen in the grievous use made of this maritime route for the transportation of black slaves from the African coast to the American coast. More proof is the deployment of bases in that zone by modern military and maritime Powers, and still more is the constant presence in the South Atlantic of fishing vessels of all sizes, types and nationalities. It was to remove the risks or the causes of tension that in October 1986 the United Nations General Assembly, in a responsible manner, declared the South Atlantic as a zone of peace and cooperation. Since that time the coastal States have endeavoured to promote confidence amongst themselves through the creation of the conditions for peaceful exchanges on the basis of ties of blood and ancestral affinities between Africa and South America. It is in this context that, daily, we see more and more the strengthening of bilateral relations between the countries situated on the two sides of the ocean. It was also within the framework of these efforts — a shining example of South-South cooperation — that the third ministerial meeting of the States of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic was held in Brazilia These measures concern in particular: cooperation in the area of the marine environment; the intensification of economic, commercial and tourist exchanges through cooperation between enterprises of the zone and the development of air and maritime links, as well as direct communications between the countries of the zone; the denuclearization of the South Atlantic, in which respect the States of the zone have made it their common objective to have the South Atlantic turned into a nuclear- weapon-free zone; the establishment of a follow-up mechanism based at United Nations Headquarters in New York, with the task of facilitating the implementation of decisions taken at various levels of the zone. Those participating in the Brazilia meeting recognized the need for States of the zone to cooperate towards securing democracy and political pluralism, as well as promoting human rights and fundamental freedoms. If the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic is to be instrumental in the laying of solid foundations for cooperation between the countries of the region, it is crucial that members meet regularly. This is why the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the zone have already decided to meet in South Africa, Argentina and Benin in 1995, 1996 and 1997 respectively. Other recent regional or global initiatives that have helped to strengthen security in the South Atlantic deserve mention. First, there are the prospects for the effective denuclearization of Africa following adherence to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons by South Africa, which has also subscribed to the safeguard agreements of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Then there is the imminent entry into force of the Treaty of Tlatelolco, which bans nuclear weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean, following the signing by Argentina and Brazil — two States of the zone — of an agreement on the peaceful use of nuclear energy and their decision to adhere to the safeguard clauses by placing their nuclear installations under the control of the IAEA. Thirdly, there is the conclusion of an international convention on the elimination of chemical weapons, which will pave the way for the elimination, in the region, of weapons of mass destruction and for the In spite of these welcome initiatives, which my delegation duly appreciates, the security of the zone remains fragile. Indeed, while the development of the political situation in South Africa has been positive and has led to the establishment of a unified, democratic and non- racial society — a condition favourable to lasting peace — there is still a climate of tension in other coastal countries of the Atlantic. The civil and fratricidal war for political power that has been raging in Liberia since December 1989 threatens to engulf the West African subregion and might even spread further, while peace has barely been restored in Angola, where the legacy of the 33-year armed struggle will be difficult to eradicate. The delegation of Benin would like to pay tribute to the United Nations and countries friendly to Angola for their praiseworthy actions to restore in that country the conditions for normal life and for the building of a state of law. It is also fitting that the United Nations be encouraged to continue to provide resolute support for the efforts to establish peace that the Heads of State or Government of the Economic Community of West African States, supported by the Organization of African Unity, have been making in Liberia for more than four years. All these activities will help to reinforce the policy that the South Atlantic be made a zone of peace and cooperation. The conflict situations of the zone are compounded by the over-exploitation of the biological resources of the high seas and the dumping of dangerous wastes, which pollute the environment and threaten human health. Indeed, does not the report of the Secretary-General state that in 1992 there were already 20,000 to 60,000 tonnes of such wastes in Africa? As security, development and democracy are indissolubly linked, it is easy to understand the anxiety of the States of the zone of peace and cooperation in the South Atlantic that there should be a favourable outcome to the problems to which I have just referred. Thus these States welcome the conclusions of the Rio de Janeiro Conference on Environment and Development aimed at combating pollution in the seas and oceans. Agenda 21, the Framework Convention on Climate Change and the The General Assembly's debates on the item entitled “Zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic” have become a ritual and run the risk of becoming wearisome if States in the zone do not seize this opportunity to take stock of what has been done to implement resolutions adopted with a view to achieving the objectives that they set for themselves and to indicate action in the medium term. Draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1 was drawn up with this in view. It has no purpose other than to be a link in the long chain of efforts to strengthen international peace and security, as is required by the United Nations Charter. The sponsors of the draft have done some violence to themselves by agreeing to most of the amendments proposed by various delegations for the purpose of taking into account all the interests at stake. As may have been indicated already, they venture to hope that the draft resolution can be adopted without a vote.

Uruguay takes a keen interest that Uruguay is participating in the debate on the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic. We believe the adoption of draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1, so well introduced by Brazil, will contribute to strengthening the common commitment to establish new instruments for the improvement of intraregional ties and understanding between the African and South American countries of the area. The objectives that eight years ago inspired the creation of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic — peace, cooperation, development, promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms and protection of the environment — not only remain valid, but, in view of recent international developments, are taking on greater timeliness and vigour. The region’s dedication to peace led to its support for the measures intended to achieve lasting peace in Angola and Liberia. We especially welcome the signing of the Lusaka Protocol by the Government of Angola and the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA). The desire to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone embracing the two continents of the zone of peace, has been made manifest by efforts resulting in the full entry into force of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean, the signing of the Mendoza Declaration and the process aimed at implementing the Declaration on the Denuclearization of Africa in order to give form to an agreement that establishes a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Africa. The zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic was conceived as a suitable forum for achieving integrated cooperation between the countries of the zone, with a view to establishing a solid foundation for stepping up joint action in many areas, including the economic, technological, environmental and cultural. Cooperation between developing countries is without a doubt an effective way to contribute to the establishment of a fairer and more equitable world order. Believing that the coordination of efforts in different spheres will contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the zone, the countries of the zone have, at the threshold of the twenty-first century, reaffirmed the growing importance of stepping up cooperation in economic and financial affairs. The Final Declaration adopted at the third meeting of the States members of the zone, which was held in Brazil last September, reaffirmed the role of regional and subregional integration in improving the international competitiveness of the national economies and the contribution of such integration to the development process. The efforts of a group of Latin American States resulted in the signing of the Treaty of Asunción, under which the Southern Cone Common Market was created, and that Treaty’s forthcoming entry into force will no doubt have a positive impact on the zone. The promotion of democracy and political pluralism and the eradication of apartheid are tangible achievements of countries of the zone. Uruguay considers that protection of the environment and the promotion of sustainable development, which must The recent Declaration on the Marine Environment, adopted at the third meeting of the States members of the zone, which was held in Brasilia should be highlighted. That Declaration urges the exchange of information and mutual assistance in order to implement the Convention on the Law of the Sea, in particular with regard to the development of abilities and capacities in the marine sector and the protection and preservation of the marine environment. It also encourages, among other things, the adoption of all necessary measures to prevent, reduce and control degradation of the marine environment; cooperation to prevent the entry of wastes into the zone; and efforts to achieve the full exercise of rights in the various exclusive economic zones and on the continental shelf in order to benefit socially and economically from their exploitation. The Declaration refers to the broad application of the “precautionary principle” in fisheries management, through the adoption of measures to lessen the risk of impacts on living marine resources and the environment. It also promotes cooperation to achieve measures for the conservation and management of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks on the high seas, consistent with the measures established by coastal States for those stocks. As some representatives of the countries members of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic have said, the international community showed its political will to strengthen even further cooperation in conserving and managing living marine resources during the meetings of the United Nations intergovernmental Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. The States of the South Atlantic intend to contribute to achieving that objective reachable, which is why they have supported the negotiation of a proper instrument for marine protection that ensures long- The need to ensure continuity of dialogue between the countries of the zone and the follow-up to the matters dealt with by the States members led to the establishment of the Permanent Committee of the zone of peace and Cooperation of the South Atlantic. What has stirred my country’s interest in the establishment of regional organizations made up of coastal States, or States with interests in the exploitation of the natural resources of the region, is the potential of regional initiatives to accelerate development of national capacities, the rational, integrated regulation of the oceans and the maximum utilization of opportunities to participate in the exploitation of resources. Tangible proof of the interest the countries of the South Atlantic take in the zone is their offers to act as hosts to ministerial meetings in coming years. Several countries have extended such offers, which demonstrate that they are a relevant tool of horizontal cooperation and the promotion of regional peace and security. We believe that those goals are shared by all the States of the Organization. Therefore, as a co-sponsor, we urge that draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1 be adopted without a vote.

The Namibian delegation is pleased to be able to participate in the discussion of this item on the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic. The vast expanse of the waters of the South Atlantic geographically separate the countries of the region, but its protection and utilization as a resource bring the countries of the South Atlantic together. The countries of the region are united in the protection of the marine resources and environment of the South Atlantic. At the outset, I should like to express my delegation's appreciation to the Secretary-General for his report on the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic (A/49/524). We also wish to commend the Governments of Argentina, Brazil, Nigeria and the United Kingdom for their replies to the Secretary-General's note of 22 March 1994, in which they conveyed their views on the implementation of the Declaration on the Zone of Peace and Cooperation of the South Atlantic. As a country within the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic, Namibia fully subscribes to the conclusions contained in the documents adopted by the third meeting of the States members of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic, held at Brasilia on 21 and 22 September 1994. It wishes to emphasize that the countries of the zone decided to take all the steps necessary to prevent, reduce and control the degradation of the marine environment resulting from the adverse effects of human activities. The Government of the Republic of Namibia considers that with the end of ideological rivalries, the zone represents a dynamic instrument of cooperation between the two sides of the Atlantic in the areas of economic, environmental, scientific, cultural and marine resource management and protection. It is a framework for the promotion of peace and security and trade, including the development of fisheries and marine resources in the region. As an active member of the zone of peace and We note with satisfaction the recent developments in the community of South Atlantic States: the holding of the first democratic elections and the establishment of a democratic government of national unity in the Republic of South Africa. These events create favourable conditions for peace, stability and economic cooperation in the South Atlantic region and are important for the consolidation of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic. Thus Namibia enthusiastically welcomes the Government of South Africa as a member of the zone. The zone as a regional grouping is now complete. The zone is a suitable forum for promoting cooperation in all aspects of development, on the basis of respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States and other relevant principles of international law. In this regard, we call upon the entire international community to keep the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic nuclear-weapon free. Namibia wishes to confirm its support for the efforts of the Angolan people to attain peace. It is our firm expectation that the cease-fire signed recently in Lusaka will hold, and will ensure the consolidation of peace and democracy, and the reconstruction of that sisterly country. My delegation congratulates the Government of Nigeria for its valuable contribution as coordinator of the zone since the Abuja meeting in 1990. The same words of congratulation go to the Government of Brazil, the current coordinator of the zone. We wish to welcome the offers made by the Governments of South Africa, Argentina and Benin to host the fourth, fifth and sixth ministerial meetings of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic in 1995, 1996 and 1997 respectively. For all these reasons my delegation commends draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1 to this august Assembly.

Panama, as a maritime country with an inter-ocean canal that is vital for world navigation, would like to join in the General Assembly's deliberations in order to give its firm support to draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1 which is designed to reaffirm the aims and strengthen the purposes of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic. When, on the initiative of a Latin American country, Brazil, the General Assembly in 1986 solemnly declared the Atlantic Ocean, in the region situated between Africa and South America, a zone of peace and cooperation, its motivation was to ensure that that part of the region would remain free from the tensions caused by interests contrary to those of the developing countries located on the African and Latin American coasts. The Assembly overwhelmingly opted to urge all States of the region, and of all other regions, to cooperate to eliminate any source of tension in the zone; to respect the national unity, sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of all States of the region; to refrain from the threat or the use of force; strictly to observe and respect the principle that the territory of a State should not be subjected to military occupation resulting from the use of force in violation of the Charter of the United Nations; and to respect the principle of the inadmissability of the acquisition of territories by force. We note with satisfaction that, from the very outset, States in the South Atlantic were inspired to seek greater regional cooperation inter alia in the interests of economic and social development, respect for human rights, the protection of the environment, the preservation of living resources, and international peace and security. We are pleased that a united, democratic South Africa, free from racial restrictions, is now playing a major role in the community of nations of the South Atlantic and in the international community, which made a substantial contribution towards validating Namibia's claim over Walvis Bay and the adjacent islands. In this connection, we would like to acknowledge the Government of Nigeria for its work as coordinator of the zone. We would also like to express our well-founded conviction that Brazil, in assuming the functions of coordinator, will expand the objectives and that we will come even closer to the goals that we all seek. At the same time, we would like to emphasize the relevance to promoting the objectives and principles of the zone of peace and cooperation in the South Atlantic of the progress made so far towards ensuring the full entry into force of the Treaty of Tlatelolco on the prohibition of nuclear weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as the timely efforts carried out by the Organization of African Unity to prepare a treaty on a nuclear-weapon-free zone in Africa. On the coasts of the South Atlantic, chapters both sweet and bitter have been written in the course of history by discoverers, conquerors, despoilers and freedom fighters — by liberators who, once on land, sowed the seeds of dignity, decency, progress and peace. The past, darkened by suffering, executions, colonialism, slavery, apartheid, oppression and despotism, is now nothing other than a painful lesson for the African and Latin American democracies to become more worthy, more vigorous and more powerful.

My delegation is happy to confirm its co-sponsorship of draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1, entitled “Zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic”, and we would like to place on record our appreciation to those representatives who welcomed us as a new member of the zone. South Africa endorses the draft resolution’s call upon all Member States to cooperate in the promotion of the objectives established in the declaration of the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic and to refrain from any action inconsistent with those objectives and with the Charter of the United Nations and relevant resolutions of the Organization, particularly action which may create or aggravate situations of tension and potential conflict in the region. My Government is fully committed to the peaceful settlement of disputes. For instance, the peaceful manner in which the Walvis Bay and offshore islands issue was resolved attests to this fact. South Africa is committed to a policy of non-proliferation and arms control that covers all weapons of mass destruction and extends to our concerns about the proliferation of conventional weapons. To this end, South Africa is a supporter of the establishment of zones of peace as well as of nuclear-weapon-free zones. We have accordingly been co-sponsors of the draft resolutions for the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones in Africa and the South Atlantic. We have also co-sponsored the draft resolution on the zone of peace in the Indian Ocean. In this spirit, South Africa welcomes the full accession of Argentina, Chile and Brazil to the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean — the Treaty of Tlatelolco. The zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic originated at the time of the cold war and of conflict in southern Africa. The new South Africa can fully identify itself with the two basic aims of peace and development of the zone, and at this time in history, with the positive turn of events in Angola and Mozambique, my Government is certain that the challenges of the zone can be faced with much optimism. Regarding development, South Africa is convinced that the zone provides a very important mechanism and framework to promote the common interests and aspirations of those African and South American States that have the South Atlantic as a shared border. The initiative could also be a very important instrument to provide impetus and substance to South-South dialogue and cooperation in general. South Africa recognizes the intra-regional opportunities for the expansion of trade, investment, cultural, tourist, sporting and other links, and wishes to cooperate in these fields in a positive and constructive manner. Creating an enabling environment in which economic activity can flourish to the advantage of all citizens is a top priority for the Government of President Mandela. The South African monetary authorities are, for example, continually looking at the question of exchange control, the lowering of import duties in terms of our General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade commitments, and the drawing up of a code of conduct to attract foreign investment. The economic potential locked up in regional trade, investment and economic harmonization holds much more promise for us. South Africa is willing to play a positive and constructive role in terms of the sharing of scientific and technological expertise in protecting marine resources and in the prevention of dumping of toxic waste in the region, including cooperation and the exchange of information on a technical and scientific level to prevent damage to the South Atlantic, especially by extra-zonal States, thus adhering to the Bamako and Basel conventions. We strongly support the guidelines contained in the zone’s Declaration on the Marine Environment. Adherence to this Declaration will enhance efforts towards the conservation of the marine ecosystem of the vast South Atlantic Ocean. My Government is committed to the guiding principles contained in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and in the Oceans chapter of Agenda 21, and welcomes the acknowledgement of these principles in the zone of peace and cooperation of the South Atlantic Declaration on the Marine Environment. South Africa expresses its concern over the continued spread of the traffic in narcotic and psychotropic substances in the South Atlantic region and the enormous danger it poses to society, and agrees that joint action is needed to address the problem. Therefore, South Africa has expressed its willingness to host in 1995 a meeting of senior officials on the question of trafficking in narcotic and psychotropic substances. In conclusion, my delegation would like to stress that without human-rights-based democracies as well as South Africa is pleased to be a member of the zone and undertakes to do its share in the realization of its ideals.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this item. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/49/L.18/Rev.1. We shall now begin the voting process. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Egypt, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lesotho, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Micronesia (Federated States of), Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Against: None Abstaining: Madagascar, United States of America

The delegation of the United States of America has asked to speak in explanation of vote. May I remind members that explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats.

The United States delegation would like to take this opportunity to explain its abstention in the voting on the draft resolution on this item. Substantial changes have been offered in this resolution to a provision which constituted one of our principal concerns with resolutions on this subject in previous years: that is, freedom of navigation, addressed in paragraph 8. This year’s resolution affirms a determination “to preserve the region for all activities protected by customary international law, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” (A/49/L.18/Rev.1, para. 8). It is particularly fitting at this time that this resolution now properly acknowledges the important maritime freedoms enshrined for all nations in that Convention. The United States welcomes this affirmation in this resolution by the States of the South Atlantic of their It is the continuing view of my Government that the creation of an internationally recognized zone of peace can be accomplished only through multilateral negotiations among the relevant parties, and not through declarations. This is one reason that we were unable to move to an affirmative vote. In addition, while we support both the Tlatelolco Treaty nuclear-weapon-free zone and the concept of a properly constituted African nuclear-weapon-free zone, we have already made clear in the First Committee our position on the document on a nuclear-weapon-free zone We welcome the cooperation of the delegation of Brazil, as Coordinator for the sponsors, in addressing the very fundamental issues of freedom of navigation, and are pleased that it was not necessary for us to vote against the draft resolution.

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 30?

I should like to inform delegations that the Assembly will take action on the draft resolution submitted under agenda item 14, entitled “Report of the International Atomic Energy Agency”, on Wednesday, 14 December, in the morning.